Civ Attributes Determine Strategy

[Khan Quest]

I apologize in advance if this has been posted before. I looked around and couldn't find any recent threads anyway.

I'd like to see the AI pursue a development strategy aligned with their civilizations attributes.

It seems that the AI always takes the same research path every game. For example, the AI always tries to get Navigation and Theory of Gravity before Military Tradition. And the AI always tries to get Feudalism first. While Firaxis wrote the AI strategy to be flexible (and it is a good AI, or we wouldn't be here reading and writing these things), all civs follow the same basic strategies given similar situations.

Here's how I'd like the AI to work:
Militaristic civs first pursue techs that will lead to better military units. Military buildings are assigned a higher build priority.
Military actions are seen as the best form of diplomacy.

Sea-faring civs primarily target techs that allow new ship units. They build a significant Navy and focus on sea-faring related improvements.

Agricultural - Less aggressive, more likely to irrigate than to mine.

Religious - Research religious paths first. Go for Theology before Feudalism.

Expansionist - Take the most risks with settlers and sea exploration.

Commercial - More willing to trade resources and luxuries. More likely to make roads before mining/irrigating.

Industrious - more mines than irrigation.

Scientific - More willing to trade techs.

Etc., you get the idea.

The strategy should still be adjusted per situation. I wouldn't want to see a mid-game, land-locked sea-faring civ aiming for Navigation, or an industrious civ over-mining itself and having too small a population.

 

[aaron_burr]

You can do this now with flavors, albeit limitedly. There are seven flavors and eight traits. So, if they keep that basic system and maybe add more flavor opportunities, it shouldn't be a problem, I'd think.

 

[Khan Quest]

You can do this now with flavors, albeit limitedly. There are seven flavors and eight traits. So, if they keep that basic system and maybe add more flavor opportunities, it shouldn't be a problem, I'd think.

Maybe I missed something somewhere. What are flavors?

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

OK first thing: Flavours are a part of the Editor for 'Civ3:Conquests', and the best way I can describe it is that you can give techs, improvements and governments (I think?) a certain 'cultural' flavour, which effects the likelihood of an AI civ, from that culture group, pursuing it!
As an example, you might have a 'sacrificial altar' improvement, which you give an 'American' cultural flavour. You then assign a % weighting (say 120%). This means that an AI civ like the Aztecs, Maya or Americans will pursue the building of sacrificial altars about 20% more aggressively than non-American civs! It can also be done in reverse, where you give a less than 100% weighting for a particular culture group, making civs from said group less likely to pursue it! As Aaron says, though, it is still a little limited, though!
As for the general thrust though, Khan, I agree that civ traits should influence an AI's tactics. By the same token, though, I would like to see civ traits evolve in response to the players/AI's strategies-which can often be altered by starting position and neighbours! For instance, an agricultural civ starts off in a very mountainous area, the AI/player takes advantage of said terrain by building LOTS of mines and shield boosting improvements, as well as pursuing 'Industrial' techs. If this strategy is, by choice or neccesity, continued then the agricultural civ will slowly evolve into an industrious civ! This will, of course, effect the speed at which said civ builds industrious improvements and researches industrious techs and, in the case of an AI civ, this will then effect its strategy for the rest of the game UP UNTIL the next civ-trait evolution! Hope that makes sense!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[dh_epic]

This is a great idea and your heart's in the right place.

But in Civ 3, the strategies aren't equal. Anyone who plays expansionistically or militaristically will do better, and that's not just in terms of domination victory. That's also in terms of culture, economics, and science. If all civs played like their traits, then surely only expansionistic / militaristic civs would be the most competitive, with everyone else losing out.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Hi DH,

I think the point that should be made here is that, hopefully if they take on some of our ideas for civ4, then the military and expansionist strategies will not be as unequal as they are in Civ3.
For instance, with implementation of Operational Range, stack limits and a more realistic manpower and economic cost for military units and war (as well as a better international reputation system), then constant warfare will no longer be the easy route to victory it currently is-especially in the modern age!
As for Expansionist, a better corruption and happiness model, introduction of civil wars and other pseudo-random events, and a better conquest/occupation system will mean an end to the notion of 'bigger is better' ALWAYS being true in Civ!!
If these fairly simple measures are implemented, then the other strategies will be able to compete on a far more equal footing! Also, though, remember what I said above about civ traits evolving in tune with your surrounding terrain and proximity of neighbours! For instance, its very hard to be an expansionist if your civ is surrounded by many powerful neighbours-better to instead go for quality over quantity, and evolve into an agricultural, commercial or industrious civ-for instance-and acquire your power from trade and/or scientific advancement! By the same token, your militaristic civ won't stay militaristic for long if he has a land mass almost ALL to himself! Commercial is probably out of the question too, as there will be no other nations to trade with! So, best to evolve into a Seafaring, industrious, religious or agricultural civ, depending on terrain factors! You see where I am coming from?

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[dh_epic]

I'd love to take the fact that there will be multiple divergent strategies in the game as a given... but it does remain to be seen. I hope the developers are paying attention.

*looks up into the metaphorical sky*

Evolving traits is definitely a slick solution to a variety of problems. You're "born" with two traits, plus a third trait that is contingent on your start location and early game.

 

[Khan Quest]

OK first thing: Flavours are a part of the Editor for 'Civ3:Conquests', and the best way I can describe it is that you can give techs, improvements and governments (I think?) a certain 'cultural' flavour, which effects the likelihood of an AI civ, from that culture group, pursuing it!
As an example, you might have a 'sacrificial altar' improvement, which you give an 'American' cultural flavour. You then assign a % weighting (say 120%). This means that an AI civ like the Aztecs, Maya or Americans will pursue the building of sacrificial altars about 20% more aggressively than non-American civs! It can also be done in reverse, where you give a less than 100% weighting for a particular culture group, making civs from said group less likely to pursue it! As Aaron says, though, it is still a little limited, though!
As for the general thrust though, Khan, I agree that civ traits should influence an AI's tactics. By the same token, though, I would like to see civ traits evolve in response to the players/AI's strategies-which can often be altered by starting position and neighbours! For instance, an agricultural civ starts off in a very mountainous area, the AI/player takes advantage of said terrain by building LOTS of mines and shield boosting improvements, as well as pursuing 'Industrial' techs. If this strategy is, by choice or neccesity, continued then the agricultural civ will slowly evolve into an industrious civ! This will, of course, effect the speed at which said civ builds industrious improvements and researches industrious techs and, in the case of an AI civ, this will then effect its strategy for the rest of the game UP UNTIL the next civ-trait evolution! Hope that makes sense!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

Ah. Thanks. I haven't messed with the editor. I'm kind of a purist, playing the game as is, as I suspect the default settings are the optimal settings for the AI.