Feel like AI cheating on me

[FreedomFighter]

I remembered that i being by DOW on enemy AI and stole his Worker + Settler off about turn 40-50, scout also report that one of his Settler been captured by barbarians before i do, this bring me the question about how did he manage to do this?

on Epic, Worker and Settler take like 25 turn each to finish and he pump out 3 of them within first 3 turn? his capital also has only 2 pop at that time.

after that i just let him be, though he going to be in hit the fan position but to my surprise, he pump out another 3 city before turn 150, how is this possible?

there's one barbarian camp that spawn right next to his capital and i do believe if he create any new unit (Worker, Settler) the barbarian not going to sit still, yet, his city still kept improving and productive.

If that was human player, he going to rage quit after lost 1 Worker and 2 Settler within first 50 turn, also the AI GPT is at -20 for quite sometime but he still has Military Unit running around, protecting his city.

he start to be pain in my ass, he's like cancer on my continent right now, I'll wait until i got first Germany UU and then will finish him off for good.

to wrap all this up

1. Me stole his Worker + Settler around turn 40-50.
2. Before turn 150, he manage to built 3 new city, even the barbarian camp spawn right next to his capital.
3. Still manage to push out Military Unit, even the GPT is at negative.

Did he cheating to get resource or what?

 

[Ashurdan]

what difficulty are you playing on?

 

[FreedomFighter]

Prince, i forgot to add that in my original post -_-

 

[VainoValkea]

There are two kinds of players, both of whom cheat. One gets free stuff upon startup, combat bonuses, faster workers, more growth with less unhappiness, information the others don't have access to and such. The other is a sapient organic supercomputer with unlimited turn times.

 

[kaltorak]

The AI does indeed get advantages. It is impossible otherwise to compete with a human player. There are too many factors in this game.
In a chess game, AIs can do great, because there are limited numbers of possible moves, and they check them all. But in civ, there are just too many things. Too many layers.

So yes, the AI gets bonuses.

 

[VainoValkea]

There are far too many things even in a chess game for an AI to check. It can't check every possible series of moves since there are just far too many possible states the game could wind up in.

 

[kaltorak]

Actually, in chess the options are few enpugh for machines to check them all. Long ago they already beat Kasparov, and now it's even harder for chess champions to beat the machines, since they are more powerful.

 

[VainoValkea]

You're wrong. No existing machine can check all the possible options and their consequences in chess in any reasonable amount of time. You're overestimating the power of computing machines.

 

[kaltorak]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human–computer_chess_matches

Their most famous success was the victory of Deep Blue over then World Chess Champion Garry Kasparov

After convincing victories in two matches in 2005 and 2006, it appears that chess programs can now defeat even the strongest chess players.

Even if they wouldn't win, we are talking about beeing able to compete with professional world champions. But they even do win.

 

[VainoValkea]

Yes, they've beaten humans, I know that. However, there's a world of difference between beating humans and doing what you claimed earlier.

Actually, in chess the options are few enpugh for machines to check them all.

No, a computer can't check all the possible options. Even our best computers can't. Chess remains unsolved.

 

[kaltorak]

It can check all the options, the relevant ones for the game. Of course, since time is infinite, you have to use common sense and not take my words literally thinking I meant the computer can handle an infinite number of moves into the future.
Of course, it can't handle the infinite moves that could happen if you consider all future options. But it can handle all the moves needed for beating the best humans. Not the irrelevant moves that would lead into an infinite game.

 

[VainoValkea]

It can check all the options, the relevant ones for the game. Of course, since time is infinite, you have to use common sense and not take my words literally thinking I meant the computer can handle an infinite number of moves into the future.
Of course, it can't handle the infinite moves that could happen if you consider all future options. But it can handle all the moves needed for beating the best humans. Not the irrelevant moves that would lead into an infinite game.

Computers can't handle infinities. They can't also handle very large numbers, like the ones we're discussing, because they'll run out of space eventually. Sure, they can beat us humans by applying pure raw computing power to the game, but still they can't check every possible option for the game, like you claimed. That's just a misconception.

 

[FreedomFighter]

and my thread turn into Computer chess thread ._.

 

[kaltorak]

and my thread turn into Computer chess thread ._.

xD true, sorry. But your question got answered right?

 

[VainoValkea]

At least computer chess is fascinating! We could be discussing Büchi Automata now that infinity got mentioned.

 

[FreedomFighter]

Still, i'm amaze about that whole conversation and yes my question been answered.

 

[Quineloe]

According to this:

http://www.civfanatics.com/civ5/difficulties

The AI should not have been able to build that many settlers, workers and units in that time. The only advantage the AI has is "unit cost" of 85%, I'm not sure what exactly that means but even if that is the construction cost for units, there's no way the AI made that many units in that short time

Did he re-capture his settler?

 

[VainoValkea]

Maybe it used Collective rule? Or rush buying?