Solver, can we fix the AI worker self-destruction?

[Lord Chambers]

I'm pretty tired of seeing late game workers destroying all the towns of rival civilizations. Sometimes it looks smart, like they're trying to destroy the prizes of my conquest because they know my invasion is going to be successful, or that they know they need workshops for hammers fast, but sometimes it looks like this:

Spoiler :

Every square is having it's improvement reversed. And judging by the poor development of the cottages in the screenshot, they were only recently built on top of some previous improvement. One tile even has two workers building two different improvements at the same time. If that doesn't demonstrate broken AI, I don't know what does.

The only logical explaination for this kind of behavior is that the rival civilization's workers have unionized and now are eternally secured work, even when it's counterproductive.

Now, "making the AI better" is an ephemeral hope, so I would just suffice for restricting the AI's ability to improving a pre-existing square to once per 100 years. Or maybe teaching it to delete extra workers instead of keeping an army of them around into the lategame (they'll unionize). Or raising the value of railroads, which in the screenshot aren't evidentally as highly prized as having a farm for 1 turn and immediately converting to a workshop. Now that is micro.

As it stands, the rival civilizations self-destruct in the late game by torching their developed cottages in favor of farms and workshops, or their mines for windmills. That's awesome if they were going for UN votes or domination, but they're just fipping tile improvements back and forth which cripples them. They might still get production bonuses on higher levels, but each and every discount on a worker results in hundreds of lost commerce later in the game since the worker AI is so fubar, turning immortal into noble.

Who else has seen this?

 

[EweezE]

There's an option to "leave old improvements" for the workers. If you automate them then they won't tear down your previous improvements.. I don't automate workers, but if I did I would check that box .

 

[Genv [FP]]

You problem is that you automate workers. Stop doing that. Seriously. You won't get far in Civ like that.

 

[zorrcell]

automated works know what theyre doing 80% of the time
at the end its stupid but then again at the end u have half a world conquered do u really want to go trhough every single land?

 

[Genv [FP]]

Yes. Automated workers can wreck a CE or even a SE left alone.

 

[Lord Chambers]

Jesus, those aren't my workers.

I forget that sometimes people refer to the AI of worker automation. For me, worker automation isn't even part of the game and so I didn't consider it when refering to the rival civilizations as "AI."

I'll fix it.

 

[DanF5771]

I've read the first post and seen it all too, especially barbarian workers like to do this.
I don't know whether that would be something for Solver to fix though--I mean, there is collateral damage, borked attitudes for resource trades, the Sea Patrol function ...

 

[JohnMK]

Just have them leave old improvements (check the box in preferences) and keep one or two workers in reserve, manually controlled. Of course, this doesn't help the AI nations any.

 

[The Snug]

Right, he's talking about AI workers not his own.

Whether it's good or bad is difficult to assess, however. It's situational. Early game it's stupid. Late game it's not such a bad idea during wartime. I've tried using Guided Missiles and Fighters to destroy AI improvements, but it has no effect since the workers simply finish building the next improvement the next turn, and already have more workers set to finish another improvement a couple of turns later, making it unreasonable to hit the square again. In some sense, it keeps the tile "pillage proof." I notice the AI doing it during war, which is the situation the OP mentioned. I haven't been vigilant enough to notice how carried away they get with it during peacetime.

 

[onomastikon]

The OP meant rival workers. The rival AI is screwed, because the rival AI has no choice but to automate its workers.
"It's situational" is true here, as it is everywhere, but only goes so far, because the OP has named the systematic problem, or at least as I have understood it, namely:
- automated (AI) workers will change improvements at the latest when they have nothing else to do. The AI seems uncomfortable with idle workers, or with disbanding them.
- (this is the punchline) The AI is obviously faulty if it will have two workers build two different improvements on the same tile at the same time
That is not situational. That needs addressing. But since I know nothing about AI programming, I haven't a clue.

 

[Cytral]

I only do the first half of the game manualy with workers.

after a while you just get to big (its time consuming in mp as well)

i do check the loi box

 

[Civsassin]

I only do the first half of the game manualy with workers.

after a while you just get to big (its time consuming in mp as well)

i do check the loi box

I agree with this quote. I typically manually control workers in the first part of the game. Once there are no improvements left, I automate workers, and they go about building roads. Once you have the techs in place for railroads, they will connect all of your cities and resources with rails.

It's key that when you automate workers, you check the option to leave existing improvements in place. It only gets complicated when you lose improvements through either espionage or random events. In that case, your automated workers will build whatever... At that point, I will unautomate one or two workers and have them build what I want. Once that's done, your good to go.

The other thing I do is as I am approaching combustion, I will unautomate as many workers as necessary and post them at the oil locations to get the wells up and running ASAP.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Actually, I think it's pretty important that this gets fixed. A big part of the reason it's easy to catch the AI later in the game is of course its stupidity. This is a great example of that - let's farm then workshop over mature cottages!

The human player can tell workers to leave old improvements if too lazy to continue ordering them as time goes on. However, the AI gets so such option, and is forced to deal with (as if the computer cares) constantly wasting worker turns and crippling itself. It can't be THAT hard to do something about this, can it? It's only been a problem for the ENTIRE TIME CIV 4 HAS BEEN AROUND or so.

 

[Civsassin]

Actually, I think it's pretty important that this gets fixed. A big part of the reason it's easy to catch the AI later in the game is of course its stupidity. This is a great example of that - let's farm then workshop over mature cottages!

The human player can tell workers to leave old improvements if too lazy to continue ordering them as time goes on. However, the AI gets so such option, and is forced to deal with (as if the computer cares) constantly wasting worker turns and crippling itself. It can't be THAT hard to do something about this, can it? It's only been a problem for the ENTIRE TIME CIV 4 HAS BEEN AROUND or so.

I do agree with you. It is extremely frustrating to see a valuable resource in AI territory with a fort on top of it. Our gameplay is a workaround for the poor AI performance. The folks at Firaxis should take a lesson for Galactic Civilizations II, which is known for its outstanding AI and it ability to act almost human.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Forts do provide resource access, so if the resource wasn't being worked by a city putting a fort on it is arguably better than plopping down the appropriate improvement.

 

[Civsassin]

Forts do provide resource access, so if the resource wasn't being worked by a city putting a fort on it is arguably better than plopping down the appropriate improvement.

This is true. Maybe the AI is more savvy than we realize...

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

yeah, they do only build forts on top of resources only if they are outside any city's fat cross.

but yeah, they do cripple themselves a lot by doing this all the time. I don't think it's something hard to code in, you just have to have "leave old improvements" on by default for all AI players, and it will be cool.

that in turn will bring in other problems, but probably better than the "let's build workshops over mature cottages" thingy.

 

[thadian]

i commend the AI recently sent a protected worker to build a fort on a bottleneck.

Usually the AI workers are just stupid. really, really stupid. It should be something like this... (pardon me not knowing codes here)

IF improvement is:
Matured cottage
generating a resource

NO improve over

IF tile is this, worker builds this or this.

IF one worker is set to build this, and another set to build something else (recheck?)
and set both to build "that".

Can the AI examine what improvement is the right one? Like can it be told "I need a workshop here because it gives better bonus than farm" or something?

i only automate my workers to "trade network" and only post railroads (and only if i already have my railroad route set already).

Maybe if the AI actually took time to examine its workers, it would bog down the turn-by-turn?

 

[thadian]

also, i would like to see the AI delete workers it doesn't need. I often send in a "pawn" (marine, yes i use them now) to capture a worker. then if i can't get it to safety, i just delete it to deny them getting it back.

AND IT BUILDS MORE WORKERS INSTEAD OF TROOPS i can see on espionage. stoopid AI.

 

[Lord Chambers]

AND IT BUILDS MORE WORKERS INSTEAD OF TROOPS

I'm telling ya man, it's those . .. .. .. .ing unions.