Combat AI

[footslogger]

This is very important for my enjoyment of the game and what I have seen of it in the videos doesn't impress me greatly. Maybe marginal improvement in tactical awareness in small-scale encounters, but the AI seems as hopeless as ever in launching attacks on cities. In the BAstartgaming video the AI (England) launches a sneak attack on the American capital with I think 3 or 4 warriors but there was no coordination to it and, though there were few if any defenders at first, the attack was quite easily repelled. This tends to confirm that the AI just can't cope with 1upt. I really like other features of the new game and will certainly play it, but I'm not sure how long my enthusiasm for it will last if the combat AI is very weak. Any observations by others?

 

[SupremacyKing2]

well it is still early. Hopefully, the AI will be improved before launch. The other problem I had with the AI attack in that video is that the units were woefully obsolete. It was 470 AD. BAStartGaming had spearmen, siege towers, archers and chariots. Why was the AI still attacking with the basic warrior and slinger? So that needs to be improved.

 

[stealth_nsk]

1. That's an early build. The AI doesn't look that good, but before the release AI is behind the rest of the development, so we could expect it to be better in the coming months.

2. Overall the Civ6 system is easier for AI to handle with nerfed ranged units and support units to help in sieges.

3. Yes, AI is unable to cope with 1UPT and will be unable in any reasonable future. Still, 1UPT with skill vs. numbers is way more fun than no tactics at all.

EDIT:

well it is still early. Hopefully, the AI will be improved before launch. The other problem I had with the AI attack in that video is that the units were woefully obsolete. It was 470 AD. BAStartGaming had spearmen, siege towers, archers and chariots. Why was the AI still attacking with the basic warrior and slinger? So that needs to be improved.

BTW, it's Prince level.

 

[stiiknafuulia]

They haven't advertized a better combat AI in any of the previews that we've seen so far... A sign that it likely isn't there, imo.

I guess I should look into multiplayer in Civ VI, since every other aspect of the game seems to have improved from Civ V. I just can't be bothered playing sp if the AI is to be a Civ V -style pushover when it comes to combat (yes, I know that the CBP supposedly made it a-ok; perhaps that can be replicated with Civ VI, but it will take time and effort by a dedicated team of modders).

 

[stealth_nsk]

By the way, could anyone recommend videos with good full-scale war, not just barb chasing?

 

[Acken]

Its clear that it looked bad in these videos but usually ai is done in the last stages of development so who knows. I want it to be at least like civ5 with modding possibilities. If its worse and the game is hard to mod then it will be a catastrophe.

To me the big worry are the rules they are adding for combat. With movements and quill mentioned you need siege units in order to attack walls. I am very worried the AI wont be able to play efficiently if we get even more tactical gameplay than civ5.

 

[darko82]

The AI does not pillage tiles?

 

[stealth_nsk]

The AI does not pillage tiles?

Barbarians surely do.

 

[cazaderonus]

Well, this is prince level and probably a build that is 2 month old in dev time.

But yeah, we cant expect human like behavior for attacking AI... Still, in quill s video i found the sandwich of chariot archers from egypt was nice combined with her declaring preemptive war. Too bad they didnt retreat after having poke enough unit to gain the upper hand.

 

[darko82]

I think that developers should look at the Civ V Community Patch (Vox Populi). This mod hugely improves the AI. I hope that Firaxis knows this mod, modders, and they do see their mistakes they did with Civ V as far the AI is concerned. Vox Populi maybe not perfect but a lot better. It gives some real challenge, which is great. That said.

BTW, the AI is extremely important. This makes the game very unique, especially strategy games.

 

[VanGovv]

Its clear that it looked bad in these videos but usually ai is done in the last stages of development so who knows. I want it to be at least like civ5 with modding possibilities. If its worse and the game is hard to mod then it will be a catastrophe.

interview with Ed Beach on the german youtube channel of WritingBull: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AH6mtOflFgI

What to get from this:
- moddability should be quite high because of rewritten code with focus on moddability

 

[AriochIV]

In the current previews (which is an early build), there are already some improvements. The AI doesn't seem to plan its attacks well yet, but at least it seems more willing to pull back its units when they are in an unfavorable position.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

By the way, could anyone recommend videos with good full-scale war, not just barb chasing?

Quill18 played as England and fought with Egypt. I think he might take the capital in the 7th episode.

 

[spfun]

From what I've seen its still a turkey shoot, The combat AI hasn't been improved in the slightest. Who knows if it will be able to use support units correctly, diplomacy AI in the early game is schizophrenic like Vanilla Civ 5.

I would rather an AI that suicides units to take out player units rather than constant shuffling around like in Marbizor video. The AI is terrible at retreating, it get picked off before it ever reachs home. It should just suicide the entire army to cause as much damage as possible.

 

[rastak]

From what I've seen its still a turkey shoot, The combat AI hasn't been improved in the slightest. Who knows if it will be able to use support units correctly, diplomacy AI in the early game is schizophrenic like Vanilla Civ 5.

I would rather an AI that suicides units to take out player units rather than constant shuffling around like in Morobirs video.

Morobir?

 

[Matthew.]

I hope this time around they give slight combat bonuses as difficulty increases. I think overall it is a better AI bonus than just pure hammer/production bonuses, since that only leads to carpet of doom along with unintentional side effects (building certain improvements/wonders ridiculously fast).

Combat bonuses won't affect AI vs. AI (they both will have them so it equals out), but it would give a higher chance to actually trade units with a human player. As opposed to the human player just killing unit after unit without losing anything, and wading through huge carpet of doom trash AI armies.

Then again, this is stupid easy to mod (or was in Civ 5), so worst case scenario I'll just do it myself in a few minutes of work. But there is something to be said about having this change in the official game.

 

[Magil]

I also hope for a competent AI. But it's difficult to be optimistic. This is a 4-month old build, to be fair to them. I'm somewhat skeptical that much will change in terms of AI in that time, though. Prince difficulty is largely irrelevant, as the AI has never got more intelligent in terms of tactical/strategic thinking as difficulty levels change in Civ, it's always just been larger bonuses.

I never understood why they couldn't be bothered for V. Modders have done great things with V's AI, and while it will never out-think a human it can at least present a credible threat with the right mods. The VI videos so far don't seem to show that. If modders can accomplish that, why don't the developers? I'd hope they learn their lessons for VI, but time will tell.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

This is my biggest fear about the game. If the combat AI is bad, then that destroys lots of tension from the game. An AI hating you, or backstabbing you, or even being vastly more advanced than you, is no longer a big problem. They'll never be able to take your cities.

The game needs a half-decent combat AI to work. And if that's not possible with 1UPT, then the combat system needs to be radically simplified until a computer can figure it out.

 

[rastak]

This is my biggest fear about the game. If the combat AI is bad, then that destroys lots of tension from the game. An AI hating you, or backstabbing you, or even being vastly more advanced than you, is no longer a big problem. They'll never be able to take your cities.

The game needs a half-decent combat AI to work. And if that's not possible with 1UPT, then the combat system needs to be radically simplified until a computer can figure it out.

Then it would be "dumbed down" and a slew of others would hate it. I guess they are in a difficult position.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

Then it would be "dumbed down" and a slew of others would hate it. I guess they are in a difficult position.

I'd say there's no benefit to having "tactical" combat if there's no competent opponent to be tactical against. How is methodically picking off the enemy with ranged units (while the AI units helplessly mill about) at all fun? It's absurdly repetitive, takes forever, and poses no challenge whatsoever.

Combat needs to be made more difficult somehow. Good Civ V players can routinely conquer AIs with armies five times as large as their own without losing a single unit. Maybe combat can still be made difficult even with 1UPT by some drastic measure, e.g. giving the AI a flat 50% combat bonus or somesuch. But I'd rather just put 1UPT on the shelf until someone designs an AI that understands it.