The 1UPT system (as we know it) has to be expunged first, if we want a better A.I

[Abade69]

Good post. Totally agree. IUPT looks good on paper but by medieval times is an absolute chore.

We can argue forever about stacks or carpets, but one thing is quite clear, by BTS the AI could give you a damn fine game, I refer to my post from June 2008 BTS Civ4:

One reason for signing up on this forum was to tell of my epic "D-Day"-esque struggle for survival against the enemy. Unfortunately I cannot recall who the leader was but it shouldnt detract from a truly awesome effort from the AI on Noble level.

I was ticking along nicely going for culture/diplo victory, had one side of a continent, fairly good relations with all, especially my neighbours, when all of a sudden out of nowhere the "Trumpets of Woe" echo around me and the AI drops in about 10 paras behind my lines, who break up roads/mines etc(all on hills with Guerilla 1) cutting supply.

I am sort of ready for war ,but not the blitz that comes with it, almost my own tactics or human in cunning, a fake attack from the sea side of my territory then smaller SoD's aimed at each of my border cities!!!!
I lost 2 cities straight away because I couldnt reinforce(paras). Didnt want to bother with them as I couldnt afford the losses and had to focus on cities.

I just about saved the 3rd city and the AI lost momentum, luckily I was close to Industrialisation so let my Shermans do the talking after I had recovered from the initial losses.

Of course it was a great blow to my ego and with my people right behind me, (and Mr Sherman), liberated the lost cities and cranked up war production to take revenge, battering them into the ground over a long protracted war, that'll teach 'em.

In the end I lost, someone won a diplo vic but I still chuckle thinking about all those para drops, dont think I've ever seen anything like it since.

I still remember my reactions to the enemy moves in that game, surprise, shock, awe, respect. To use the paras to pillage my production and cut off re-enforcement. The fake landings. The smaller SOD's on 3 cities at once.
I can not recall such a story in Civ5 or Civ6 ( with far fewer diverse military units).

For the last 6 years we have just had a very large obvious build up of ridiculous amounts of (usually obsolete) units, milling around borders before the inevitable "surprise" war.

I really thought that Civ6 would be the time to move to limited units based on government/war footing/finance or other mechanic and change to a smaller tactical map for battles.
The thing that kills Civ6 for me at the moment is the amount of non-combat units that clutter the map. Even after the ridiculous 3 charge builders disappear until you make ANOTHER one (who thought that would be fun?)

"Limited" is the keyword here . I know what you mean, i also like nasty surprises (even if they make me lose). Clicking "next turn" becomes really boring, and the only reason i avoid wars is because i find it nauseating to move 15 units every damn turn. Hopefully the carpets of doom are history thanks to the future mods and patches, i am only worried about the A.I as it is incapable to take a single city with medieval walls and beyond.

 

[Abade69]

Another options would be to use military population cap, based on city population, and territory, to end this nightmare. Then some units should have the ability to gain the ability to forage its food, thus allowing larger armies.
1UPT does not work this way. If a unit cap is introduced, then stacking units could be introduced back.

I just played a game on deity with just Domination victory and NO AI has managed to conquer me or anyone else, they had Nukes when I had Pikemans, and didn't even tried to conquer me. I'm so pissed off.
Not being Blitzkriegged in any way is not fun!

The problem whit a cap based on territory and population is that you are favouring big empires and drowning small ones. One way you could counter this is to cap "Unit number limit" by city, and "stack" with technologies, policies, gov's. This way an empire with a small number of cities could have less armies, but the "stack" could match a big nation power. Big empires would still have an edge, but small empires would stand a chance at defensive wars or even an edge with techology, promotion, terrain, tactics, etc.

I know right? I have never seen the A.I capture a city with medieval walls and beyond.

 

[Roxlimn]

Spontaneous armies? You must be joking. Let me see if i understand... I kill 5 of their 10 base units, next turn it generates other 5 units is this what you are suggesting?. I think it may work if they generate when NOT at war with anybody. Dirty but as you say they don't need to abide to the player rules if we are trying to make it a challenge and eliminate carpets of doom.

Another question comes to mind: How would you balance what kind of AI level spawns for each game?. King level AI will keep building above their base, is that right? If that is so, 2 King level AI's would make them enter a loop of unit production. as they will be trying to balance each other to infinity (that includes the player trying to match numbers too).

I think your idea may work to some extend. If you got a base minimum per AI difficulty, and each new level exceeds that limit (removing the "as many" part), then maybe battle bonus, or free upgrades as you say. Pretty cheap but worth a try.

I'm saying that the King AI (all the King AI) will make as many units as you do +1 up to the limit of their maintenance capabilities. So you can't bankrupt it just by building more units that it can support. The King AI will also have a basic rate of reinforce - 5 next turn sounds a little much, but a certain amount of reinforce would be appropriate if it had already planned and intended a war, and a certain level would be appropriate if it expected a war, and another if you surprised it with a war.

So if the King AI had 5 cities, I don't think it would be inappropriate to just have it generate 5 units every X number of turns if it were on a solid war footing already, and certainly if they have the Encampements.

The AI units spawn only as much as the player does plus a modifier, so they don't key off each other. That number can be adjusted up or down based on whether the AI intends to war or whether it is a warlike Civ to begin with. For instance, if you have a standing force of 10 units, the King AI might be expected to have 11 (and stop there).

 

[Beorhtric]

Sounds pretty cool, but it seems to requiere completely new mechanics added to the game (some other deleted), are you sure it can be modded?

I would expect some parts of it can be modded - I've not done Civ modding before so couldn't tell you for certain how much, I am however looking into the modding side of things to see what can be done.

It's more something fireaxis would need to do in an expansion/civ 7 than something for vanilla civ 6...

 

[Victoria]

It seems the discussions are around deity and in that situation the AI has lots of benefits that allow it to "carpet" as I imagine it can afford the maintenance despite the lack of amenity through warmongering.
I'm sure a few tweaks could fix that.

I am not sure I understand what a carpet of doom is. A line of the enemy you are facing over rough terrain can always be broken and individual units flanked, concentrated firepower etc etc. Played many a tactical game and any line can be broken with the terrain and unit variation this game allows. So this is a carpet, not of doom.

The carpet of doom seems to come from the stack of doom usage which really was that... If you can build yourself 50 units in a stack and attack someone they can do nothing about it

Carpet and stack are both bad. Neither should be used, they are the polarization's of reality

Its all about balance and the corps/army with support units stacking is pretty fine to me. I do not see carpets of doom unless you are talking about carpets of foreign apostles that stop me moving in my own territory.

This all seems an attack on 1UPT which this game is not anymore... its a middle ground.
The AI should always upgrade troops so simplify its own choices and that's a design issue.
I like the idea of supply, this has been discussed in another thread in better detail than here with less extreme statements.

I have been a wargamer for a very long time and this is not a wargame. It is a strategic game with quite a lot of tactical options also, including combat.
Its broke a bit, lets see what they tweak before rewriting the combat system.... I play king/immortal but higher I just do not enjoy myself.

Maybe the simplest fix is to remove the deity level and rename immortal to diety?