I don't even bother anymore...

[dojoboy]

While playing an old GOTM last night, I realized a couple things. After playing Civ3 almost daily since January, I rarely build city walls in every city, and I rarely build more than one defender per city (build 1 defender/1 offender v. 2/1).

A couple important variables: (1) play warlord to monarch (adjustments made accordingly) and (2) barbarians set sedentary to roaming.

Why? I guess experience. After initial expansion (peaceful and violent), I rarely build city walls since city size influences city defenses. [Question: Are city walls obsolete in size 7+ cities?] In regards to defenders, until railroads and paratroopers there is no need for more than 1 defender / city. [Question: When raging barbarians are selected in set-up, do they rage once expansion is complete?]

I realized (last night) that my economies and offensives have been much more effective these days.

Do you guys know of any other areas to streamline an empire?

Granted this works well for me in SP and may lead to disaster in MP. [punch]

 

[-proletarian-]

Lately I've been building up my military like a b*tch because I'm sick of those unprovoked attacks that always occur around 1000AD once everyone gets established. It doesn't seem to make a difference, to be honest. No matter how much I build up my military, the best I can ever get is "we have an average military compared to these guys". The AI must pump out ground units 24/7.

 

[MonkeyPaw]

It's annoying sometimes when a "massive barbarian build-up" manages to take out my single spearman and starts looting my treasury like crazy.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

I soooooo long for the mutli-cheat! I'd really like to know where the AI takes all these units from. If I play on Regent, supposedly the level where all if even (and I made sure it is in my mod!), I can only match AI expansion, even when I have way better land, when I restrict myself to 1 defender / city. The AI has units extra it can send to escort settlers, and it has units left over to attach me. How???????

 

[dojoboy]

Originally posted by Lt. 'Killer' M.
...I can only match AI expansion, even when I have way better land, when I restrict myself to 1 defender / city.

Good point.

 

[D9phoenix]

In regent i can sometimes out produce the AI's. If you notice most of there so called military is older quickly produced units. I do this trick from time to time on the higher lvls. Just build lots of warriors if you have no iron hooked up. Or if you do have iron don't hook it up to your cities right away. Just use the city to upgrade the few you need.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Well the AI outproduces me when Warriors are top-notch, so it is not unit price. i can match their building if I build Warriors while they build Archers/Spearmen.

 

[-proletarian-]

In fact, the only time I ever have a strong military in comparison to the AI is after I've built my capital and built two warriors as a garrison. I then (if I'm not expansionist) pump out 4-5 warriors to scout out my surroundings. After that very early stage the only way to match their militaries is to bankrupt yourself doing nothing but pumping out units in every city.

 

[Trinity]

I always get the same message, "we have an average military". I planted a spy when I built the Intelligence Agency and found that 35 of their units were workers, 37 were spearmen, and they still had warriors running around. Yes they had 100 infantry, but those infantry would pale compared to my then 70 mech infantry.

It is quantitative, not qualitative. However, remember the AI will remove city garrisons when they engage in war, and will regarrison the cities instantly when those cities are threatened. You will also notice a drop in city size due to pop-rushing.

 

[Evincar]

Yes, that happened to me in regent, and it gets worse on Monarch. At the begining the AI misterously expands faster than me, and I'm always behind in tech, military...everything. In regent, this changes in the middle ages, but, in Monarch, I have to wait until industrialization, since the AI doesn't understand that having cities that can produce a tank every two turns is good . Then, I can easily crash the AI, but usually not before.

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by Lt. 'Killer' M.
I soooooo long for the mutli-cheat! I'd really like to know where the AI takes all these units from. If I play on Regent, supposedly the level where all if even (and I made sure it is in my mod!), I can only match AI expansion, even when I have way better land, when I restrict myself to 1 defender / city. The AI has units extra it can send to escort settlers, and it has units left over to attach me. How???????

It CHEATS.

The Civ 2 Multi Cheat was, as we all recall, very useful for many things other than just "cheating". We could do such as switch sides in a scenario (we don't have scenarios either with Civ 3) or run a dragging game quickly for several centuries by playing as barbarians. We could control our own accelerated starts. So Firaxis kills the Multi Cheat.

At fifty dollars a game, if someone WANTED to blatantly cheat, for real, LET THEM HAVE THEIR FUN. It's their game. But no.

Firaxis took away the Multi Cheat, and then also killed the "multi.sav" cheat for Civ 3 with the 1.21 patch, as they do NOT want you to see in how many ways the AI cheats, and not just with units. Ever notice how few factories the AI builds although it still gets factory-level production?

As for "escorting settlers", that is a good one. Here's what happens: I raze a city (an absurd concept, BTW) - and immediately everyone knows about it and sends settlers/foot soldier combos marching to the now open tiles. They get there faster than I can send a settler there! They come marching in even when at war with me and they keep coming even after I've destroyed the first pair. They come from a SINGLE small city that is isolated and could not possibly make those units that quickly.

It's not only illogical; it's a cheat. The AI gives itself freebies.

 

[Sullla]

Zouave's obsession with AI "cheating" aside , there has never been any evidence whatsoever that the AI civs gets free units (except at the start of the game on Monarch and up). After playing many, many games I'm very confident that the AI does not pull units out of thin air. They will pop rush or rush build like crazy to produce settlers if even the smallest amount of land opens up, but that's not the same thing as cheating.

As for the AI out-expanding you on Regent... that shouldn't be happening. In a well-played game of Civ3, the player can run circles around the Regent AI and completely out-expand it. If this is causing anyone out there problems, I invite you to look at the training day games in the succession games forum that are being run by Arathorn, Sirian, Zed, and myself. Each game is an example of how to play the early game well enough to beat the AI every time on Emperor and below. If you doubt me, just come and take a look at my game.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Sulla: what can I ask more then a two cows for each of my first three cities? ideal spacing? but when i look at the AAR, the AI plunks down cities as fast as I do all the time. Sure, soon I overrun them, simply because I build the occasional Temple instead of several warriors, then can keep on settlering when they switch over to buildings.....

As for the frre unit: either they get one, or the Ai doesn't suffer from resistance. cheat cheat cheat cheat!!!!! If Firaxis ain't gonna tell us the rules of the game, I call every AI deviation from the rules that apply to the human a CHEAT!

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by Lt. 'Killer' M.
Sulla: what can I ask more then a two cows for each of my first three cities? ideal spacing? but when i look at the AAR, the AI plunks down cities as fast as I do all the time. Sure, soon I overrun them, simply because I build the occasional Temple instead of several warriors, then can keep on settlering when they switch over to buildings.....

As for the frre unit: either they get one, or the Ai doesn't suffer from resistance. cheat cheat cheat cheat!!!!! If Firaxis ain't gonna tell us the rules of the game, I call every AI deviation from the rules that apply to the human a CHEAT!

Of course they are cheats. The AI regularly breaks its own rules.

Now, with Civ 2 it got certain clearly stated advantages, such as better percentages in combat as we went up in level. Fine. Everything is up front and straightforward. But Firaxis didn't do that nor did they even tell us in all the ways Civ 3 cheats. Man, that would be a LONG readme.

 

[Arioch]

Of course they are cheats. The AI regularly breaks its own rules.

Now, with Civ 2 it got certain clearly stated advantages, such as better percentages in combat as we went up in level. Fine. Everything is up front and straightforward. But Firaxis didn't do that nor did they even tell us in all the ways Civ 3 cheats. Man, that would be a LONG readme.

Yep, the AI cheats. I bet you can still beat it though...
As for the 'cheats' being different from Civ 2, the AI in CIV 2 is simple so only a few variables need to be adjusted. The LONG readme would be needed for Civ 3 because the AI is much more advanced in order to make a better game, this means the cheats need to be more complex so that the AI is more balanced against human opposition.

On topic - I discovered the same methods as dojoboy and since I don't plan to spend my time playing MP I reckon I'll be just fine.

 

[JuicyCivNewbie]

The AI really sucks, so it pretty much has to cheat. Hell I only find deity interesting in the BC and early AD years (and only in the BC years do you generally have a chance of losing). No one right now can make a challenging civ3 AI which would run on anything less than a supercomputer, if it's possible at all with our technology now. If the AI didn't cheat it would be less than a walkover (like regent now).

As for city defences I leave virtually all my cities completely undefended once I have the luxuries to keep them ungarrisoned. I leave units defending border cities and even occasionally build walls and forts there, but nothing else. Building too many units is a terrible waste and IMO learning how NOT to defend your cities is an important skill I learned with civ2.

 

[Qitai]

Originally posted by Lt. 'Killer' M.
As for the frre unit: either they get one, or the Ai doesn't suffer from resistance. cheat cheat cheat cheat!!!!! If Firaxis ain't gonna tell us the rules of the game, I call every AI deviation from the rules that apply to the human a CHEAT!

I thought it is clear that in the case you are probably refering to, it is likely that AI did not get free unit but bought it instead. As for the resistance, getting no resistance for capturing a size 4 city is normal for me. I can't exclude the possibility that AI get no resistance though. But then, I don't find that a big problem in terms of game play.

I wouldn't get so excited about minor advantages as long as units do not appear out of thin air (which although many claims has been made, no concrete proves are given). From my observation, the AI did not cheat in most aspect of the game. I keep a close look at the AI in games I played and I can almost always explain where they get that tech or unit. And I mean getting it in a way that a human player can get it as well. That does also means that in some cases, it is actually possible to stop the AI from getting that tech or unit.

Btw, it easy to win any games at Emperor and below if you know how to play. AI is afterall, sad to say, pretty dumb and predictable.

 

[Qitai]

As for defense, you need it only where it matters. You don't need defense in places that you can't be attacked. Spend more effort on intelligence.

"Know yourself, know your enemies. A hundred battles, a hundred victories." Sun Tze.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Well Quitai, I can win deity, too, but still I always get resistance in small cities, and always see the Ai rushing out units. Simply put: I guess Firaxis was able to come up with excellent game concepts, but not it seems with an AI that can actually play with them.

 

[Qitai]

I know you can win deity, killer. Never doubt that. But my experiences with resistance and culture flip is not as bad as you. I have no resistance quite often. So having no resistance is of no surprise to me. And even if AI never gets any resistance, I do not see that as a great advantage. So, no problem there either.

It is just that, although I agree AI does get some advantage, I would not react as strongly as you do. None of them is significant enough to upset the game (Well, if units appear out of thin air, I would be very upset).

And well, we all know the AI is dumb. I believe they hard code the AI strategy. I cannot expect anything clever out of that kind of programming. This just fix the strategy and behaviour of AI, which after a while becomes easy to deal with. A value base AI would make AI to really "think" and react to situation rather that fix strat that never changes. The chess game did that and it can beat the chess master now.