New AI: Anybody winning on Emperor?

[Jorunkun]

Is it just me or is the new blakeified AI really this tough? I mean, pre-patch I could pretty much hold my ground on Immortal. I’d lose some games, but I also won a few. Now I’m struggling to keep up on Emperor. So far, I’ve managed one (pretty lucky) diplo win, but most games I just get marooned somewhere in the middle ages and, come grenadiers and cavalry, live and die at the AI’s whim.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not complaining. I think that Blake is doing fantastic work and hope he and others will improve the AI’s playing skill even further, especially when it comes to waging war sensibly. I don’t mind shifting down a level, or dropping old strategies that no longer work. If Emperor is the new Immortal, let’s figure out how to beat Emperor.

But here’s my question: Any suggestions as to how to do this? Is anybody here winning on Emperor? Because I just can’t seem to get on top of the game anymore. I can’t find any clear leverage points - at any stage of the game - to get ahead of the other civs; militarily, tech-wise or other.

With the AI expanding lightning fast, my old-immortal response would have been to counter with an early rush, take a few cities, sue for peace and be even. On new Emperor, it’s still possible to take a city or two pre Longbows - but the AI just doesn’t let up, and the costs of the war soon exceed the value of its gains, as the other AIs out-expand you.

Out-expanding the AI peacefully has worked for me on some games, where the map was favorable, offering chokepoints and secluded backyards to settle. But only for a while: I’ve managed to stay roughly on par tech-wise until the middle ages, even keep up in pop, but once I ran out of room, I found myself facing huge armies and still growing AI opponents.

In other words: Neither aggressive warmongering nor focused building works. Winning on Emperor now seems to be mostly a matter of getting an above-average starting position, a favorable map … and then toughing it out as the underdog most of the way, hoping for a lucky break (i.e. joining an ongoing war).

So what’s an Emperor to do? Observations and suggestions for what to do welcome.

 

[cabert]

Just subscribing the thread since I had a very hard time winning on monarch with a really favorable start (going for culture with Asoka, loads of FP + sea food in the in the capital, good nearby city sites, copper in the fat cross of my second city which was built along the river without knowledge...) and would be really surprised anyone could manage a tech lead on emperor...
I was beaten to liberalism by a good deal although playing for cultural made it a strong priority!

 

[CookieCutter]

I wonder if there are any succession-games running with the newest AI on emperor so one might learn something. I usually am able to win at monarch. But emperor is always a struggle. Especially with continents. Once I control my continent I usually cannot overcome the technological and military lead of the other half of the world

 

[aelf]

I'm interested to try it out in another Emperor's Challenge. Gives a real meaning to the word 'challenge', eh?

 

[Arlborn]

Im not here to give any adivise, specially because before patch I was prince and now Im noble hehe, but disregard some unbalances yet to balance, isnt it really nice to dont feel like the centre of the game? Isnt it nice to feel just like 1 more in the game? With as much chance to win as the others in the game? Its so real cool, you are just 1 more now and the game is completely unpredictble! Its so much funnier to play now

I know you wasent complaining, just a comment hehe, and as I see its the feeling of most of people how harder the game got

 

[carl corey]

Well, I've lost a few games on Monarch post-patch, but I've also won three and have a good fourth one. I'm sure that with some more skill than mine it should be possible to win on Emperor too.

On Monarch I've managed to win the Liberalism race with Washington, so it's still possible. The AI still mistimes his Golden Ages, starting them when they are too small, so having a late game Golden Age (or more than one?) can help you get closer in techs. And tech-wise the AIs still follow a pretty regular path, meaning I get to sell chemistry and steel for example (to other continent AIs ) for a whole bunch of techs.

 

[Jorunkun]

Im not here to give any adivise, specially because before patch I was prince and now Im noble hehe, but disregard some unbalances yet to balance, isnt it really nice to dont feel like the centre of the game? Isnt it nice to feel just like 1 more in the game? With as much chance to win as the others in the game? Its so real cool, you are just 1 more now and the game is completely unpredictble! Its so much funnier to play now

I know what you mean. The AI plays more like a human oponent now, as there are fewer weaknesses and no-stick tactics to exploit and that's a good thing. However, the downside of this is that the new Emperor seems to me (at the moment at least) to be mostly a game of chance. So much depends on your start, the lay of the land around you and the course of events beyond your control that victory or defeat are not really in your hands. But then again maybe we just need more practice with the new AI ...

 

[Drake007]

On new Emperor, it’s still possible to take a city or two pre Longbows - but the AI just doesn’t let up, and the costs of the war soon exceed the value of its gains, as the other AIs out-expand you.

I can win on emperor consistently (epic for life though). Its hard for me to judge what you could improve with no savegames, but that quote of yours tells me that maybe you should consider pillaging and razing cities a bit more? It fuels research, unlike capturing which hinders it short term, and it makes the AI weak, i.e. an easier prey later. With the AIs bonuses, the razed cities will be back up in no time; keep them weak and make them work for you until you can afford their cities! Also, bribing the AIs into beating each other is extremely important; their bonuses dont matter if they just use it on themselves.

I find warmongering to be even more important than before, since the AI puts more focus on research now but less on military. So i'm just warmongering a lot, but always trying to find a compromise between the long and short term, i.e between capturing and razing/pillaging (which in a way is a long term investment anyway). Anyhow, post a savegame or something.

I understand your frustration though. I catch up later on emperor in warlords than i used too on immortal in vanilla last january. Its definitely tougher.

 

[Jorunkun]

Thanks for your post, Drake. In fact, i am just now playing a game which is going rather well, thanks to - you guessed it - a successful early rush (axemen vs. archers).

Fighting the AI still feels different from old immortal - there are more defenders, especially once war starts, and just constant streams of new stacks. The AI feels more resilient throughout. I have yet to see an opponent ask for peace, let alone offer even the most measly tech for it, even after taking two cities and running at a kill rate of 1-4 or so.

I guess in my earlier games I had the bad fortune of starting out next to aggressive civs, and maybe I waited a tad too long to get going. In this game, I had copper with my 2nd city next door to the capital and immediately spawned veteran axes. Attacked when my third city came online. But even then the first enemy city was defended by two archers, the second one by four, with another stack of four arriving as I reached it. Tough.

I don't see how you can get anywhere on this level without rushing asap - the AI starts at a prod advantage which grows bigger with every turn (unless you have a land cordoned off later, but even then it's super tough).

What do you do if you start out without horses or bronze nearby, or next to Monty, Caesar and other early powerhouses though? If you lose out on the land lottery, you're in dire straits no matter how well you play your cards, no?

 

[Jorunkun]

Okay here’s where I am at thinking about the new AI and how to compete with it. This is a bit of a ramble – apologies, it’s getting late here and I wanted to get this out quickly. Please chime in with your observations, theories and questions – would be happy to discuss in more detail.

1. The root cause of the AI’s strength is improved city management and growth
Stating the obvious, but still: Blake has done an ace job here, and the consequences are more far-reaching than I’d expected. The AI places it’s cities better, manages its workers/tiles more efficiently, grows pop and prod faster and prioritises improvements that leverage this base strength. As a result, it’s stronger throughout.
Pre-patch, you could count on the AI slacking off somewhere mid-game; this is no longer the case. They start out strong and just get stronger with every turn. More pop and prod also means bigger armies.
IMHO, what this means is also that the disparities between civs are more pronounced. Civs with a food-rich start and/or lots of room to expand unhindered will profit disproportionately, leading to bigger armies and (correct me if I’m wrong) earlier and more ruthless wars between civs. Basically, post-patch the strong get ever stronger and the weak get killed; the overall state of the world seems somehow less balanced – true?

The main counters I can think of here are a) blocking off land and key resources, b) worker stealing and c) pillaging more extensively. A and c seem to be the most powerful. Also, I’ve had some success with beelining for drama (often a good idea anyway), building theatres and hiring artists on border cities. This will only work until the late middle ages, as the AI will eventually outproduce you in culture, but snatching a city with culture is probably more cost effective than attacking Julius Caesar while he has praetorians and you have archers and swords.
Ah, and reillaging, a good way of keeping the AI busy is to pillage roads outsides its cultural borders in peacetime. With the AI expanding at the speed it does, there are often spots where this is feasible, especially early on. Keeps the workers busy, denies the AI ressources and doesn’t hurt your relationship at all.

2. The AI techs faster and smarter
Faster is a result of bigger and better-developed cities, and better use of funds, i.e. deficit research. I find that you get a lot less money from tech whoring (btw, good luck with your new emperor’s challenge, Aelf).
Smarter is due to different tech choices, such as an earlier focus on writing and alphabet (you can still beat them to it and trade, but nothing like old emperor), and on useful techs such as iron working or techs that unlock civ-specific UUs.

My main tactic in research has been to use specialists as much as possible, scientists in particular. In the early game, you can make use of the higher happy-cap (vs immortal) and cheap excess food to run two scientists in most your cities – a better payoff for research than cottages (see Acidsatyr’s thread in this forum for a good look at how to do this). It also still pays to prioritise techs for trade, although you will get worse deals than before as the AI doesn’t have as much cash reserves as it used to.

Another upside is that the AI seems to have deprioritised religious techs. It is easier to get one of the early religions, and COL/Confucianism and Philosophy/Taoism, both of which can also be lightbulbed. I think religion has become more useful as a result of the patch, as you can actually get one even when not spiritual and use it to deter neighbours from attacking you.
One interesting twist in one of my past games has been to found Taoism on a non-religious island, not spreading it and benefiting exclusively from the prod-boost of organized religion. 25% cheaper buildings in the early middle ages (when you are building all those courthouses, markets, theatres etc) is quite handy in leveling the playing field.

3. The AI keeps stronger, bigger armies and doesn’t give in to peace as easily
In part, this seems to be related to point 1: more pop = less support cost for armies. Also, I think the AI builds a better mix of units, more cats in particular, but maybe I’m seeing things here? My impression was that there are far more units stationed in almost every one of those big cities – more than on old immortal, possibly. It’s hard to make out the main attack stack among all those local powerhouses.

This is my main concern with Emperor at the moment. War feels incredibly costly – no more pushover offenses with a profitable peace to follow. The AI just keeps rolling. Some notes here:

a) The best wars are those fought between the AI. Make nice with everybody (early open borders, trade anything you have, give in to blackmail ..) and use techs to incite wars. Then join the winner.
b) one thing to keep in mind is that for all its numbers, the AI still doesn’t use all those units efficiently. They mostly just sit around, so you can still pick off cities one by one provided you bring in overwhelming local concentrations of troops quickly. The thing to avoid, more than ever, is trickling in units for a war of attrition, which you are bound to lose.
c) I’m beginning to warm to vassalage. Stronger units, and more of them at less cost seems like a good deal in world of bigger armies. I’ve begun switching out of slavery in the middle ages and am pretty pleased with the results – may be just a fluke, but give it a try and let me know what you think.
d) consider using tech bribes to end a surprise Blitzkrieg against a stronger opponent. You keep the cities you took, spare your troops and only lose a tech that you wouldn't have been able to trade with the guy you attacked anyway.
e)The endgame levels the playingfield somewhat. Even if you are somewhere in the middle of the scoreboard come the modern age, you might still stand a good chance at a diplo or cultural win, or go all or nothing in a modern age / nuclear war.

Right – hope this is of value to some of you. Please let me know what you think.

J.

 

[JLH Fans]

On emperor?
U must be joking.
I finished a game on emperor about 5 days ago,(large map pangea)with the Ottomans.
I reached an easy domination victory by the early 1800's.
Even with better AI emperor is still a cakewalk.
But I have just been started a new game at immortal with Frederick,and this will be really a tough one.

 

[illram]

I am finding that the AI gets ridiculously far ahead in tech. The levels have seemingly gone up one in the tech department, certainly. The AI is still useless at fighting but their tech edge always makes up for it in the early game.

Try playing small map/10 civs: utterly ridiculous. (Just played one where Mali, with one city, has longbowmen by 50 AD for gods sakes. And I razed/pillaged the hell out of him at the beginning of the game.)

 

[napoleonbee]

On emperor?
U must be joking.
I finished a game on emperor about 5 days ago,(large map pangea)with the Ottomans.
I reached an easy domination victory by the early 1800's.
Even with better AI emperor is still a cakewalk.
But I have just been started a new game at immortal with Frederick,and this will be really a tough one.

thanks for all your helpful advice buddy

 

[Drake007]

JLH, nerds looking for a self-esteem boost are not welcomed in these forums. I pity you though, its almost as if civ 4 is your only source of it.

if i dont have copper/iron/horses i'll probably beeline to construction. with ivory, elephants + catapults is pretty decent. with no ivory you're stuck with archers/longbows + cats, which sucks but oh well its better than nothing. i'd probably pillage a bit with archers before getting construction.

actually i dont have much of a clue of what im talking about , i dont play all that much and never encountered such a bad situation. i guess its definitely a tough one; with the AI having so much bonuses, the best time to beat on them is when things are relatively fair: as early as possible.

 

[obsolete]

A year ago or more i was kicking ass on monarch. I took a break, came back and was shocked at how I could suck so bad. Then checking around I noticed it was due to the latest patching. But as is, I seem to fail whether I go war mongering or try to go peaceful. If I ever win one, I'll post my results here.

 

[JLH Fans]

JLH, nerds looking for a self-esteem boost are not welcomed in these forums. I pity you though, its almost as if civ 4 is your only source of it.

if i dont have copper/iron/horses i'll probably beeline to construction. with ivory, elephants + catapults is pretty decent. with no ivory you're stuck with archers/longbows + cats, which sucks but oh well its better than nothing. i'd probably pillage a bit with archers before getting construction.

actually i dont have much of a clue of what im talking about , i dont play all that much and never encountered such a bad situation. i guess its definitely a tough one; with the AI having so much bonuses, the best time to beat on them is when things are relatively fair: as early as possible.

Self-esteem boost ?
I just wrote that I could win on emperor at least 8time from 10.
That's all.
Even with no horses,bronze and iron.
Of course,sometimes when my GG die with more than 80% chance,I use a lodagame,and I attack (and lose)with another unit.

 

[berserks01]

I too find the patch greatly favored the AI. I can beat Prince easily pre-patch, now I have to work at it to beat it.

I also noticed that barb animals/warriors will attack you rather than the other AIs when you're both close by even though you're in a more favorable defense position. And that I'm losing more now than before when my odds are 80% or higher.

 

[Mr. Civtastic]

Especially with continents. Once I control my continent I usually cannot overcome the technological and military lead of the other half of the world

Ive always found continents tough with tech. Its because we (I) rely so much on tech trading at the higher difficulties. Post-patch, I was Gandhi on Monarch and just got dusted in tech. It wasnt even close. I changed gears to win a culture race because I definately wasnt winning space. If you dont make an effort to meet the other civs, youre going to have problems. And even when you do it will still be tough...they will probably have a religion that is different from yours.

 

[obsolete]

I also noticed that barb animals/warriors will attack you rather than the other AIs when you're both close by even though you're in a more favorable defense position.

I haven't seen this. At least not 100%.

 

[DaviddesJ]

(OK, forget it.)