Hey Civ V AI - EXPAND

[Bleser]

To start with: I LOVE CIV V. It's been consuming me since it's release date and has, as a result, already gotten me in trouble with the wife, which is success.

I'm on my second game, playing at King level, and again am dominating the competition (even though this time around they are keeping up in tech and building all the wonder but one so far before me).

What seems to be obvious, though, is the AI's refusal to expand. Of all the Civ's I've met (and it's now 1250 AD), the average Civ has only two cities (Montezuma has ONE) and each Civ only knows about 1/4 the world at most, thus limiting their trading potential.

This is on an archipelago map, but it seems they are afraid to leave their home islands and get out and explore/expand - which Civ IV AI loved to do so much.

Meanwhile, I have nine cities and positive happiness and am sure I'll steamroll to victory (and have a blast doing so).

Has anyone else noticed this general trend? And I'm not looking for more useless "Civ V AI sucks man!!" type posts - I want to see what everyone is seeing in their games, or if this is a result of the map type.

 

[Thoras]

This is on an archipelago map, but it seems they are afraid to leave their home islands and get out and explore/expand - which Civ IV AI loved to do so much.

AI settlers are sea sick...

 

[JFJohnny5]

AI settlers are sea sick...

lol - can someone mod some Dramamine into this game ASAP?!

Seriously though, the AI truly is afraid of the water. It's not just settlers. They never seem to build naval combat units either.

 

[mattavich]

One thing i think people are forgetting is that expanding early has it drawbacks in civ5. You can much easier achieve high culture and special wonders that require each city to have x uilding with fewer cities. More cities are harder to manage too and the AI may lose some happiness bonuses etc.

Civ5 is actually very complex when it comes to "what should i do for the best" or "what plan/strategy do I utilize".

I think the AI tends to stick to smaller number of cities unless it is very powerful military wise.

In Civ5 it is much easier to hold off a larger nation too and win victory over larger nations. Making it more realistic.

It is not your size that wins a game but how you use what you have to your advantage.

PS* Use great generals to create citadels, they are way powerful and can hold off a much stronger opponent.

 

[Thimble]

I play Pangea maps, and I've noticed that some civs get stuck at 2 cities despite being surrounded by open land. This is an odd bug.

 

[Thoras]

lol - can someone mod some Dramamine into this game ASAP?!

Seriously though, the AI truly is afraid of the water. It's not just settlers. They never seem to build naval combat units either.

It depends on the AI. I finished a game on king and archipelago, and some had many destroyers, but others were on foot. The most advanced definitely had boats floating by

 

[mattavich]

I play Pangea maps, and I've noticed that some civs get stuck at 2 cities despite being surrounded by open land. This is an odd bug.

Just in case you don't know, Gandhi gets a bonus for staying small and is hit with a penalty for having to many cities.

I think devs tried to steer away from "grab as much land as you can and the guy with the most land will be the strongest" as it was in Civ4

 

[Booshaka]

I started a King standard continents map last night with two added AI. 6 civs on my landmass. By early Medieval era China has one city. Iroquois are expanding out of their peninsula but keeping the city placement close. Japan has cities all over the place, like anywhere he can put them probally around 8 or more. Persia and Siam have 4 cities each and are both sticking near their capitals. I built 3 and took beijing. But then Siam and Iroquis double teamed me and took one. My whole army was horses since i had only two iron and they human waved me with spears. Think all reload this is one from the beginning and see what they will do. So far the best performance by he AI I've seen early game.

 

[mattavich]

I think as players our problem is we are basing Good AI on how many cities they have. Civ is a totally different animal.

AI still SEEMS poor though

 

[fliddermang]

Personally I've found that there's always one or two civilizations that aggressively expand but after I'm forced to confront them around mid game (and usually take them out) it's smooth sailing then on while only the more placid, weaker civs remain.

 

[duxup]

I played a map recently and I had Darius to my West, fairly close to me, and the Germans to the south. I was a bit concerned about my location and Darius built his capitol up impressively very quickly. I was worried his other cities might be just as impressive and then...

I found the dude had just his big capitol, and just was sitting there. Of course I quickly took the city before Bismarck got a chance.

 

[JFJohnny5]

It depends on the AI. I finished a game on king and archipelago, and some had many destroyers, but others were on foot. The most advanced definitely had boats floating by

Hmmm, wonder if it is somehow AI-level related. Been on Prince myself. But sometimes I am just baffled by the way the AI avoids water. Here's an example:

Continents map. Me and four civs on my continent. When I made it to Caravel I set out across the ocean to meet the neighbors I knew were there. I found the other 3 and sailed their entire coastline. Not a single one of them had a single naval unit. And, there were two ruins sitting on islands separated from the mainland by one hex of Coast. A Trireme would have found them. One of the ruins HAD to be visible to the Aztecs as it was on the first hex outside his cultural borders. So I knew the AI could *see* it. But the AI didn't scout the water AT ALL. Aggressiveness/expansion arguments aside, that just doesn't seem right...

 

[Iberian]

Civ5 is actually very complex when it comes to "what should i do for the best" or "what plan/strategy do I utilize".

I think the AI tends to stick to smaller number of cities unless it is very powerful military wise.

Another weird case of what game are you playing?

What is best for winning is domination. Pretty much an assured win. Even if you don't dominate the world you have soo many cities you can win any other way if you need, though it is easier to build some units, a carrier and some bombers and take the super civ capital on the other continent. Which brings me to my next point...

I conquer my half of the world and an AI on the other side does the same. I haven't seen a game where the other island had all the civs remaining after 1500ad. By 1850 it is down to 2 or 3. There always seems to be one powerful warring civ who really would win the game if it weren't for me. None of the small civs have a chance.

The advantage to culture/science win is that you can play in less time.

 

[Matte979]

Its a BUG, the AI settlers get stuck, some pathfinding issue. I have sent my save game to Firaxis when this happened I sent a scout and saw the settler just move back and forth or stand still.

I suggest you do the same. Until then add some more civs and you get enough of them expanding. Then pretend that the states that do not as citi states, preferable helping them and leaving them alone.

A lot of sometimes they get unstuck in medieval times which generally is to late. But I have seen a lot of growth around medieval times. So try to leave them alone and dont use it to your advantage.

As stated above its correct that the AI should not overbuild but only having 1 or 2 cities means certain death. Specially with huge happiness. The AI need production capacity and 1 city will not result in that.

 

[OMG Hexes]

I'm playing on huge right now, King difficulty. It's the mid 1600s, I have a large navy, and I've explored the entire world. I have yet to encounter a SINGLE AI nation naval unit. This is with a full list of AI civs on the setup screen.

The civs on my continent aren't aware of the civs on the other continent, and vice versa. There are a number of CS on islands directly off the coast of both continents, and I'm the only one who has made contact with them.

I built this navy with the hopes of actually maybe fighting a naval war at some point in the game, but now I've just decided to give the entire thing away to those island CS to avoid paying the maintenance.

If the AI won't build navy, that's a huge bug.

 

[Bleser]

Here is my example screen shot. This is Montezuma's only city. It's 1255 AD and I think he'd only met one out of the other nine civs remaining. Look at that land to the east... no attempt to settle it.

Spoiler :

 

[dannythefool]

If the AI won't build navy, that's a huge bug.

They actually do build navy, and I *have* seen them embark settlers, but it appears to be a very very low priority. I'd say it's definitely a bug. Just play on an archipelago map, all islands will be completely untouched when you discover them. I've seen the AI explore with triremes, and bigger ships later, but the only time I've actually seen an AI settle a different island was across *at most* one tile of water. Or in one case, two tiles of water, separated by a tiny 1-tile island.

 

[Doctor Phibes]

Hi, first post but long-time player from Civ2 onwards.

Yeah - Civ5 is nothing short of hilarious at naval stuff. I think most people agree that none of the Civ AIs could cope well with maritime strategy, but this is a train wreck even compared with Civ3.

I'm currently working through the levels, playing Prince, huge map, archipelago game (with low sea levels, so lots of land if you can be bothered putting to sea). Basically, I did not see a single AI unit apart from barbs until 1200AD or so when my caravel encountered a Greek trireme. It's now 1350, I'm up to ships of the line and even that one trireme has disappeared. The RN has suicidal barb galleys to get a few XP points from, but this is getting silly. (Still playing it through for the lulz though - I'm still getting used to the game after all.)

Incidentally, even the barbs are not trying. I should have been dragged before an Admiralty board of enquiry for leaving a galley among my whaling boats a couple of turns, but it didn't even pillage them before I zapped it.

 

[Abremms]

@OP, thats odd. in all my games, AI expands like mad. much faster than i tend to. usualy by the time i drop my 3rd city i have to go to war to get a 4th.

@AI Naval bits, the AI seems to heavily prioritize control of thier home continent before doing anything beyond it. try the Small Continents mapscript (its in the advanced options). its a balance between archipeligo and continents, the AI won't generaly have much trouble gaining control of a continent (there are usualy ~4 of them) once they have that, they generaly start working on a navy and sprouting colonies on the smaller islands and invading other continents.

 

[superoxen]

I've also seen the AI being very weak with expansion sometimes. Been playing up through the difficulty levels starting with Chieftain. Current game is Prince, standard size, continents...I've been steadily rampaging across my continent with horse units, taking useful cities and burning or ignoring the rest.

It's ~1500AD, I just found the other continent with my first exploratory vessel, and I meet Bismarck, who has done OK for himself and has 5 or 6 cities visible...then there's Hiawatha, who has a whopping ONE city. In 1500AD. There's plenty of open land around his capital to settle, but it looks like all he's done is spam spears and trading posts.

Going to play on King next, hopefully the AI will be more consistent with aggressive expansion there. Basically I've been able to settle wherever I please so far because the AI is super sluggish when it comes to getting settlers out. The AIs on my continent in my current game were matching me 1:1 for cities at first, but after I had 3 cities and starting churning out horsemen, then knights, I got total control over where cities can go.

Still an awesome game though