How is the AI?

I agree very much with this. The tactical AI still isn't brilliant, but since the last couple of patches I've seen the AI throw multiple sieges on city states where they will bring a good number of melee or mounted units and will actually deploy and use siege units. I've seen several city states taken down by a combination of a handful of Longswordsmen or Musketmen and two Trebuchets (I use the Steel and Thunder mod that adds these units). I've also seen AI use combinations of land and sea units to put a city state under siege.

That said, the AI still has some severe shortcomings. They can overpower city states by out-teching them, but they generally fail against major civs on their same tech level. To be fair, this is as much a question of walls being too strong (imo.) as it is a question of the AI being bad. They also seem to fail at regrouping and falling back when their initial assault is dismantled. These are situations where we still see the famed single unit rush, or even rushes using civilian units. Again, this is as much an issue with the AI as it's a question of game design: The fact that producing new military units take at least a handful of turns, and often significantly longer than that if you don't have a production-focused city, leaves the AI extremely vulnerable once you have cut their gold reserves and supply from them.

Wrt. district placement, there has also been improvements in this area. I actually see some decent district placements fairly often. They probably still don't understand to buy tiles to get optimal placement, but the nonsense placement we saw in the early days seems to be gone. I think the issue is not as much that the AI places their districts badly as it is that they generally build too few districts and/or the wrong ones (yes they now build many campuses, which actually helps them keep up in science, but they sure do love their encampments and holy sites still, not to mention entertainment complexes and renaissance walls (which may actually not be a bad priority to help them survive)). Again, I think their tendency to wasting military units futilely ends up acting as a major production sink that draws away production from more constructive elements like districts and buildings.

I have just started playing civ 6 again and starting to wonder at what point does the AI actually build any military usually?

I started at a lower difficulty to learn the game more and built my way up to emperor now. Playing huge maps with 12 civs on epic speed there only ever appears to be one civ on a map who actually has a military at all. In my current emperor game in the information era i have 3500 military score with what i would class as a bare bones army (from playing vox populi), america has a military score of 1100 which appears to mainly consist of rangers and heavily outdated cavalry units from the visibility i have and all other civs have less than 100 military score which from my understanding of the military score is around 1 unit each with 5 of those civs having over 10 cities so it is not like they can't support a large military.

At one point mid game congo did appear to have a reasonable army (didn't actually check military score at that point and only assumed based on taking the city state early on and the units i got visibility on from them attacking my allied city states) and had taken a city state it had settled around. We ended up at war as part of an emergency but there were (my) suzeran city states between me and him and they just ripped his army apart, even going so far as to take one of his border cities and raze it. We ended up in phoney war for around 40 turns while i moved my army to him and built more units expecting a difficult fight and when i decided to invade him i only saw one unit which he built while i was attacking so it appears my city states had wiped out his military and he never rebuilt them?

While i have seen a few city states get conquered, as a whole it would seem city states are much more capable of defending themselves and attacking threats than the civ AI's do, which i guessed was down to resource availability restriciting the AI from upgrading to current units but tis is still happening with the more resources mod.

I have never seen an AI scout or any other unit apart from a builder appearing to explore at all. I have only ever seen one AI (none CS) ship and that was built by Kupe who is a naval based civ. In fact the only difficulty i have had with any combat is when during my congo war, in a single turn their cities/encampments went from 60 strength to 80 strength which (from my understanding) is probably because they built that one current era unit as city strength is based off the strongest unit you have trained(?) so their cities could actually kill my units.

As this game is in the closing stages should i just jump straight to Diety or does the AI actually step up on immortal?



As a side note the AI seems extremely lacking in the builder department. During early scouting in my current game i discovered england and india and it appears england had taken one of indias cities before i met them both even though england had a military score of around 50 and india were currently the leader with over 500 military score ( i assume england just about captured the city while wiping out it's own military and india just gave up?). To the point, i noticed that a number of tiles had been pillaged during this war...around 150 turns later i had visibilty on these tiles again and they still were epillaged?!
On a similar note, when conquering cities i tend to have to send in a troop of builders, not to repair tiles as almost not are improved but to simply do basic improvements of even luxuries or strategic/bonus resources never mind farms, mines or lumbermills.
I do occasionaly capture a builder but this is usually wondering around in no man's land although very occasionaly i capture one in the AI's territory.


As an additional comment, as i usualy see when discussion of poor combat AI comes about there is inevitably discussion on how 1UPT was a mistake and we should allow stacking as the AI could deal with that much better...can i just say that stacking is just papering over the cracks of poor design and implementation. 1UPT doesn't break the AI it just shines a bright light on the traditionally sloppy design and implementation that is traditional with civ games as AI can handle 1UPT perfectly well and in an effective and dangerous manner if programmed well enough. i.e. as per the great AI the vox populi people have created where the AI can attack and defend on a huge front while protecting vulnerable squishy units and can do so with cause. My most epic brown trousers (seriously impressed with the AI) moment of any 4x/strategy game was when a 20+ fleet of ships appeared out of the fog of war off my coast protecting a sizable invading army. On the ther foot a seaborne invasion, even over a small straight and with overwhelming force can be a prolonged and difficult endeavor as the AI defend the coat effectively, not allowing a foothold and cycling damaged units out to heal rather than just letting me pick them off peacemeal. A recent vox populi game i wanted to invade a AI over a 2-3 tile straight. The first 50+ turn war ended in stalemate. The second war i had to sacrifice a number of units to eventually take a coastal city and had to expend a great general to build a citadel to defend it from being recaptured and even then i had to slowly roll the AI back as they would kill any unit which exposed itself.
 
The AI just fizzling out, Late Game Tedium, and the positive feedback snowball has led me to the following conclusion about how to best enjoy Civ6.

Turn off all victories except score

Set the game length at 200 turns

Usually at that point you have basically already won the game or you have’nt, and from then on it’s just batting AI pinatas around.

The early game, at least for me, and it sounds like for others, seems to be the more enjoyable and exciting part of the game, so why play past that point when you can simply start a new one?
 
I have just started playing civ 6 again and starting to wonder at what point does the AI actually build any military usually?
Not sure if I can answer all your questions, and your obvservations don't all match my average game observations, even though I can recognize some patterns. Just out of curiosity, do you use any mods or NFP game modes?

I frequently see the AIs with ~0 military score in mid/late game. I'm fairly sure this happens because they've engaged in a war and lost all their units. So obviously the AI is incapable of building up an army again. Whether it's because it fails to even build new units, or because it builds new units and then send them off one by one as soon as the finish, only to have them immediately killed because they lack backup, I can't say, but from my observations I lean towards the latter explanation. In late-game, the AI does seem to love hard-building armies of units, and it's my impression that even with the AI production bonus, these will take a lot of time for them to finish. On a small side-note, programming the AI to not run all their melee and mounted units head-first into encampments and walled cities would probably do wonders for their survivability. The idea of AI actually fortifying their melee units around a city and then applying siege units behind them could actually give me some unpleasant dreams.

I do encounter AI scouts, but I think they get one for free as their starting units on Immortal difficulty? I'm not sure, but maybe they don't build any from scratch. As for late-game reconnaissance units, I have no recollection of seeing them in action. AI does seem to build ships, however - not huge amounts, but civs like England, The Netherlands and Indonesia normally have at least a couple of Caravels and maybe some ranged naval units also.
 
I haven't purchased any of the NFP as most reviews aren't great for them with the features mainly seeming interesting but poorly implemented so just play based game with gathering storm (skipping R&F as this only gives me more civs and doesn't change the game as all systems are included with GS?) and maybe if i stick with the game i might pick them up in a sale.

I run a couple of UI mods so i get basic information more easily...sukritacts simple ui adjustments and custom notifications so i get notifications which are so basic they should be in the base game.
The hilly hills mod so i can actually see hills!
The only game changing mods i use are one to slow climate change as it seems to happen way to fast where it got to last stage with only 3 power stations, virtually no fossil fuel based units as there was virtually no coal or oil available and didn't build railroads, before i even got any green power sources in my last game and one which adds more strategic resources as they seem to be extremely lacking in the base game and was hoping that would help the AI upgrade units better.
 
I do agree that "stacks of doom" can be seen as papering over the cracks of poor AI so to speak, but the system works. The AI can make use of the mechanic and really give a player a run for their money. However, I don't think it's fair to say that Civ IV AI would be as poor if it were 1UPT. The AI's problems in Civ VI go much deeper than just manoeuvring units. As posters have mentioned, the AI will simply not make any units at all and then get destroyed in wars, or they will leave improvements pillaged for eternity. Civ IV AI is at least competent in these areas and will maintain their empire reasonably well and rarely neglect their army.

In regards to Vox Populi, the AI is indeed much improved and a challenge to play against but somewhat overhyped, I believe. I have still seen the AI shuffle their units backwards and forwards whilst I whittle away at them and they often create poorly placed cities. I understand modders can only do so much, however.

I'm very upset to see Civ VI is still in such a poor state. There seems little reason to move on from Civ IV as of yet.

Kind regards,
Ita Bear
 
I haven't purchased any of the NFP as most reviews aren't great for them with the features mainly seeming interesting but poorly implemented so just play based game with gathering storm (skipping R&F as this only gives me more civs and doesn't change the game as all systems are included with GS?) and maybe if i stick with the game i might pick them up in a sale.

I run a couple of UI mods so i get basic information more easily...sukritacts simple ui adjustments and custom notifications so i get notifications which are so basic they should be in the base game.
The hilly hills mod so i can actually see hills!
The only game changing mods i use are one to slow climate change as it seems to happen way to fast where it got to last stage with only 3 power stations, virtually no fossil fuel based units as there was virtually no coal or oil available and didn't build railroads, before i even got any green power sources in my last game and one which adds more strategic resources as they seem to be extremely lacking in the base game and was hoping that would help the AI upgrade units better.

please link to this mod from climate change (slow climate change) . Thx
 
I do agree that "stacks of doom" can be seen as papering over the cracks of poor AI so to speak, but the system works. The AI can make use of the mechanic and really give a player a run for their money. However, I don't think it's fair to say that Civ IV AI would be as poor if it were 1UPT. The AI's problems in Civ VI go much deeper than just manoeuvring units. As posters have mentioned, the AI will simply not make any units at all and then get destroyed in wars, or they will leave improvements pillaged for eternity. Civ IV AI is at least competent in these areas and will maintain their empire reasonably well and rarely neglect their army.

In regards to Vox Populi, the AI is indeed much improved and a challenge to play against but somewhat overhyped, I believe. I have still seen the AI shuffle their units backwards and forwards whilst I whittle away at them and they often create poorly placed cities. I understand modders can only do so much, however.

I'm very upset to see Civ VI is still in such a poor state. There seems little reason to move on from Civ IV as of yet.

Kind regards,
Ita Bear

Agree 100% with your assessment. That's why I'm planning to move on to HumandKind when it's out in August.
 
I noticed something odd.... each game since a few patches back has a random civ that is 10-15 techs ahead of everyone else. The devs silently include a designated OP civ or something?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PiR
I noticed something odd.... each game since a few patches back has a random civ that is 10-15 techs ahead of everyone else. The devs silently include a designated OP civ or something?

Anecdotally, I feel like I see the same. More anecdotally, I feel like I've seen this since Civ III, but snowballing AI was easier back then since they had the ability to capture enemy cities and so could actually enact their war plans.

I wonder if the engine can only handle a limited number of strategic decisions and applies them to a single AI.
 
I noticed something odd.... each game since a few patches back has a random civ that is 10-15 techs ahead of everyone else. The devs silently include a designated OP civ or something?
I've been noticing runaway civ similar to Civ5 lately. Science wise, they could win, if left alone.

They do consume a weak neighbor depending on terrain. If they got the tech advantage, they can just hammer walls down.

It's nice to have a competitor. I had switch to religion or diplomacy victory a couple of times, because AI had a massive lead in science on deity.
 
Funny. AI is garbage and Firaxis REFUSES to release dll.

They dont want to release DLL because the DLC thing about the game, if you have the community modding it, it will harm a bit that selling machine, the dlc is somekind of mod that they cash it, without dll, you just can buy their mods (DLC).
 
Top Bottom