Ranking the AI leaders

[Gliese 581]

Better rather to repeat the simulation several hundred thousand times on random maps.

That sounds time-consuming, even if all animations and end of turns can be skipped.

 

[Zack]

The time to post in this thread was a few months ago guys...

 

[Zeiter]

We should be able to start a game of civ without a human controlled player and just let the AI slog it out a bunch of times. Then we could answer the debate once and for all.

WolfRevolution has an AI autoplay feature for exactly that. The turns only take as long as it takes the computer to process them. So the turns go like 1 turn/sec until about the medieval period, then it's like 1 turn/5 sec, then by renaissance it's like 1 turn/15 sec, etc.

Also, a propos the original thread:

1. Alex. CRE/AGG means he can expand, conquer, and grow pretty huge with tons of vassals.

2. Sury. Always grows huge, builds a very balanced empire, wars intelligently.

3. Zara. Ditto.

4. Joao. Will spawn overseas colonies like crazy, and techs pretty well on maps with water with his UB.

5. Justinian. Really gets cranking in the medieval era with his awesome UU.

6. Hirohito (Expansive, imperialistic), using WolfRev. Japan is actually a decent civ when give decent traits and a leader with a decent personality. Hirohito's traits are much better for both expansion and warfare than Tokugawa's, I've found.

48. Monty. Just doesn't know when to stop.

49. Mansa Musa. His presence makes the game significantly more difficult (by dramatically increasing the AI global tech rate), but he himself is rarely in a position to win. Gets beat up by the nearest warmonger before the renaissance, at the latest.

50. Wang Kon. Doesn't expand enough.

51. Sitting Bull. Gets a promising start, but then something seems to happen to his tech rate, like a giant leech has implanted its fangs into his economy, and he stays perpetually stuck in the middle ages.

52. Tokugawa. During the last game I played, declared on me with chariots...in 1600. A.D. Meanwhile, everyone else had muskets and grens.

 

[damnation]

1. Alex. CRE/AGG means he can expand, conquer, and grow pretty huge with tons of vassals.

I think you mean the Kublai Khan. Alex is AGG/PHI

 

[Zeiter]

I think you mean the Kublai Khan. Alex is AGG/PHI

Hah! Of course!

But wait, why does Alex always seem to generate so much culture pressure???...It's the Odeon, isn't it...I guess it generates extra culture, right?

But Kublai Khan is good too. I rarely seem to get him in my games, though....

 

[Fraxander]

Justinian and Gilga both big warmonger and loves to expand their empire.....
hard to beat....

 

[Kwibuss]

Hah! Of course!

But wait, why does Alex always seem to generate so much culture pressure???...It's the Odeon, isn't it...I guess it generates extra culture, right?

But Kublai Khan is good too. I rarely seem to get him in my games, though....

Alex generating cultural pressure? The first time i've heard that His greek partner Pericles is great at cultural pressure, but Alex is imo a true warmonger and usually not really looking at culture rates.

 

[causeforconcern]

I've just finished my first game on monarch and this is how the following civs did. Interesting as it seems to confirm most peoples beliefs on who is strongest.

1st Huayna Capac (me)
I won so naturally I was the most dangerous

2nd Mehmed
Ultra powerful, well connected, lots of cities. He was beating me by score due to having a stack of vassals but fortunately he liked me (he was right next to me the whole game and not once gave me any trouble) and had little interest in tech.

3rd Hannibal
Didn't have much to do with him as he started off as an island nation. Seemed to tech well and was well liked.

4th Joao II
I don't think he fought a single war throughout the game. Lot's of cities and decent tech but I'm confused why he didn't do better as he had plenty of resources at his disposal.

5th Zara
Wow. In any other game this guy would have absolutely dominated. Sadly for him he was only one of two civs that were non-Hindus. Once the apopolectic palace was built all hell broke loose and pretty much the entire world declared war on him. Despite this (and it went on almost the whole game) he managed to not be destroyed and finished a pretty respectable 4th out of 14.

The rest of them were all roughly the same. Many of them vassals or just too weak to make much difference. Wang Kon was probably the weakest as he seemed to dislike me immensely and even though I wasn't particularly motivated to destroy him my friends were.

One nation who could have been a huge problem and usually is on most games for me is Catherine. For some unknown reason she just does not like me. Sadly she is almost always fairly powerful and starts reasonably close by. I managed to stop her this game by convincing others to declare war and stop trade with her. She was also the only civ I had consistent wars with too.

If I've learnt anything from this game it's to take out the angry balanced civs like Catherine and Zara.

 

[Draco Spirit]

I think some civs can be killers at diffrent points of the game. I mean Monty and Tokugawa are typicaly mearly anoying latter in the gae, however in the early game they can be real since they love starting wars with you before you really want a war.... that can harm you alot in the long run.

 

[DMOC]

To refer to a previous post:

I once played out a game but didn't participate. I set a deity pangea game with 17 other AI's and set me off to 1 corner of the room and just kept hitting end turn while I watched tv or something. The end result?

Gandhi won by a space race.

The top AI's:

-Gandhi, who had several vassals.
-A close second, Boudica, also had several vassals.
-A close third, Zara Yaqob, also had several vassals.
-I believe the first civ to go was Elizabeth, because she spawned next to Montezuma.