Ed Beach believes that the Tactical AI for military units in CIV 6 was working very well... Do you agree ?

[lt22677]

That's not "tactical AI"

Why does strategic AI work wonderfully? Let's put it this way, the AI (strategic and tactical) of Civ 6 would be scandalous for a game from the 90s, let alone for a modern game, with the tragedy that they haven't managed to improve it even with all the patches/DLCs

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

Why does strategic AI work wonderfully? Let's put it this way, the AI (strategic and tactical) of Civ 6 would be scandalous for a game from the 90s, let alone for a modern game, with the tragedy that they haven't managed to improve it even with all the patches/DLCs

Bit of an exaggeration but I don't disagree that the AI in 6 is poor, it's just not what Ed Beach was talking about; all he said was that the tactical AI was working well, not the AI as a whole or the strategic AI.

 

[Solver]

Short Answer NO

A little more detailed answer:

NO, the AI in CIV 6 is the worst of all the AI seen in relation to its game system, worse even than Civ 1 and 2 where at least you had AI that updated/produced advanced units based on the technology achieved while the AI of civ 6 couldn't even do this and I found myself in games where I had tanks and fighters while the AI responded with ancient units (and it took the FINAL PHASES of game development to get some use of aviation from the AI). If he thinks this about the work done on the AI of CIV 6 I see it as tough for Civ 7 too (I hope not, but I have no hope)

The good thing about not knowing any facts is that if you don't know them, they can't get in the way of complaints supported only by whatever you make up.

The Civ1 AI cheated to a ridiculous extent. Not only getting bonuses that modern Civ AIs rely on, but actually using different roles. Know how the Civ1 AI built Wonders? It got random wonders for almost-free, expending a bit of money but never having to actually build wonders in the build queue. And speaking of buying, it could use money to partially hurry production, something that didn't exist for humans. AI Triremes don't have the risk of randomly sinking. The AI would periodically get magical trade routes between its cities. And Civ1 still had the modern-style bonuses where production and research were just flat out cheaper on higher difficulties.

 

[lt22677]

Ed Beach can say whatever he wants, but the facts are that even with a sensational numerical superiority he can't be credible, I also remember the topics of people who complained that the other AI nations were unable to conquer the cities, let's put some topics

Deity beaten - Bad AI - what next?

So, deity was beaten after 10 hours played. My initial thoughts is: Negatives: - extremely bad AI in fights (I was warrior swarmed, but they were just standing there as archerfodder) - unescorted settlers on deity (got my third city from the opponent) - bad city placement from AI (on flat land...

forums.civfanatics.com

Can the A.I factions fight?

First game on King and not really seeing any fight from the A.I factions.They lack unit depth and any sort of strategy.Was I just lucky or do you see the same issue.It's all too easy first 8 hours in.

forums.civfanatics.com

Does the AI become competent at higher difficulties?

Played an Egypt builder game where I was attacked by Monty. I had two warriors and two cities without walls, and he came rolling in with 10 dog warriors and slingers with more on the way. He then proceeded to faff about for 15 turns, slaughtering my units and occasionally attacking my city, but...

forums.civfanatics.com

AI can't win science victory

I'm playing through an Immortal game as Germany. I am quite far behind, but the AI is unable to close out the game because it does not seem to know how to repair pillaged spaceports. The AIs have all built multiple spaceports, and then (from what I can tell) used spies to pillage each others'...

forums.civfanatics.com

King level: major disappointment in AI.

So I was playing King level and had a BAD start on Tundra. Made the best of it. I am sort of in third place, but Arabia is in first. They have completed a space port, and are 1/3rd done with tech victory, while I wallow in the Industrial age... He is in the INFORMATION age! With more paintings...

forums.civfanatics.com

The AI just can't build empires. At all!

I just moved up to emperor and I still don't have much idea as how to do things in a good order (like districts, how many and when etc.). But I'm still winning. By a decent margin... And I've concluded, that the AI just haven't got the slightest idea as how to build an empire. At Emperor, they...

forums.civfanatics.com

A Good AI Example

I have noticed several times the AI will attack all my units within its attack range and then offer peace. This is a trick I always used in Civ 5 to make sure I got as much EXP and did what damage I could before accepting a peace deal. I am going to assume it is intentional and not just lazy...

forums.civfanatics.com

Does the AI use Air Units?

I'm near the end of my third game, and even though several of the other AI civilizations were ahead of me in technology, I have yet to even see an enemy air unit. I can see that Greece (who was the technology leader) has built at least one Aerodrome, but there is no sign of any actual units...

forums.civfanatics.com

The combat AI, again, is awful

I really hate to say it. This is the one area of Civ V that needed the most work, and it is no better than it was in Civ V. For the third or fourth time, an enemy Civ has declared war on me and gotten 5-10 units near one of my cities. With just a basic strategy of rushing the city, they could...

forums.civfanatics.com

AI not conquering each other kills this game for me

Why are AIs not conquering each other, not creating empires, and it does seem I am the only one complaining about it? Seriously, in civ5 the world was very much alive, dynamic, interesting, you were just one of expanding empires. AIs were fighting each other, conquering, empires were rapidly...

forums.civfanatics.com

And I could go on forever, so NO dear Ed Beach, the AI of Civ 6 neither Tactical nor Strategic does a good job and I really hope that at least this time you do your job well

 

[lt22677]

The good thing about not knowing any facts is that if you don't know them, they can't get in the way of complaints supported only by whatever you make up.

The Civ1 AI cheated to a ridiculous extent. Not only getting bonuses that modern Civ AIs rely on, but actually using different roles. Know how the Civ1 AI built Wonders? It got random wonders for almost-free, expending a bit of money but never having to actually build wonders in the build queue. And speaking of buying, it could use money to partially hurry production, something that didn't exist for humans. AI Triremes don't have the risk of randomly sinking. The AI would periodically get magical trade routes between its cities. And Civ1 still had the modern-style bonuses where production and research were just flat out cheaper on higher difficulties.

Even the AI in Civ 6 cheats at a sensational level and yet it does a WORSE job than in Civ 1 which I remember is from 1990

 

[lt22677]

The good thing about not knowing any facts is that if you don't know them, they can't get in the way of complaints supported only by whatever you make up.

Just because you ask me for the facts here is the list of advantages that AI HAS based on the level

Difficulty level (Civ6)

The difficulty level is a game setting in Civilization VI that allows players to compete against AI opponents matched to their skills and desire for challenge. In order from lowest to highest, the difficulty levels are as follows: Settler Chieftain Warlord Prince (default) King Emperor Immortal...

civilization.fandom.com

 

[Solver]

Yeah, exactly. The Civ6 AI gets large bonuses that end up being pretty massive on Deity, but then it actually plays by the rules. The AI gets hit by disasters, it actually builds stuff, etc. The high-difficulty Civ1 AI got bonuses comparable to Civ6 Emperor, but then it also had completely different rules like I described - free instant wonders, instant trade routes, unsinkable ships. Which was completely typical of 90s game programming, too.

 

[lt22677]

Yeah, exactly. The Civ6 AI gets large bonuses that end up being pretty massive on Deity, but then it actually plays by the rules. The AI gets hit by disasters, it actually builds stuff, etc. The high-difficulty Civ1 AI got bonuses comparable to Civ6 Emperor, but then it also had completely different rules like I described - free instant wonders, instant trade routes, unsinkable ships. Which was completely typical of 90s game programming, too.

Wow, so let me understand the AI of Civ 1 (I remember a game from the 90s) is capable of conquering cities while the Great AI of Civ 6 IS NOT?

 

[Solver]

Let's see, Civ1 has no stacking restrictions so pathfinding is dead simple, no city defenses, and every combat is resolved in one hit, so yes, conquering cities in Civ1 is a pretty low bar. Oh and a unit tree that generally gave the attackers an advantage. Making a Civ1 AI that conquers some cities is easier than making a Civ6 AI that can even move three units to another city, but some people will remember their 90s impression and mistake some visible success in a game with simplistic rules for a sophisticated AI.

Go take a look at the unit AI code for Civ1. It's downright primitive.

 

[Siptah]

Let's see, Civ1 has no stacking restrictions so pathfinding is dead simple, no city defenses, and every combat is resolved in one hit, so yes, conquering cities in Civ1 is a pretty low bar. Oh and a unit tree that generally gave the attackers an advantage. Making a Civ1 AI that conquers some cities is easier than making a Civ6 AI that can even move three units to another city, but some people will remember their 90s impression and mistake some visible success in a game with simplistic rules for a sophisticated AI.

Go take a look at the unit AI code for Civ1. It's downright primitive.

NukeAppeal. That’s a way to phrase it…

 

[lt22677]

Since you asked me for the Facts, let's make a comparison on the bonuses of the AI of Civ 6 Deity and that of Civ 1 Deity (I ignore the various elements that do not influence the AI such as the player's research penalty)

Difficulty level (Civ1)

The difficulty level is a game setting in Sid Meier's Civilization that allows players to compete against AI opponents matched to their skills and desire for challenge. In order from lowest to highest, the difficulty levels are as follows: Chieftain ("Chieftan" on the Hall of Fame screen)...

civilization.fandom.com

Difficulty level (Civ6)

The difficulty level is a game setting in Civilization VI that allows players to compete against AI opponents matched to their skills and desire for challenge. In order from lowest to highest, the difficulty levels are as follows: Settler Chieftain Warlord Prince (default) King Emperor Immortal...

civilization.fandom.com

Civ 6 Deity

AI Science/Culture/ Faith Bonuses = 40%

AI Production/Gold Bonuses = 100%

AI Combat Bonus = +4

AI Combat XP = 50%

AI Free Tech/Civics Boosts = 5

AI Starting Settlers = 3 (this is a GREAT BONUS)

AI Starting Builders = 2

Civ 1 Emperor

CP Rows of Food = 8 (The number of rows in the computer player's food storage box (i.e. how long it will take for a city to grow). The number of rows in the human player's box is always 10)

CP Resource Cost Multiplier = 0.8 (All computer players have their costs to build units and city improvements multiplied by this amount.
)

CP Lightbulb Increment Per Advance = +10 (Each time an advance is discovered, the cost (in lightbulbs) of acquiring the next increases by this amount.)

Let's see, Civ1 has no stacking restrictions so pathfinding is dead simple, no city defenses, and every combat is resolved in one hit, so yes, conquering cities in Civ1 is a pretty low bar. Oh and a unit tree that generally gave the attackers an advantage. Making a Civ1 AI that conquers some cities is easier than making a Civ6 AI that can even move three units to another city, but some people will remember their 90s impression and mistake some visible success in a game with simplistic rules for a sophisticated AI.

Go take a look at the unit AI code for Civ1. It's downright primitive.

Look at the AI of Civ 1 (which is certainly not good, I'm not saying this) it doesn't start with 3 Settlers, it doesn't have a +4 combat bonus, it doesn't start with 5 free techs, it doesn't start with 5 additional units (this is is another notable bonus given that in Civ 1 it is a Stack and Civ 6 has the 1UPT) yet the AI of Civ (which I remember WAS RELEASED IN 1990) is capable of conquering cities, while the AI of CIV 6 NO
How do you explain it?

 

[lt22677]

Let's see, Civ1 has no stacking restrictions so pathfinding is dead simple, no city defenses, and every combat is resolved in one hit, so yes, conquering cities in Civ1 is a pretty low bar. Oh and a unit tree that generally gave the attackers an advantage. Making a Civ1 AI that conquers some cities is easier than making a Civ6 AI that can even move three units to another city, but some people will remember their 90s impression and mistake some visible success in a game with simplistic rules for a sophisticated AI.

Go take a look at the unit AI code for Civ1. It's downright primitive.

It's primitive so what? its job DOES it, while what does the ADVANCED CIV 6 CODE DO? Can he conquer the cities? Can he build PLANES?

 

[lt22677]

Go take a look at the unit AI code for Civ1. It's downright primitive.

And having said that, ME AS A PLAYER I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE CODE! I pay to have a game that guarantees me a challenge and CIV 6 didn't guarantee it (and take a look around the forum and see what they say)

 

[Siptah]

Since you asked me for the Facts, let's make a comparison on the bonuses of the AI of Civ 6 Deity and that of Civ 1 Deity (I ignore the various elements that do not influence the AI such as the player's research penalty)

Difficulty level (Civ1)

The difficulty level is a game setting in Sid Meier's Civilization that allows players to compete against AI opponents matched to their skills and desire for challenge. In order from lowest to highest, the difficulty levels are as follows: Chieftain ("Chieftan" on the Hall of Fame screen)...

civilization.fandom.com

Difficulty level (Civ6)

The difficulty level is a game setting in Civilization VI that allows players to compete against AI opponents matched to their skills and desire for challenge. In order from lowest to highest, the difficulty levels are as follows: Settler Chieftain Warlord Prince (default) King Emperor Immortal...

civilization.fandom.com

Civ 6 Deity

AI Science/Culture/ Faith Bonuses = 40%

AI Production/Gold Bonuses = 100%

AI Combat Bonus = +4

AI Combat XP = 50%

AI Free Tech/Civics Boosts = 5

AI Starting Settlers = 3 (this is a GREAT BONUS)

AI Starting Builders = 2

Civ 1 Emperor

CP Rows of Food = 8 (The number of rows in the computer player's food storage box (i.e. how long it will take for a city to grow). The number of rows in the human player's box is always 10)

CP Resource Cost Multiplier = 0.8 (All computer players have their costs to build units and city improvements multiplied by this amount.
)

CP Lightbulb Increment Per Advance = +10 (Each time an advance is discovered, the cost (in lightbulbs) of acquiring the next increases by this amount.)


Look at the AI of Civ 1 (which is certainly not good, I'm not saying this) it doesn't start with 3 Settlers, it doesn't have a +4 combat bonus, it doesn't start with 5 free techs, it doesn't start with 5 additional units (this is is another notable bonus given that in Civ 1 it is a Stack and Civ 6 has the 1UPT) yet the AI of Civ (which I remember WAS RELEASED IN 1990) is capable of conquering cities, while the AI of CIV 6 NO
How do you explain it?

They just did. Once again, you seem to completely miss the point of the discussion you got yourself into. Everybody is wrong every now and then, but you seem to have a lot of trouble accepting that it can happen to you specifically. And instead of shutting up when you are called out, you just get yourself deeper and deeper in nonsense territory. I don‘t get it.

Moderator Action: Please refrain from telling other members when they should shut up. ~ LK

Edit: Sorry, should have written „let it go“

 

[lt22677]

They just did. Once again, you seem to completely miss the point of the discussion you got yourself into. Everybody is wrong every now and then, but you seem to have a lot of trouble accepting that it can happen to you specifically. And instead of shutting up when you are called out, you just get yourself deeper and deeper in nonsense territory. I don‘t get it.

OK, so let's get back to the point of the Statement that "Ed Beach believes that the Tactical AI for military units in CIV 6 was working very well... Do you agree?" my answer is NO, for the reasons I stated, is that okay?

 

[Gedemon]

Moderator Action: that thread is about tactical AI

 

[Gedemon]

There are no multiple units per tile mods, that the work with the AI. Only with you, as the player.

you could, I made some.

Unfortunately, but good to know. I've always kind of wondered if I might like V with multi-unit-per-tile, but it would have to be for the AI as well. But I haven't followed the modding scene for V (or really VI) close enough to know if I'd missed something.

Combat and Stacking Overhaul

As civ6 modding options are very limited at this moment in relation to unit stacking, this is nowhere near the civ5 version of this mod, but it's a first step. General Features: Most land and sea ranged units have a range of 1, except some late...

forums.civfanatics.com

Combat and Stacking Overhaul (BNW) v.1

This component add some of the features of the R.E.D. WWII mod to the base game. The R.E.D. DLL for BNW mod is mandatory, it must be activated first in the mod list (which also means that this mod is compatible with Brave New World only)...

forums.civfanatics.com

and yes, I had the feeling it was better.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

Let's see, Civ1 has no stacking restrictions so pathfinding is dead simple, no city defenses, and every combat is resolved in one hit, so yes, conquering cities in Civ1 is a pretty low bar. Oh and a unit tree that generally gave the attackers an advantage. Making a Civ1 AI that conquers some cities is easier than making a Civ6 AI that can even move three units to another city, but some people will remember their 90s impression and mistake some visible success in a game with simplistic rules for a sophisticated AI.

Go take a look at the unit AI code for Civ1. It's downright primitive.

I think it has been suggested a few times, but removing city attacks could help the tactical AI in VII; obviously we have walls in the game but now they can be built around more than one district, so I assume they don't operate in exactly the same way as in V and VI. I hope they provide added defense but can't fight back, would much prefer it if only units can fire back from districts.

 

[Gorbles]

I think the tactical AI was solid, however it was always hampered by moving its units into position in the first place. Something that VII looks to mitigate (pending how unpacking your units works?).

 

[UWHabs]

I think it has been suggested a few times, but removing city attacks could help the tactical AI in VII; obviously we have walls in the game but now they can be built around more than one district, so I assume they don't operate in exactly the same way as in V and VI. I hope they provide added defense but can't fight back, would much prefer it if only units can fire back from districts.

I think VI did switch to a very pro-defense model of cities, between walls giving you the free shot counter plus being pretty much invincible unless if the attackers have the right siege units. Like I think if you got rid of the free city attack, and instead of walls having their extra HP they came in with just a stronger defensive value, I think the AI would be a lot more effective at taking them out. Whether that would switch to be too "easy" for a human then, I don't know.