Is AI really brain dead?

[LukaSlovenia29]

"But if you make them behave that way, you'll soon run into trouble in a game with limited hexes and the "one-unit-per"-rule in place"

I think that's not necessarily true, in modded Civ V BNW the AI becomes really competent in waging war.

 

[Sascha77]

hexes and the "one-unit-per"-rule in place"

I think that's not necessarily true, in modded Civ V BNW the AI becomes really competent in waging war.

Dang... quoting me while I was editing that part of my post ..

Still: The basic notion holds true. If you have a game that:

1. limits the amount of units a single tile can hold
2. has maps with a finite number of tiles
3. features AI players that constantly spam units

you'll eventually run into trouble, since the map will be full of units and nobody will be able to move anywhere...


S.

 

[wiggawuu]

I think you guys should play a game on Deity before coming to conclusions.

Playing a game or two on newb difficulties doesn't count. Don't start selling people on false claims.

 

[TehJumpingJawa]

I think you guys should play a game on Deity before coming to conclusions.

Playing a game or two on newb difficulties doesn't count. Don't start selling people on false claims.

The AI pissing warriors, chariots and galleys all over the map because they have infinite money & production capacity doesn't make them smarter, it just makes the early game harder/more tedious and the turn times slower.
The AI is still broken to the point of uselessness.

 

[bc1]

I started off playing the game on deity and confirm the AI is indeed brain dead
without understanding the new game mechanics, just plopped a couple cities, produced units and that's it
kinda disapointing

 

[Atossa]

In my first game, I found Russia alone on an island with a single city, a few eras behind. I moved in with a single musket man and reclaimed something like 4 settlers and 6 builders. They were unable to expand at all because of the barbarian threat. Playing as Britain, the settlers were a welcome boon.

I am currently playing as Russia, isolated on a large island which I share with two city-states. The barbs have been relentless. I wonder if the large expanse of tundra on the southern half of the island has something to do with this? However, the city-states have been aggressive in destroying the barbarian camps in their half of the island, which has been of big help.

Why the AI in your game didn't bother to settle its first settler, and then keep pumping out more, is puzzling. Obviously, it would be easy to fill in an island wilderness with cities and eliminate the barbarian threat, especially since Russia's cities are given extra tiles upon founding. Is the AI coded to recognize the need for cities, but not coded to understand the need for escorts?

 

[Sascha77]

I wonder if the large expanse of tundra on the southern half of the island has something to do with this? However, the city-states have been aggressive in destroying the barbarian camps in their half of the island, which has been of big help.

My current game as Japan (Island Plate on King) has me on medium sized island by myself, way up in the north of the map. My island is practically all tundra in its upper part most of which is still covered in fog of war since the terrain is too crappy to settle. So far I've only had three or four barb-camps pop up in the tundra/snow and I'm close to 100 turns now. Which is really, really odd, since the other two games I've played before felt like I was playing on raging barbarians... camps were popping up left and right, especially in the early part of the games. This one almost has me wishing for more barbs so that I can earn more money and tech-boosts ...


S.

 

[ThunderLizard2]

***You guys forget too soon how awful CiV was on release ***

Actually I remember Civ V AI at launch very well. I bought at release and was very disappointed with the idiocy of the AI's military and diplomacy. However at least in Civ 5 the AI would attack - just not well because it would advance ranged units not melee. One thing similar is the crazy peace offers that the AI gives after loosing a few battles.

Sticking with 1 UPT was the stupidest decision IMHO with regards to building a decent AI. It's too complicated to code a AI with 1 UPT as humans can process by seeing placement and code can't easily replicate that. Not saying we need Civ IV SODs but should have gone to 3-5 UPT based on a support calculation.

 

[sherbz]

I've said it a hundred times previously and I'll say it again: 1upt is too complicated for the AI. It could cope with stacks. But 1upt confuddles IT

 

[Oddible]

Still: The basic notion holds true. If you have a game that:

1. limits the amount of units a single tile can hold
2. has maps with a finite number of tiles
3. features AI players that constantly spam units

you'll eventually run into trouble, since the map will be full of units and nobody will be able to move anywhere...


S.

Except the only problem condition in this is #3. There are a ton of tactical war games out there with single unit per tile and finite maps that have amazing combat AI (ie. SSI games: Panzer General and all the new Slitherine games). And it isn't the spamming of units as much as the choice of the WRONG unit. I'm popping city after city of a civ and they're building Builders to rebuild the tiles I've pillages - that shouldn't happen except for critical resources or after the war is over. They're trying to build SETTLERS during a war. It is just dumb.

 

[Zaimejs]

What a disappointing thread. I was just getting my feet wet last night, and I was really happy with the look and feel. It feels like a polished version of V. I have lots of learning to do... not sure how everything works, but I got a good start just using my knowledge of prior civ games.

Now that I read this thread, I know I'm going to be disappointed. I am next to Greece, and they did that unescorted settler thing. I should have taken it, but I was being nice.

I'm only playing on Prince for the first game, just to kind of learn the ropes... so I was hoping things would improve at higher levels. No?

 

[TehJumpingJawa]

Found Germany.......

- Alone on a large continent
- He had 1 City, his capital.
- His army comprised 1 catapult which was fortifying the capital
- Every tile around his capital was pillaged
- The barbarians (all 3 of them) had following them 5 settlers...... wonder where they came from.
- Every few turns after discovery, I'd get a message about Germany creating a new settler.

/facepalm.

At least try Frederick!!

Brain dead indeed.

 

[Rhavanna]

Yeah this has been my experience so far. The AI is just dumb as goddamn bricks.

I'm playing on immortal, and it's basically just me against barbarians. The AI declares war, sends 3-4 warriors at me, and that's it. I run to their capital with an army, and they've got NOTHING guarding it. 120 turns in and my closest neighbor has 3 unimproved wheat tiles, and an unimproved iron source right next to his capital. Later in the industrial era, my neighbors are still fielding "armies" of spearmen and catapults.

I love all the new features they added to this game, and I think it has a lot of potential. But honestly as is, the AI is so horridly bad the game is basically unplayable.

 

[whirlwind91]

WTF?

 

[OranHarken]

This has to be the worst AI to date from this franchise. While I dislike stacks of doom if it is the only way to make the AI capable of playing then unfortunately we need to go back to it. I genuinely hope that Firaxis is ashamed of releasing the game with AI this bad.

 

[Browd]

Captured settler from an AI, probably liberated from barbs.

 

[Selereth]

Seems like the battle royale AI is exactly what we got on release. Funny too, considering people were initially praising the AI for being really aggressive in the early eras. Now that everyone's had a few days to play the flaws of the AI are being revealed, and they're unsurprisingly similar to the flaws of Civ V's AI. People are already beating the game on Deity, that's how bad it is.

 

[Frank327]

After watching the AI battle royale I decided to not buy this game day 1 because the AI looked horrendous. Then once it released I saw so much positive feedback from game and AI that I still decided to buy it. Now I'm wondering where that positive feedback came from. Sure, the game is still pretty enjoyable in a single player sandbox way but the AI is nothing but an obstacle. They're absolutely horrendous and that's not overstating it. If you can't make the AI settle logical places near the capital (you know, the spots that are shown when you select your own settler) and the AI can't escort settlers while owning 10+ military units, then what CAN the AI do? Their decision making seems way too random.

 

[bc1]

Civ V AI is pretty much brain dead too
Hoping Civ VI would be much improved at launch might be delusional
Lets pray for AI patches

 

[Falk]

Civ V AI is pretty much brain dead too
Hoping Civ VI would be much improved at launch might be delusional
Lets pray for AI patches

Civ5 had an awful combat AI, but that's not a big issue for me personally.

Civ6 has an awful AI in every regard. It's not just the combat AI. The AI has absolutely no clue how to do anything.

In my current game, Japan has spammed about 3 dozen warriors in its territory. These units are just shuffling about doing nothing, it looks like an anthill.

The AI is a no show. In that AI livestream they had an AI developer on camera, but I can hardly believe anyone did any AI work for Civ6 at all.