Overly Passive AI: UPDATE

[Dolen2]

It's been a while since the last time I brought this up, about AI holding back too much in war although being the aggressor.
It seems like they declare war with no goal set. There have been many updates since then, however, sadly I've seen almost no change regarding AI timidity and passiveness in war, and no, difficulty doesn't matter.
At this point, you no longer have to worry about defending your country anymore.

I'm almost 100% sure that something fundamental regarding war AI was changed in 6-12 version.

I know nothing about coding, so anyone can call me whatever they want but I just miss those times

 

[azum4roll]

6-12 version? No, I just completed a 7-29-3 game and AI are hyper aggressive unless they're bribed to war AND too far away from you.

 

[Dolen2]

Which difficulty do you play on?

I may post some pics to show what I have been describing.

 

[Dolen2]

Ok, I did a small test again using Ingame Editor to monitor AI war-related behavior, on Standard Immortal setup with no events, technology trading and vassalage. Latest 10-23 ver.

1. AI aggressiveness

By the turn 171 1110 AD, only 3 wars have been declared in total; 2 by Zulu (who is already like the most aggressive civ in the game), and 1 by Maya-Byzantine alliance. 8 players, turn 171, only 3. Let this sink in for a moment... it seems odd, and even more so considering how aggressive VP AI had always been.

You might say it is because of less intense border conflicts, well look at these pictures to see that's not the case

Spoiler :

2. AI Military Strength

Although this test was done on Immortal, the military strength of the most civs remained beyond pathetic, especially the ground forces.

India: Turn 161 1010 AD

Spoiler :

I mean.. look at that WTF

Portugal: Same

Spoiler :

Byzantines: Same

Spoiler :

Maya: Same

Spoiler :

Polynesia: Same

Spoiler :

If you are a long-time VP player, you know this is not how it used to be.
If I don't build up a decent force by about 80 turn, I'm basically screwed, and that's how it was even on King difficulty.

3. War AI Timidity or just bad AI

AI doesn't seem to know how to assault a city anymore; they just stand back doing absolutely nothing.

In my test Zulu declared war on Portugal presumably trying to take BRAGANCA.
And this picture shows how the assault has been going for the last 20 turns or so.

Spoiler :

Another case of Zulu war against pathetic Indian army which would have been easily crushed.
What's shown in this picture was how it had been for like 20 turns or so, and would have remained so forever.

Spoiler :

Thanks for reading all the crap.

 

[Recursive]

I suspect the culprit for the lack of aggression is the new IsWantsToConquer flag. Reported this on Github.

 

[Kim Dong Un]

I suspect the culprit for the lack of aggression is the new IsWantsToConquer flag. Reported this on Github.

Yeah, wasn't this version supposed to specifically touch AI that addressed this exact problem of not committing enough to certain conquests? Probably something amiss.

 

[Recursive]

Yeah, wasn't this version supposed to specifically touch AI that addressed this exact problem of not committing enough to certain conquests? Probably something amiss.

No, it nerfed AI attacking players that aren't desirable war targets, to prevent AI sending units to be slaughtered, especially in a defensive war. It may have been overdone.

Edit: According to ilteroi, it should be better in the next version.

 

[cerk]

Good to know. I was getting by with only 6 units with an 8 city civ and in renaissance already (Prince difficulty) and I was wondering if I had accidentally enabled Passive AI. Of course it helped that i shared borders only with korea with only 2 cities and the recent discussions in defensive city placement upped my game.

Spoiler First war on the map ever on T269, epic :

 

[Recursive]

Good to know. I was getting by with only 6 units with an 8 city civ and in renaissance already (Prince difficulty) and I was wondering if I had accidentally enabled Passive AI. Of course it helped that i shared borders only with korea with only 2 cities and the recent discussions in defensive city placement upped my game.

Spoiler First war on the map ever on T269, epic :

View attachment 538176

Passive AI is not a thing yet

 

[swapoer]

Regarding the first problem, I have different experiences. Playing as Americans and having Rome and Aztec as neighbors in the same continent on Immortal, Rome and Aztec war against me and each other every 20-30 turns.
Egypt and Indian in another continent, they war against each other in late game.
As far as I can tell the ai is still as warlike as they used to be. Indian even cancel several dof with me just because their religion failed to spread into my continent!

 

[BiteInTheMark]

Ok, I did a small test again using Ingame Editor to monitor AI war-related behavior, on Standard Immortal setup with no events, technology trading and vassalage. Latest 10-23 ver.

1. AI aggressiveness

By the turn 171 1110 AD, only 3 wars have been declared in total; 2 by Zulu (who is already like the most aggressive civ in the game), and 1 by Maya-Byzantine alliance. 8 players, turn 171, only 3. Let this sink in for a moment... it seems odd, and even more so considering how aggressive VP AI had always been.

You might say it is because of less intense border conflicts, well look at these pictures to see that's not the case

Spoiler :

2. AI Military Strength

Although this test was done on Immortal, the military strength of the most civs remained beyond pathetic, especially the ground forces.

India: Turn 161 1010 AD

Spoiler :

I mean.. look at that WTF

Portugal: Same

Spoiler :

Byzantines: Same

Spoiler :

Maya: Same

Spoiler :

Polynesia: Same

Spoiler :

If you are a long-time VP player, you know this is not how it used to be.
If I don't build up a decent force by about 80 turn, I'm basically screwed, and that's how it was even on King difficulty.

3. War AI Timidity or just bad AI

AI doesn't seem to know how to assault a city anymore; they just stand back doing absolutely nothing.

In my test Zulu declared war on Portugal presumably trying to take BRAGANCA.
And this picture shows how the assault has been going for the last 20 turns or so.

Spoiler :

Another case of Zulu war against pathetic Indian army which would have been easily crushed.
What's shown in this picture was how it had been for like 20 turns or so, and would have remained so forever.

Spoiler :

Thanks for reading all the crap.

Some notes to the pictures:
India: yeah, looks terrible, but hey,..... It's India, the most peaceful civ.
Portugal: I count 24 units for a 8 city empire, doesn't look that bad for that state of the game. Simply a bad focus on navy than on land units.
Byzantine: the same, atleast 27 units, mostly ships, but in this case not the worst idea cause it's less landlocked than Portugal.

Something you could claim, is a bad naval/land force ratio. Portugal has way too many ships for its landlocked territory, especially with the fact that the Zulu are directly bordering them.

Something that screw me more is the bad shape in general of the AI cities. It looks a bit like the AI is only building tile improvements, if those are needed cause of citizen birth. The most South city of the Maya has 9 citizen but only 8 good/improved tiles to work.

 

[Dolen2]

Something that screw me more is the bad shape in general of the AI cities.

That's actually what I noticed too.

Something you could claim, is a bad naval/land force ratio. Portugal has way too many ships for its landlocked territory, especially with the fact that the Zulu are directly bordering them.

You are absolutely right. There is something fatally wrong with naval/land force ratio.
However, even if they had a formidable army, like Zulu in this test, AI would just suck at maneuvering it to take cities.
The last picture shows this well, and it occurs too often.

 

[Dolen2]

For comparison, here's what I found in the following test on 6-2 version in question.
Same setup except that this test was done on King to show difficulty doesn't matter in AI passiveness.

1. AI Aggressiveness

By Turn 161, 9 wars (3 in the previous test) have been declared while the participating civs were more naturally warlike.
I doubt it matters, as Turkey and Portugal NEVER declared war in the previous test, and with generally peaceful Maya being fairly aggressive here.

2. AI Military Strength

Notice in these pics below that AI makes more land units in general, or they are just better at deciding whether to strengthen naval forces.
And it makes more sense in most cases, since ships can't attack or defend inland cities, and as shown in the previous test they suck at deciding whether to dedicate more resources to navy.

And also note that they have been constantly losing units in fierce battles unlike in the previous test, so there would be more units present if war was as rare.


What "King" used to look like:

Spoiler :

Aztec: Turn 161 1010 AD

Spoiler :

France

Spoiler :

Polynesia

Spoiler :

3. War AI

I witnessed many fierce engagements in this test, trying to assault or defend cities, which was never seen in the previous test.
They no longer play around.


NOBAMBA has been occupied by both factions multiple times, and reduced to ashes

Spoiler :

Aztecs making a determined push towards CORDOBA, and this was in the same turn as they declared war
Good war preparation, and effective concentration of force

Spoiler :

Japan pushing hard with flanking cavalry

Spoiler :

All that is never seen in recent VP

 

[Dolen2]

I was happy to see these exciting moments in the latest patch:

Germany getting crushed by Iroquois

Spoiler :

Denmark vs Carthage: Battle for Total Dominance

Spoiler :

now this is an avengers level threat

Spoiler :

Overall, I feel it's back on the track war AI wise, and hope it will stay this way in the future

 

[Mambo668]

Hey Dolen is it the same mapscript in Your #13 and #14 post ? Normal continents in both games?

 

[vyyt]

Yay!!! Your screenshots, @Dolen2, warmed an old warmonger's heart and brought tears of happiness to my eyes. I have not had a chance to play much recently, but I was getting the impression that while the AI was getting better and better on the unit to unit tactical level, they were not building enough (land) units for their puny and futile offensives and their units were just dancing and prancing around waiting to be overrun with my blitzkriegs. But with the lack of evidence and being always behind several versions, I was reluctant to create a post like yours myself. Looks like the fun battles of 2017 are back!

 

[SuperNoobCamper]

I have started an 8-players standard Terra match on Emperor difficulty normal speed as Carthage on a land locked capital, i have not had a single turn after T60-70 without being at war with at least 2 AIs and they have been spamming units at my cities like crazy; they put sanctions on me, Open door on my CS allies, spamming great generals and stealing my lands and taking a single city takes like 10 turns of fighting and they do fight back and the damned 3-tiles ranged attack of a 70~ combat strength is ridiculous in early industrial era.
Although my experience on Emperor was pretty rough before the AI bonuses got adjusted, i can feel the changes made in the latest patch to the AI unit building & attacking formation but the Navy/Land units building logic could use some tweaking.

 

[Recursive]

I have started an 8-players standard Terra match on Emperor difficulty normal speed as Carthage on a land locked capital, i have not had a single turn after T60-70 without being at war with at least 2 AIs and they have been spamming units at my cities like crazy; they put sanctions on me, Open door on my CS allies, spamming great generals and stealing my lands and taking a single city takes like 10 turns of fighting and they do fight back and the damned 3-tiles ranged attack of a 70~ combat strength is ridiculous in early industrial era.
Although my experience on Emperor was pretty rough before the AI bonuses got adjusted, i can feel the changes made in the latest patch to the AI unit building & attacking formation but the Navy/Land units building logic could use some tweaking.

If the AI is consistently as good as you describe, it sounds like it's in a pretty good place right now - perhaps the handicap bonuses could even be lowered in the future.

 

[SuperNoobCamper]

If the AI is consistently as good as you describe, it sounds like it's in a pretty good place right now - perhaps the handicap bonuses could even be lowered in the future.

In this very match i can say it's over performing and it was actually giving me a hard time trying to fend them off but it may have something to do with the map itself since most cities are land locked and the vast majority of their resources are poured into making land units.
In fact i'm pretty sure i would have lost that game at some point if it were not for early elimination of Ottomans and taking their capital with great wall; it's pretty much the sole reason i have not been overrun by Denmark, Greece and The Aztecs gigantic infantry army in the early game and of course the Red fort in my capital * i have been forward settled by both the Aztecs and Denmark* managing to take down their ranged units in their lands before entering my territory with a bunch of citadels and forts along the borders.
However previous match playing as Egypt using the same setup but a communitas map was pretty easy that i eliminated 2 players without actually losing a significant portion of my army got bored and started a new game mainly because they did not build enough land units whilst having a ridiculous navy.
I like the current handicap bonuses but i would not mind giving the AI a few more to make up for the bias they tend to have towards naval units.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

I had to fight the huns on a wide open terrain and it was an extreme hard fight.
They were north and I was south. The fight of the west side of a CS and a lake was an incredible attrition war, cause they placed 3 citadels in a hill and desert dominated area, making it nearly impossible to break their defence and pillage their citadels at same time. On the east side of the CS and lake I was able to conquer one of their cities, but the further push towards their capital was a real pain. The territory of their capital was thanks to their UA huge and my units had to walk a long way back to heal. A huge open terrain laid in front of me and I had to send several waves of Tercios and Fusiliers to tank the permanent Skirmisher and Melee attacks. The only reason Ive made it to their capital and got it was the pure amount of melee units which permanently push to front and then immidiatly heal in the back and my level 6-8 elite ranged units.

I think from a tactical level, the AI is now pretty clever.
The only 2 weak spots which have to be looked at for now are their lacking ability to take cities with ships and the ability to find a good balance in naval and land units.