I don't understand the AI

[Calbrenar]

My friend and I have been playing a lot of Civ games multiplayer and we are having some issues with the AI. If we set it to like Noble or Prince the game is ridiculously easy and the AI never does anything ever. If we set it to Monarch the AI has 25 unit stacks fairly early.

How big a cheater bonus does the AI get? I'll have like 54 turns to make a settler and the AI already has a second city with 3 warriors on it and the tiles worked at like turn 50 something on normal? Not only that but when they send their stacks up their stacks all magically have like Combat 1-3 AND Recon 1-3? How is that even remotely possible? Do they just randomly get free promotions? I don't remember it being like that before when I played.

It's like unless you have some form of magic early there's no way you can stop them unless you build massive hordes of units and if you do that then you don't rex at all and you end up losing anyway. It doesn't help that they are basically guaranteed to declare on you regardless of your relationship with them either.

Is there an AI mod that makes the AI more of a challenge without giving them ridiculous bonus' to gold/production/promotions? Hopefully one that doesn't add more OOS problems?

Failing that it'd be nice if there were some tips on how to play better. I've been reading some of the deity game diaries and it has a lot of good info in there that I've been making use of like using workers to kite guys around until they are on a good tile to kill etc but I have a hard time knowing what techs to go for or when to run agristocracy vs cottage vs specialist. Like the game I have now I started with decent flood plains and 2 gold mines so i went RoK first as Balseraphs. I've been making lots of freaks and warriors and had 5 cities and Tasunke promotes 18 warirors into 4/6 archers that some how have 2 movement and Combat/Recon 2 and 3. ?????

It's 150 turns in and I don't see how I can possibly have built anything to counter that unless I rushed Sorcery and even then I doubt i'd have had any mages or anything. Maybe if i rushed the tech for the Harlequin.. Do they still get chaos? The best part is since they are all archers with 4 horses my shock promotions are worthless...

 

[Aline]

Try the more naval AI modmod, it not only makes the AI build ships it also makes it a lot smarter, you might whant to step down on the difficulty for your first games though, they do maintain their bonuses so they become insanely hard to beat on higher difficultys.

 

[Horatius]

At the lower difficulties the AI is slow to build up but at higher difficulties it's indeed faster because of the bonuses. The bonuses are to compensate the inability of the AI to play as well as an experienced human. They have a bonus to pretty much everything of importance. The higher the difficulty, the higher the bonuses. There is no cheating whatsoever.
If you know what you are doing an AI without help will never keep up with you, ever.

Tasunke's troops had six strength and two movement because of their world spell. It will eventually wear off. Tasunke is a tough cookie to deal with early on, though, no doubt about that.

I assure you that on monarch there is always a way to stop them.

It is all about experience. If you can predict the AI behavior you will know how to counter it in time.

It's better that people that have troubles playing on higher difficulties post some screenshots and the save game so that other people can give a more specific advice to the specific situation, just like they do on the civ 4 strategy forums.

Why did you went for Rok early on instead of bronze working for example? Did you bulbed it or teched it normally? Did you have copper? How is the land in general? What exactly is going on? I really can't say much...

I wouldn't bet on plain freaks early on to defend, though.

 

[Calbrenar]

I don't think you can load multiplayer saves in single. I actually didn't get RoK until about 100 turns in and then BW at 120 or so. I had Copper reasonably nearby and I didn't get a single bad Freak promotion. I don't think there is anything I could of done against that big of a stack except if I had beelined archers and made nothing but them for most of hte game and even then unless he suicided his stack on my city it wouldn't have stopped him from pillaging all my improvements.

The main reason I went for RoK was I had Mining from the gold and I almost always get god king when I have a good cap so rok seemed to be an easy thing to go for since it hadn't been researched yet and it was only one tech.

I think maybe my starting biuld was off? I waited for it to grow to the hap cap (5) before I built anything but warriors and scouts and that took a while since i didn't have any special resources just flood plains. But when I started making settlers they came out quick especialy after I picked up agrarianism and popped out workers. I think I probably don't build enough workers either I only had like 6 at turn 150 and 4 of those I had made within the last 40 turns. I play with raging barbs on though so it's often not worth it to get workers earlier in numbers as the barbs are so brutal.

Part of the reason I had problems with tasunke is I simultaneously got attacked by about 14-15 barb warriors in 2 dif stacks from the east and west right when he attacked. Otherwise I would have moved all my defenses down to the city by him earlier.

If the AI only gets production bonus' then how do all their units end up so highly promoted?

I can try to get some screenshots later tonight but again I don't think I can load a multiplayer save in single can I? Maybe in WB?

 

[Horatius]

If it's a multiplayer save you can't, unless there is some trick that I don't know of.

Like I wrote, the AI gets bonuses in pretty much everything.

You're also now saying that you were playing with raging barbarians.
First of all, the AI will build more units than normal early on to counteract the extra barbarians (one of the reasons that they are showing up with more promotions...); second, bronze working was even a bigger priority because of that.

Freaks are too expensive early on for what they are worth in base strength without being really lucky.
Every hammer and every turn in production counts in the early game.

So pump those bronze warriors and axemen, train them with the barbarians and then go kill Tasunke with the help of some catapults.

Now you know better. Go and play.

 

[UncleJJ]

Freaks are too expensive early on for what they are worth in base strength without being really lucky.
Every hammer and every turn in production counts in the early game.

So pump those bronze warriors and axemen, train them with the barbarians and then go kill Tasunke with the help of some catapults.

I agree that if you have bronze hooked up that a big stack of warriors and catapults are a very cost effective way to fight defensive wars and they're available much earlier than mages.

Actually freaks cost 60 hammers, the same as the swordsman, so in most cities they can be built without the training yard and then go to the city with one for an upgrade. That is better than building swordsmen directly, plus some freaks can be very strong if you get lucky so why would you want to build swordsmen? By all means upgrade a well promoted warrior and any freaks to swordsman but until iron weapons are available building swordsmen is not cost effective when compared to bronze warriors.

 

[Horatius]

Actually freaks cost 60 hammers, the same as the swordsman, so in most cities they can be built without the training yard and then go to the city with one for an upgrade. That is better than building swordsmen directly, plus some freaks can be very strong if you get lucky so why would you want to build swordsmen? By all means upgrade a well promoted warrior and any freaks to swordsman but until iron weapons are available building swordsmen is not cost effective when compared to bronze warriors.

Something is wrong here.

And no, don't encourage him/her to spam freaks too early, just no. She/He will waste too much time (and money) and moan again. Maybe it's bc I play on diety, but it's just not worth it.

Freak spam and upgrades (when you don't have a massive streak of bad promotions) are for a secured middle game.

 

[UncleJJ]

Something is wrong here.

And no, don't encourage him/her to spam freaks too early, just no. She/He will waste too much time (and money) and moan again. Maybe it's bc I play on diety, but it's just not worth it.

Freak spam and upgrades (when you don't have a massive streak of bad promotions) are for a secured middle game.

I didn't, please don't misrepresent my advice. If you had quoted all I wrote you'd see that. I expressly recommended he use bronze warriors and catapults

I just corrected your mistaken advice about "axemen" and you didn't seem to understand how freaks could be upgraded to swordsmen.

 

[Calbrenar]

I don't see how a stack of axemen would have done anything since he had a bigger stack of archers.

I guess if I built nothing but axe in capitol as soon as I got copper then i might have had enough to rush him but i doubt i would have had enough to stop him and secure my improved tiles form barbs. Plus what if I hadn't had Bronze? Build Horsemen instead?

I'm not sure how your'e supposed to outspam an AI that produces more units faster then then you and with more promotions. The only time I've ever been successful beating the AI it's been with spellcasters and summons. Tebryn and Varn can both demolish huge stacks of AI with ease using RoF or Sand Cat etc. I've never been big with recon/melee units always religion/caster so it's probably why I have such a hard time with it.

 

[Horatius]

I didn't, please don't misrepresent my advice. If you had quoted all I wrote you'd see that. I expressly recommended he use bronze warriors and catapults

You did start with that but what was "expressly recommended" was not to build swordsmen when you can build freaks.

I just corrected your mistaken advice about "axemen" and you didn't seem to understand how freaks could be upgraded to swordsmen.

Axemen or swordsmen are the same thing and it should not matter that I tend to say axemen when I write fast because there is no difference whatsoever. On the other hand, there is a little difference between the training yard and an Arena. But why should we be picky about words?

Btw, it's kind of annoying that you're saying that my advice is mistaking and that I don't understand something when you're clearly just theorycrafting.

Freaks end up being more expensive than Swordsmen in the long run. And no, building them is not better than building a swordsmen directly when your economy is weak and can't afford to waste turns trying to be lucky.
If you don't understand this, why are you talking when you don't have enough experience playing the Balseraphs? Or if you have it's clearly just on lower levels of difficulty.

With a good middle game I'll try to have one or two cities spamming freaks, not before. In the beginning, what I build must actually be cost effective.

When you wrote That is better than building swordsmen directly... so why would you want to build swordsmen my mind was blown. Upgrading without ingenuity is way too expensive for the early game - and you're still paying 60 hammers for freaks when many of them will be completely useless.

Also, if you are mostly building (or upgrading) bronze Warriors before Iron I want to play you on multiplayer.

 

[Horatius]

I don't see how a stack of axemen would have done anything since he had a bigger stack of archers.

You lost the game because of your tech path and your way of expanding with those settings.

Plus what if I hadn't had Bronze? Build Horsemen instead?

That is certainly an idea.

I'm not sure how your'e supposed to outspam an AI that produces more units faster then then you and with more promotions. The only time I've ever been successful beating the AI it's been with spellcasters and summons.

Just play more and you'll get it.

 

[UncleJJ]

@ CalBrenar
Mages summoning and using fireballs etc are indeed powerful but it takes a long time to get the mages and the nodes needed to support that. You can't use that strategy to repel an early attack by an enemy using tier 2 troops as Tasunke seems to be using in your game.

As Horatius and I have recommended it is a lot more reliable to use catapults and warriors to deal with large attacking stacks. That is a lot easier to get going early. With bronze; a warrior is strength 4 and costs 25 hammers, and a generic axemen is strength 5 and costs 60 hammers. In a normal fight on flat land two warriors will beat an axemen more than 95% of the time and costs less hammers. Occassionally the first warrior will win, but if he doesn't the damage he does will make fight easier for the second warrior, so most often we lose 25 hammers and the enemy loses 60 hammers.

Catapults (90 hammers and need Construction and Seige Workshop) will damage one unit and do collateral damage to 6 units in the enemy stack and have a 80% + chance of surviving. Damaged tier 2 units (axemen, archers or horsemen) cost 60 hammers are vulnerable to warriors with bronze weapons costing only 25 hammers. Try to have 2 warriors for each enemy unit and then if the first one dies the second can finish off the damaged unit. But with enough catapults quite a few warriors might get a first time kill and so less warriors might be needed, it depends how many catapults you have plus on where you tackle the enemy stack, hopefully not on a hill or in a wood. You can usually draw the whole enemy SoD (Stack of Doom) out onto a flat area (the killing ground) by using a worker or warrior as bait, then hit them with the catapults and follow in with all your warriors. I have done that in many games and it has never let me down so far. I normally play on emperor or immortal but don't use raging barbarians, perhaps you could try a game without that setting.

And please note axemen or in this game freaks upgraded to swordsmen are not as cost effective as warriors and they can't be built as easily as they need the Training yard. The main problem with this warrior spamming approach is that a large stack of warriors costs a lot of maintenace; so don't build it up until just before the attack is coming and then after the big fight your losses will reduce the maintenace cost of the warriors back to managable proportions.

EDIT Horatius posted while I was composing this

 

[UncleJJ]

You did start with that but what was "expressly recommended" was not to build swordsmen when you can build freaks.

Again you misrepresent me. Incorrigble

Btw, it's kind of annoying that you're saying that my advice is mistaking and that I don't understand something when you're clearly just theorycrafting.

You didn't seem to understand what the OP was asking. As you were unnecessarily rude to me I gave you a verbal reminder that you are fallible. If you don't like that perhaps it would be a good idea to pay attention to your manners.

My "theorycrafting" could be contrasted with your crude and sloppy play which you have demonstrated. Any fool can do an "axe rush" (or equivalent) in FfH2 even on Deity. FfH2 is not a difficult game to win at any level, the AI is shockingly weak at defending itself. But the game is still fun and I enjoy playing it and before this episode enjoyed discussing it. For my self I choose not to play with simplistic strategies, I have done all that enough times before on BtS where I can win on immortal. YMMV but I don't want to play FfH2 that way, I want something different.

If you don't understand this, why are you talking when you don't have enough experience playing the Balseraphs? Or if you have it's clearly just on lower levels of difficulty.

I have played both the Balseraph leaders several times. And I am a fast learner and pay attention to details, something you could do more. You clearly don't have a good understanding of how they could be played. Just because you play one way and win means very little to me.

What a conceited person you are! Of course it is a fallacy anyway; that your advice would be any better than mine just because you are a "diety player" It could be argued that my advice would be more appropriate since I play nearer to the OP's level (monarch) but I won't make that suggestion since I don't think it is true. Good advice is well thought out advice whoever it comes from.

With a good middle game I'll try to have one or two cities spamming freaks, not before. In the beginning, what I build must actually be cost effective.

Again you mis-represent me and my advice. The OP had already built some freaks, in that case he would be advised to upgrade them to swordsmen. That increases their strength from 3 to 5 for only 5 gold. Even you should think that was a good strategy (given what he had already done). I never advocated that he should build more freaks but instead more warriors.

Then I pointed out that he should not build swordsmen directly, freaks are nearly always better on average, even if you only really do want swordsmen. [Edit: I know your opinion is different, but so what? you don't have a convincing argument for your assertions] This is particularly true if you have the full range of freak upgrade options (eventually chariots, mimics, longbows etc). But this was indeed advice for the middle game, and not intended for what was his desperate situation (I may not have made that clear). He should build warriors and not freaks OR even the "axemen" that you advocated in your first reply. Bronze axemen (swordsmen) are not cost effective compared with bronze warriors. So if anyone gave poor advice at that stage it was definitely you.

Of course freaks are not really upgraded in the usual sense anyway. It is more a case of choosing their career path, since they are already tier 2 units. In the early game those options are obviously constrained by technologies and whether buildings available.

Although in fact I don't think freaks are particularly worthwhile in the middle game with the Balseraphs. When I have a mage with Mutate I instead build warriors and mutate them along with disciple units before upgrading (or not) and then using them appropriately. I might build a few middle game freaks if I need another freak show for a new city (usually with Perpentach) but otherwise they aren't any better than mutated warriors. You seem to have a limited view on how the Balseraphs could be played.

Given what you've written so far on these boards you do seem to lack imagination and worse than that are oblivious to your personal blindspots. I enjoy debating people who look at this game (or other games) in ways that are different from mine. I enjoy their different perspective on things. But those debates have to be friendly and conducted in good faith. You meanwhile arrogantly assume that you know more than anyone else regardless of their background and worse that your chosen way is somehow always the best way. Funny that isn't it? Further you seem to assume that the other is wrong or argues in bad faith even if they might make a grammatical error or express themselves poorly, instead of being generous and giving them (and in this case me) the benefit of the doubt . There is little excuse for your bad manners.

When you wrote That is better than building swordsmen directly... so why would you want to build swordsmen my mind was blown. Upgrading without ingenuity is way too expensive for the early game - and you're still paying 60 hammers for freaks when many of them will be completely useless.

Your mind probably was blown, but that is simply because you have poor understanding of how the game can be played. It seems you have a poor grasp of the economy in this game probably because you concentrate on warmongering. Your predjudice against an upgrading stategy is silly. If you played BtS regularly then you'd appreciate that there are often instances when upgrading troops at a vital moment is a game winning ploy. Upgrading troops on BtS costs 3 gold per hammer plus 20 gold per unit, and in FfH2 it costs 2 gold per hammer and 5 gold per unit. Ingenuity only halves the already bargain prices on FfH2. What is more on BtS upgraded troops lose all experience over 10 (although they retain promotions) and have to regain the exp lost. In FfH2 all the experience is retained. So it should be obvious that even without Ingenuity an upgrade strategy can be very powerful in FfH2 and even more so than it already is in BtS. It is for instance more cost effective (in some ways) to build a lower tier troops and then upgrade (eg. savant to ritualist) than a rush buying strategy where 1 hammer costs 3 gold. That particular trick is usefull for rapidly spreading a religion during a golden age but there are many others reasons to upgrade in this game.

Also, if you are mostly building (or upgrading) bronze Warriors before Iron I want to play you on multiplayer.

I don't think I will be playing any games against you.

--------------

Metacomment: I've written far too much and too negatively No good will come of it

 

[Calbrenar]

So it sounds like what you guys are saying is as you get further up the tree you basically just need to build for attack spam unless you can get some kind of early magic like Priests of Winter? I've actually played a ton of games on Monarch in multiplayer and never had an issue but this is also the first time that I've started right near an AI, and had them actually attack me.

Normally I'm fairly far apart from everyone else, not sure why. I guess when you see you're close to an opponent like Tasunke or Jonas/Mahala you just assume they will be coming for you with horde and rush catapults and whatever specialist troop you can get? (Copper/Horse/etc?)

 

[Horatius]

is there something wrong with you? Having a bad day?

So he's playing with raging barbarians and Tasunke have a bunch of 6 str archers on his behind (and what I said was mainly in consideration to his situation; there is obviously (thank you for the reminder) several ways to play in many different situations) and you are telling him this:

Tech festivals, bronze working and construction, spam warriors and freaks and upgrade them. Do not build swordsmen (oh, I'm not misrepresenting anything).
It's too bad that Calbrenar cannot post a save game because you'll would eat your words so hard it would not be funny. Revelry would seem to help you a little bit but the barbarians and tasunke would probably block your warriors in and that would be that.

Do you really think that you can hold on in those settings and situation with mainly bronze Warriors? and that you can tech fast enough consistently upgrading them when every bit of commerce is important in the early game?

With a weak economy and being put under pressure it does not work unless you get lucky (oh I don't understand anything, I'm just a warmonger with sloppy play).
go ahead and upgrade like a madman in early game and say that it works (again I'm misrepresenting you, right? oh you were just talking about upgrading in the middle game, you'll probably say; what has that to do with the specific situation?).

and freaks are definitely too expensive early on because - I guess I have to be clear about what is obvious - you always discard a percentage of them (what, you don't get bad rolls?). So,once again, it doesn't work when you are under pressure and every unit counts.
and why am I mutating warriors in the middle game when I can produce freaks fast enough (and I can afford to discard them, throw them in the Arena or maybe cure them) and they are cheaper to upgrade to most stuff?

You said also:
"Bronze axemen (swordsmen) are not cost effective compared with bronze warriors"

and that is bull. You keep throwing numbers around but all that matters is how long you are taking to produce stuff. if I have a city with 20 hammers I'm definitely producing T2 and I'm kicking your ass as my axes get promoted. Other cities with less production produce Warriors as fodder.

and oh, against the AI, you are not exactly trading 50 hammers for 60 because of their bonuses if you care so much about the numbers.

You also said:
"Any fool can do an "axe rush" (or equivalent) in FfH2 even on Deity"

People, start a game on deity and do an axe rush. UncleJJ said everybody can. Why are you having trouble on Monarch? It's easy.

just because the way you talk I'm sure that I'm a stronger and more imaginative player than you. It should be obvious, though, that I don't care about that.
The only thing that I was doing was having fun posting stuff, joking around, giving advice with the best intentions. No one can come complain about a single rude post from me except you.

- You had to try to look smarter while accusing me of being a prick.

Metacomment: I've written far too much and too negatively No good will come of it

You got that right. You managed to spoil my fun and probably a little bit of the fun of others that will read this.
Don't bother answering this; the time for child stuff in this forum is over for me.
No fun, no point in posting.

 

[Calbrenar]

Also just to clarify the reason I was building freaks is I had a ridiculously good string of promotions. Like 4/6 from heroic defender, blitz, and so on and so forth. Not a single bad promo except Heavy which given the situation I was in at the time was actually still a good one since who cares about slow move. That's why I was building them over swordsman because they didn't take long to build and were getting great promos.

 

[BvBPL]

Don’t Deity level AIs receive three free promotions sight unseen for their new units? They seem to split those promos pretty evenly between drill and combat. That might be why you see so many drill three warriors.

Drill three, by itself, isn’t a totally awful promotion for warriors defending a city. It does give a 30% chance of a defensive strike after all so it is reasonable to include some units on the drill line as defensive strikers. In the field or when attacking they aren’t so hot though.

Then again, that effect that defensive strikers have on a well put together spam attack stack is likely minor if only because the attacker has probably two or three times as many units as the defender and has already accounted for substainal attrition in the attacking stack.

On the third hand, I guess it is possible that defensive strikes might be more powerful against smaller high-level elite city cracker stacks that have a attacker/defender parity closer to 1:1. Of course, those stacks are likely to be at least tier three units, if not national units, and by the time you get those rolling a warrior with drill three isn’t much more than a roadbump.

Regarding the Freak v. Warrior v. Swordsmen debate, I personally think freaks get a lot more appealing once you get priests running about who can cure disease. Once you get priests out, the only negative promotion you can get w/ freaks that stick around is weak. Well, that an vunerable to fire (or whatever).

 

[Calbrenar]

I'm only on monarch and they seem to have at least 3-4 promos

 

[Doug Piranha]

Well, Tasunke's units will start with Commando and Combat I, so there are two free promotions on any difficulty level. Throw in some civics XP bonuses and possibly the Form of the Titan, and it's conceiveable that the units would be born with four promotions.

 

[Calbrenar]

Yeah it looked like they all had 4-5 (Drill 1-3 and the Combat 1-2) but I guess some could have been fighting barbs etc too.