computer ai too good

[murewa]

I tested playing a huge scenario with 15 civs at Deity diff and more than half of the other civs already had a second city by the 5th turn! That's impossible!

1) Settler costs 30 shields
2) At best you can have population 3 at turn > 5
3) You can't hurry production of the Settler since it will kill at least 1 citizen (rules for Despotism) that leaves you not enough citizens to create the settler.
4) And for crying out loud the settler has to move for at least three turns to get into position and build the city!! What?! First turn settler?! Makes me wonder how anyone can defeat Deity.

Are there any starting bonuses for AI civs with respect to level of difficulty? Could anyone kindly elaborate.

All I'm saying is it's a developer's mistake to create an imbalanced start. To me the best AI is still the one that can beat me hands down at the same set rules that I am playing. Not by cheating! Dumb dumb dumb!

 

[Evincar]

Well, apart from some cheating, such as omniscence and being able to run at deficitl,the AI gets a massive advantage in Deity.IIRC the advantages are this:

1º)This is the big one: The AI gets a 40% discount at EVERYTHING. Their research cost 40% less, just like their improvements, units, wonders and pop growth. That's why it's nearly impossible to keep up with the AI in Deity -Everything is dirt cheap for them)

2º) They get aditional army support: 4 units/city plus 16 free ones. This allows them to support massive armies, even in Democracy. For example, a 10 cities Rep would have 4*10+16=56 free units, while you have zero

3º) Corruption is much greater for you, since your OCN is only 70% of theirs.

4º) The AI will share pretty much everything they own, while never willing to give you a dollar for your elder son. this is reflected in the AI trade rate, which is an insane 160% (100% would mean the AI doesn't edge you out in trading AT LEAST IN THEORY)

5º)Anarchy can never last more than 2 turns for the AI...which sounds like brutal cheating

6º) Finally they start with a lot of units: 8 defensive (warriors or spearmen if available) 4 offensive (warriors or archers if available) plus 3 settlers and 2 workers, I think. that's why in their 5 turn they had two cities.

So, as you see, the problem it's not that the AI is very good, in fact it's terrible. The problem is they are playing another game.

 

[murewa]

Thanks for the info. That was enlightening (3 Settlers?! *swear*) BTW where can I get a source for good info such as the one you posted. The civ3manual file is too 'non-technical' to be of any help. I have a lot of questions about this (starting bonuses for each difficulty level for instance) and I wouldn't want to bother you that much (although it would be just as great if you did find the time, thank you). Knowing your foe IS half the battle.
Besides I wouldn't want to keep restarting a scenario just because my neighbor civ had such an outrageous starting bonus that I did not know of and I'd feel I've done something wrong to have such a backwards civilization in contrast.

 

[Zouave]

The AI is so dumb and sloppily programmed the only way it can be "competetive" is to cheat, cheat, cheat in various ways, and to conspire with all the AI civs against the human.

I've long said the AI gets freebie settlers as another cheat - and you've proved it again.

So, as you see, the problem it's not that the AI is very good, in fact it's terrible. The problem is they are playing another game.

Yep. And a lot of us are sick of it.

 

[Raiden]

They get 3 settlers?!!! They start out with all that, and we start out with practically nothing! :aargh3:

 

[JuicyCivNewbie]

Hehe, they actually start out with 2 settlers AFAIK. Usually they get their third city down around 3100bc, too late for if they started with three.

 

[Gastric ReFlux]

Hmmm. You rarely hear people complain about the advantages they get over the AI at Chieftain and Warlord levels.

 

[Maple]

Originally posted by JuicyCivNewbie
Hehe, they actually start out with 2 settlers AFAIK. Usually they get their third city down around 3100bc, too late for if they started with three.

You can check by starting a diety game, saving and exiting on the second turn, and then using the civ3multitool's savegame editor to look at your opponents army.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Gastric ReFlux
Hmmm. You rarely hear people complain about the advantages they get over the AI at Chieftain and Warlord levels.

Well, Chieftain is basically a tutorial level, so I don't think that counts.

Anyway, the people who care about AI-human balance don't normally play at those levels.

 

[zeeter]

Part of the challenge of playing at the higher levels is that the AI gets certain advantages. Yet we complain about it? If you consider it cheating, play at the medium difficulty and wait for multi-player.

 

[JuicyCivNewbie]

I think the only real challenge of higher levels is the AI advantages. Imagine if deity was set as regent level, with no cheating. Every game would be a walkover.

 

[BCLG100]

yeh because the whole point of deity is that it is mean to be hard and the only way that they could make it really har was to cheat

 

[murewa]

Originally posted by zeeter
Part of the challenge of playing at the higher levels is that the AI gets certain advantages. Yet we complain about it? If you consider it cheating, play at the medium difficulty and wait for multi-player.

as some of you have pointed out, i made a mistake on the subject... it should be ai is too bad!

the problem with ai having a starting advantage but only that is that they will never learn and if you drag the game towards the modern era they'll surely lose. the challenge will only come during the start of the game and the first 2 milleniums or so. after that the game will always become a walkover.

that's why it's called ai - Artificial Intelligence, intelligence being the prime word. that's why starcraft will always be my favorite when it comes to that. maximum diff ai in that game is just plain perfect that dragging a game a long time will most likely cause your defeat.

 

[SirJethro]

Is there a post that shows AI and human player advantages at every level? Am I correct that Regent is "even" (cheating aside)?

 

[Gastric ReFlux]

There are probably some posts around that give the details, without one having to hunt through the Editor.

But yah, Regent is basically the even level.

And remember, we humans have an advantage that's effective at every level--we actually have intelligence.

 

[Koronin]

Exactly, which is one reason why Civ2 was so easy to beat.

This 'AI CHEATING' argument is about the lamest of them all, it's not cheating, it's called playing against a stacked deck.

I doubt the person who whines the most about AI cheating, scores very highly on the even reagent level anyway.

Originally posted by JuicyCivNewbie
I think the only real challenge of higher levels is the AI advantages. Imagine if deity was set as regent level, with no cheating. Every game would be a walkover.

 

[Koronin]

I think you're asking way too much of a $49 game to 'learn' during its gameplay, just not feasable in this day and age, yet.

I never really though much of the SC AI, in fact it kinda sucked. It never hoarded units up for attack, always sent in small squads of mixed units, which it could micromanage at light speed, but it's far from what I'd consider to be challenging, very predictable.

Originally posted by murewa


as some of you have pointed out, i made a mistake on the subject... it should be ai is too bad!

the problem with ai having a starting advantage but only that is that they will never learn and if you drag the game towards the modern era they'll surely lose. the challenge will only come during the start of the game and the first 2 milleniums or so. after that the game will always become a walkover.

that's why it's called ai - Artificial Intelligence, intelligence being the prime word. that's why starcraft will always be my favorite when it comes to that. maximum diff ai in that game is just plain perfect that dragging a game a long time will most likely cause your defeat.

 

[zeeter]

I disagree murewa. Not only does the AI get an early advantage, but they also get the ingame advantages such as cheaper costs and such, not to mention other things such as free sailing and being able to see the map. These are all methods of evening out the intelligience. Its like "alright, you beat me at Regent, lets see you do it at Diety where I start faster and have less overhead." I don't know how much smarter the AI is at the higher levels, I think its just a matter of how much the AI gets.

 

[Gastric ReFlux]

The AI routines, as best as I can tell, are the same at all the levels. The differences in levels are the differences in the costs of production, research and unit support.

 

[zeeter]

Originally posted by Gastric ReFlux
The AI routines, as best as I can tell, are the same at all the levels. The differences in levels are the differences in the costs of production, research and unit support.

Exactly. I'm sure that the ai will seem to make different types of moves, but this is more due to them having more troops to make moves with. Although I'm not sure how true this is either, since the best move the AI can come up with is to stack thirty units atop one another and move them at you in a bull rush.

The most intelligent thing I've ever seen the AI do in battle was to attack my one Iron producing city - thus forcing me to end the war more quickly than I'd hoped when my legions ran out.