Thanks, Polobo and Schuesseled! Very helpful info.
The AI chooses...oh boy.
Unless Firaxis has made
huge improvements in city management AI, it will choose poorly at least 50% of the time. I foresee lots of gold being needed to actually get the tiles you should be working, rather than stupidly chosen tiles the AI thinks you "need". Maybe the city governor settings will help, so you can at least try to specialize a city for growth, or production, etc.
So much is going to depend on the strength of the AI. Hopefully this multi-level system which has been described will have positive effects and the AI will do well with the basics: selection of city sites, management of city growth and citizen assignment (tiles, specialists, etc.), happiness management, etc. If the basics are done well, then the AI will not need as big of bonuses/handicaps to provide a challenge at higher difficulty levels; instead it can play a solid basic game and get smaller targetted boosts to provide a stronger opponent.
I really hope Firaxis invested a lot of effort in this area, as the Civ IV AI was just miserably bad at the basics much of the time. I have a personal game right now where I have a ton of EP (early Great Wall and settled G.Spies) and can investigate AI cities, and it is just horrific how bad the AIs are.
Holy Rome is currently broke, losing 44 gpt at 100% cash, on strike and most of his army disbanded. (His power has dropped by ~30% in the last 10 turns, with no war.) He is in HR, so now his cities mostly have multiple unhappy citizens since their garrisons have disbanded.
So how does he respond? Does he build Rathaus everywhere to control his costs? (He has CoL, has had it for some time. Zero Rathaus.) No, he is building military in every single city, probably to try to control happiness using HR. But any unit that completes gets disbanded since he has negative gpt.
He has also set his research (what tiny bits he is getting from specialists) to Divine Right -- probably in some hope of building Versailles to control costs. Of course, the tech will take him 56 turns currently....
Two other civs in this same game are in similar trouble -- one also negative at 100% cash, on strike, etc., the other only +2 gpt at 100% and still building units.
The other three AI are doing well -- plenty of infrastructure, 50% or 60% science at positive gpt, etc. I have no idea what has caused the difference between the "doing OK" civs and the "busily imploding" civs, but something has gone drastically wrong.
Anyway, sorry for the ramble about a Civ IV instance of AI failure. But seeing things like that make me
really hope Firaxis has made sure the foundations of the AI are strong. Multi-level grand strategy sounds like a great idea and all, but if the AI can't get the basics right it won't matter.