How does difficulty affect AI?

[Adam3333]

Firstly, Sorry if this is common knowledge, but I couldn't find an answer easily with a search.

I wanted to find out how the difficulty setting affects the AI.

Does changing the difficulty make the AI play any differently, or is difficulty based purely on bonuses and penalties to the player and AI?

If the bonuses and penalties system is being used, are the bonuses and penalties the same as an unmodified copy of Civ? or are they completely rewritten for the mod?

lastly, if the above system is being used, is 'prince' the setting that makes players and AI equal in all aspects in terms of bonuses and penalties?

Thanks,

 

[Gazebo]

Firstly, Sorry if this is common knowledge, but I couldn't find an answer easily with a search.

I wanted to find out how the difficulty setting affects the AI.

Does changing the difficulty make the AI play any differently, or is difficulty based purely on bonuses and penalties to the player and AI?

If the bonuses and penalties system is being used, are the bonuses and penalties the same as an unmodified copy of Civ? or are they completely rewritten for the mod?

lastly, if the above system is being used, is 'prince' the setting that makes players and AI equal in all aspects in terms of bonuses and penalties?

Thanks,

This may be your answer:

Difficulty Changes:
AI no longer receives free techs at start, but instead receives incremental bonuses every era (Gold, science, free units, etc.). This helps the AI keep up with an advanced player without making the early game solely about 'catching up.'
Social Policy and Tech cost per city increased slightly (3-5% more per city, depending on map size).

G

 

[Funak]

This may be your answer:



G

I'm pretty sure they either start with a ton of gold or with more units than you do aswell, because I ran into 2 scouts and one warrior from the same civ at turn 3.

Which is kinda what you said, but still makes the earlygame all about catching up

 

[QualityGiever]

Sorry for bumping this, but I can't seem to find an answer with some looking around, so: is there a difficulty setting with the CP/CBP/etc. that actually doesn't give the AI any advantages? I'm not great at the game, but I like most of the changes, so I'd like to know if that's an option and, if so, which setting it is.

 

[Funak]

Sorry for bumping this, but I can't seem to find an answer with some looking around, so: is there a difficulty setting with the CP/CBP/etc. that actually doesn't give the AI any advantages? I'm not great at the game, but I like most of the changes, so I'd like to know if that's an option and, if so, which setting it is.

Why do you care about advantages the AI gets? You play a difficulty because you're able to handle it, not because the AI doesn't get any advantages over you.

If you're really not sure about what you can handle then just pick a difficulty at random, move up if you win and move down if you lose.

 

[QualityGiever]

Why do you care about advantages the AI gets? You play a difficulty because you're able to handle it, not because the AI doesn't get any advantages over you.

If you're really not sure about what you can handle then just pick a difficulty at random, move up if you win and move down if you lose.

Thanks for the lecture? I care because that's how I'd like to play the game: against the AI w/o any advantages so that I know any differences are just due to either starting placement luck or decisions I or the AI make. If there's not an option to eliminate any advantages/disadvantages then I'll just deal with that, but it would still be nice to get a straight answer.

 

[Delekhan]

I think it's a valid question to ask how the CBP handles difficulty levels differently from the base game. It helps to know the rules of the game before diving in, so as to avoid frustration 200 turns into it.

One other thing I noticed: I play on Emperor or Immortal, and the AI's cities all start with 3 population (with normal settlers).

 

[Funak]

Thanks for the lecture? I care because that's how I'd like to play the game: against the AI w/o any advantages so that I know any differences are just due to either starting placement luck or decisions I or the AI make. If there's not an option to eliminate any advantages/disadvantages then I'll just deal with that, but it would still be nice to get a straight answer.

It was not a lecture, it was a suggestion. Way too many people are obsessed with thinking that if the AI won't receive any advantages then the game would be even. That's not how it works, you're able to do a lot of things as a player that the AI can't deal with meaning that they are always at a disadvantage, no matter what.

I have a friend who acts exactly the same way, he gets bored of the game because prince is way too easy and refuses to increase difficulty because that would be 'unfair'.
I'm just trying to make you have a more healthy attitude towards the game.

 

[QualityGiever]

It was not a lecture, it was a suggestion. Way too many people are obsessed with thinking that if the AI won't receive any advantages then the game would be even. That's not how it works, you're able to do a lot of things as a player that the AI can't deal with meaning that they are always at a disadvantage, no matter what.

I have a friend who acts exactly the same way, he gets bored of the game because prince is way too easy and refuses to increase difficulty because that would be 'unfair'.
I'm just trying to make you have a more healthy attitude towards the game.

As of right now the AI generally seems to plays smarter than I do. It was written by people who know the ins and outs of the games better than me, so that's not so odd. I've been playing on Prince (which may or may not be a 'neutral' difficulty, if one even exists with the CBP) and it certainly isn't easy for me. I also don't really want to read suggestions or tips on how to play better, but would rather figure it out on my own.

I don't want to play a super easy difficulty and get my own advantages since I'd rather get better practiced in a fair setting. I also don't particularly feel like practicing against an AI that gets advantages against me. Perhaps when I actually get competent enough that I regularly win on whatever might be the neutral difficulty (if there is one) I would consider switching to a higher difficulty, but that's not nearly the case right now.

I just want to practice and learn the game against a competent AI without any advantages/disadvantages, I don't see why that's such an unhealthy mindset to approach the game with.

 

[Funak]

As of right now the AI generally seems to plays smarter than I do. It was written by people who know the ins and outs of the games better than me, so that's not so odd. I've been playing on Prince (which may or may not be a 'neutral' difficulty, if one even exists with the CBP) and it certainly isn't easy for me. I also don't really want to read suggestions or tips on how to play better, but would rather figure it out on my own.

I don't want to play a super easy difficulty and get my own advantages since I'd rather get better practiced in a fair setting. I also don't particularly feel like practicing against an AI that gets advantages against me. Perhaps when I actually get competent enough that I regularly win on whatever might be the neutral difficulty (if there is one) I would consider switching to a higher difficulty, but that's not nearly the case right now.

I just want to practice and learn the game against a competent AI without any advantages/disadvantages, I don't see why that's such an unhealthy mindset to approach the game with.

The problem is that the AI is terrible at the game. You can not judge a situation where you and the AI have the same opportunities as even, because it isn't. You're a human being, you're capable of thinking outside the box, you're capable of forming strategies, the AI is barely able to pick a victorycondition.

If you feel that Prince is too hard, then just drop down one rank. If you think you can soldier through prince without dropping down a rank, go for it. Just don't make a decision based on something other than what you think you can deal with.

 

[Gazebo]

The problem is that the AI is terrible at the game. You can not judge a situation where you and the AI have the same opportunities as even, because it isn't. You're a human being, you're capable of thinking outside the box, you're capable of forming strategies, the AI is barely able to pick a victorycondition.

If you feel that Prince is too hard, then just drop down one rank. If you think you can soldier through prince without dropping down a rank, go for it. Just don't make a decision based on something other than what you think you can deal with.

Woah woah, terrible? I wouldn't say that. The AI is extremely competent at everything except micromanagement of units in combat. Other than that, civ is largely about maximizing numbers which, of all things, a computer definitely excels at. It may not always seem like it, as the AI doesn't necessarily make 'human' decisions, but the AI is pretty capable, and that's before the CP/CBP changes.

G

 

[Funak]

Woah woah, terrible? I wouldn't say that. The AI is extremely competent at everything except micromanagement of units in combat. Other than that, civ is largely about maximizing numbers which, of all things, a computer definitely excels at. It may not always seem like it, as the AI doesn't necessarily make 'human' decisions, but the AI is pretty capable, and that's before the CP/CBP changes

Ok I stand corrected.
"In my opinion, the AI is dumber than a bag of bricks. They can't seem to form even basic strategies and most of their decisions seems to be made by blindfolded dartthrowing."

 

[QualityGiever]

The problem is that the AI is terrible at the game. You can not judge a situation where you and the AI have the same opportunities as even, because it isn't. You're a human being, you're capable of thinking outside the box, you're capable of forming strategies, the AI is barely able to pick a victorycondition.

If you feel that Prince is too hard, then just drop down one rank. If you think you can soldier through prince without dropping down a rank, go for it. Just don't make a decision based on something other than what you think you can deal with.

Sorry, but I just don't subscribe to your view of the game and it really is beginning to come across as more of an imposition than a suggestion. Why is it so bothersome for someone to want to play it as I've described?

Anyway, I'm not really interested in getting into a debate about it, so I'll just reiterate my question in case someone actually has an answer.

Does anyone know if there is a difficulty setting for the CBP that doesn't involve handicaps for either the player or the AI and, if so, which one it is?

 

[Gazebo]

Sorry, but I just don't subscribe to your view of the game and it really is beginning to come across as more of an imposition than a suggestion. Why is it so bothersome for someone to want to play it as I've described?

Anyway, I'm not really interested in getting into a debate about it, so I'll just reiterate my question in case someone actually has an answer.

Does anyone know if there is a difficulty setting for the CBP that doesn't involve handicaps for either the player or the AI and, if so, which one it is?

I believe I can answer that. King is about as close to 'balanced' as the game gets. I'd recommend setting the BALANCE_GLOBAL_DIFFICULTY_LEVEL to 1 (instead of 2) in the CommunityOptions.sql file of the CBP. That'll give you a very balanced game in terms of AI bonuses.

G

 

[Delekhan]

One of the places where the AI's sub-normal decision making is on display is its inconsistent choice of city sites.

Sometimes they're pretty good. CBP has improved them.

Often, though, I see the AI settle a city and my jaw drops at their idiotic choice of location. I have actually loaded IGE with the express purpose of deleting an AI's crappy city and putting it just one or 2 tiles away, in a new amazing location, because any human with half a brain would have made that choice.

And then there's the ease with which I can manipulate them into doing silly things. Need to keep Askia busy? Just put some GPT on the table, and maybe throw in a horse or two, and he'll blindly charge into war wherever you point.

 

[WileyNg]

Personally I think the AI is quite good now but they are still quite terrible in taking cities.
I think that's because AI now prioritizes on building a sizable army which can match the neighbour's overall combat strength. This leads to a problem. Two comparable armies just simply cannot erase one another, let alone taking cities. And most of the time we see two warring states just come to a standstill until they finally give in and sign a peace treaty.

The only thing that can make a difference is diplomacy. I always love to see AIs forming coalition against those who are too aggressive. But then this will put all the warmongering states into a grave disadvantage. In my lastest 5 games, Zulus, Denmark, Assur, the Mongols, they tended to make enemies with all the civs they met and became very weak as a result of the coalition against them.


Gazebo how would you address this? Do you think the warmonger AI should furthermore prioritize in expanding territory and building a larger army?

P.S. I found out that Assur didn't build any new cities in the first 150 turns so she was very weak. The problem which expansionist AI don't choose pottery for building settlers still persists.

 

[joosegoose25]

P.S. I found out that Assur didn't build any new cities in the first 150 turns so she was very weak. The problem which expansionist AI don't choose pottery for building settlers still persists.

I played the first ~120 turns of a game with the 2/15 version, the first time I'd played since the Pottery change. Sooooo much unclaimed land and too many AIs with only 2 cities. I had chalked it up to chance and bad luck until I read you mentioning Pottery. Settlers unlocking with Pottery would make a lot of sense for what I saw.

Edit: I started a game with the 2/17 version and noticed something peculiar. Here is La Venta at turn 96, Standard settings:

Spoiler :

That's where the settler spawned (maybe one tile away), it just sort of walked in place for 96 turns before finally settling. Also worth noting: in this game Isabella has yet to settle a single city beyond her capital at turn 104, and she went Might.

 

[Funak]

I played the first ~120 turns of a game with the 2/15 version, the first time I'd played since the Pottery change. Sooooo much unclaimed land and too many AIs with only 2 cities. I had chalked it up to chance and bad luck until I read you mentioning Pottery. Settlers unlocking with Pottery would make a lot of sense for what I saw.

Edit: I started a game with the 2/17 version and noticed something peculiar. Here is La Venta at turn 96, Standard settings:

Spoiler :

That's where the settler spawned (maybe one tile away), it just sort of walked in place for 96 turns before finally settling. Also worth noting: in this game Isabella has yet to settle a single city beyond her capital at turn 104, and she went Might.

You see those city-state settlers every once in a while, I usually just take them before they start cities, putting them out of their misery.


Also I'm really not a huge fan of the settlers from pottery, it seems to mess with the ai and it just creates a mandatory tech that you have to go for as your first or second tech.

 

[QualityGiever]

I believe I can answer that. King is about as close to 'balanced' as the game gets. I'd recommend setting the BALANCE_GLOBAL_DIFFICULTY_LEVEL to 1 (instead of 2) in the CommunityOptions.sql file of the CBP. That'll give you a very balanced game in terms of AI bonuses.

G

Thanks for the help!

 

[Gazebo]

Thanks for the help!

To explain further, I've removed the free techs for AI civs from the game, and the bonuses the civs receive are much smaller and scattered throughout the game. The game is less front-loaded in that regard, and allows for a more balanced experience.

G