The AI Is Still Bad?

[Kwami]

I'm pretty sure that the AI is the AI. All that changes is the bonuses the AI receives.

Yeah, but those bonuses matter. If the AI has a lot more science, then they'll get to the space race projects faster. If they have more culture, then they'll start digging for artifacts sooner. If they have combat bonuses, then they can make me waste resources on wars instead of advancing. Etc.

Maybe it's just the way your game turned out!

Maybe!

If they won't improve the AI this game will die. At the moment is better than Civ VI (this wasn't difficult to achieve), but still definitely not enough.
As always, the main problems are stupid random wars that it can't handle, units not correctly used (usually they run away for no reason and I feel like the AI doesn't produce a lot of units during wars), peace deals definitely too generous and victory condition that it can't handle (expecially when related to colonizing the new world, that the AI can't usually reach properly).

I hope they will focus on improve the AI.

They're always improving the AI. They have a long way to go, though.

I agree that peace deals are too generous most of the time. Though, I did have one game where I tried to give Xerxes my entire empire (almost 20 cities and towns) and he still wouldn't make peace!

 

[Ornen]

so far, I'm finding the AI to be much less challenging than in previous entries. here's the AI as I'm nearing the end of Antiquity on Immortal difficulty (5/6):

Ashoka has only one city, though it does not appear anyone has declared war on him. Everyone else is still well under the settlement cap.

Hatshepsut is doing a decent job building wonders, and Catherine has earned a few codices.

overall, they are not charting. they are not founding enough cities to really compete. by and large, they are failing to adequately pursue the legacy conditions.

I've been steadily moving up the difficulty ladder... hopefully Deity gives me a little bit of a push. but so far, the AI does not really know how to play the game

 

[Cruor]

I played my first game on Emperor (they changed the name - why? 3rd from hardest) and I crushed the AI in my game. AI sucks. Firaxis actually got lazier, all upping the difficulty does is give the AI huge cheats like + combat strength and + science/food/prod/culture.
1) AI doesn't get how to use commanders and often does not use them. I easily pick off their units... then I find a lone commander to kill.
2) Does not defend its settlers. Independant people, other AI and the player can just kill them.
3) Sits in water, be it ocean or nav rivers and gets picked off by my ranged units.
4) Likes to forward settle just to be a jerk, and will pass up a better spot just for the sake of being an irritation. If you know where the settler is going and put a unit there, the settler will just sit there for the entire age.
5) AI is slow to expand in the ancient era.

On the plus side:
1) AI at least builds units, unlike Civ 6. I actually had a sizeable force come at me in the modern age, though without a commander they weren't hard to beat.
2) AI IS smart enough to cross the ocean and attack an island city of yours, which is a step up from 6. Again... no commander, doesn't bring ships to escort, easy pickings.
3) AI seems to grasp game concepts, like it will go after an economic path or science path etc with some competence. It does build its cities up, something it struggles to do even in modded Civ 4.

Is the AI better than Civ 6? Yes. But it's like.. getting punched in the arm by a strong guy wearing brass knuckles is better than getting punched in the face. Yeah its BETTER but it still sucks. Needs a lot of work.

Also, competent AI IS possible. Stellaris and EU4 can both give me a good run. Civ games just always have bad AI and its unacceptable. Other people can do it so why can't Civ?

 

[Pfeffersack]

Ouch...reading those impressions hurts...it was said AI was a focus this time, the game was simplified and streamlined (which should mainly help the AI), age breaks allow struggling nations a catch-up (which will help the AI again more than the human player) and it seems to receive even more boni than before...and then there is not even a clear indication that its overall better than in Civ6? From what I get from these and other threads, reviews and gameplay videos I saw we have in best case a situation where the AI might act more smart in some details or situations, but is still (or even worse) "lost" in the big picture of being able to compete. That's concerning. Of course, there is the chance that things will improve - AI is one of the areas where you can do a lot after release. The question is just who much priority this will get.

 

[ThERat]

I played my first game on Emperor (they changed the name - why? 3rd from hardest) and I crushed the AI in my game. AI sucks. Firaxis actually got lazier, all upping the difficulty does is give the AI huge cheats like + combat strength and + science/food/prod/culture.
1) AI doesn't get how to use commanders and often does not use them. I easily pick off their units... then I find a lone commander to kill.
2) Does not defend its settlers. Independant people, other AI and the player can just kill them.
3) Sits in water, be it ocean or nav rivers and gets picked off by my ranged units.
4) Likes to forward settle just to be a jerk, and will pass up a better spot just for the sake of being an irritation. If you know where the settler is going and put a unit there, the settler will just sit there for the entire age.
5) AI is slow to expand in the ancient era.

On the plus side:
1) AI at least builds units, unlike Civ 6. I actually had a sizeable force come at me in the modern age, though without a commander they weren't hard to beat.
2) AI IS smart enough to cross the ocean and attack an island city of yours, which is a step up from 6. Again... no commander, doesn't bring ships to escort, easy pickings.
3) AI seems to grasp game concepts, like it will go after an economic path or science path etc with some competence. It does build its cities up, something it struggles to do even in modded Civ 4.

Is the AI better than Civ 6? Yes. But it's like.. getting punched in the arm by a strong guy wearing brass knuckles is better than getting punched in the face. Yeah its BETTER but it still sucks. Needs a lot of work.

Also, competent AI IS possible. Stellaris and EU4 can both give me a good run. Civ games just always have bad AI and its unacceptable. Other people can do it so why can't Civ?

That's a damning assessment of the AI. It's not that Firaxis got lazier. Civ3/4 didn't have a super smart AI , however due to the game design, the AI could give you a real run for money. Civ 5 and it's 1upt killed the AI and the ideas mainly put forward by the chief designer of Civ6/7 are poison for the AI. It can't handle the convolution.
Guess the game is meant for the people who play casually and don't even need an AI, just want to feel good to even win on deity.

 

[coolhandluke11]

The ai is competent and throws waves of units at you. ive lost prized commanders to it.i suggest you play it at deity/online and tell me its bad i dare you. to win your going to need a frontline army of twenty four units and a replenish train coming in behind them to get a miltary victory. i lost the first three and finally won the fourth. you gotta love the legions when there tanked.
firaxis made a great game.

 

[Elhoim]

The main issue for me with the AI right now is settling. It takes a long time to settle and expand, and tends to not have a coherent empire (which makes defending it harder). They specially love to take far away cities in peace negotiations, which also hurts their defensive abilities. Military-wise is not bad, but it seems to play like Civ 5-6 without heavily using the commanders.

 

[AD1730]

I played my first game on Emperor (they changed the name - why? 3rd from hardest) and I crushed the AI in my game. AI sucks. Firaxis actually got lazier, all upping the difficulty does is give the AI huge cheats like + combat strength and + science/food/prod/culture.
1) AI doesn't get how to use commanders and often does not use them. I easily pick off their units... then I find a lone commander to kill.
2) Does not defend its settlers. Independant people, other AI and the player can just kill them.
3) Sits in water, be it ocean or nav rivers and gets picked off by my ranged units.
4) Likes to forward settle just to be a jerk, and will pass up a better spot just for the sake of being an irritation. If you know where the settler is going and put a unit there, the settler will just sit there for the entire age.
5) AI is slow to expand in the ancient era.

On the plus side:
1) AI at least builds units, unlike Civ 6. I actually had a sizeable force come at me in the modern age, though without a commander they weren't hard to beat.
2) AI IS smart enough to cross the ocean and attack an island city of yours, which is a step up from 6. Again... no commander, doesn't bring ships to escort, easy pickings.
3) AI seems to grasp game concepts, like it will go after an economic path or science path etc with some competence. It does build its cities up, something it struggles to do even in modded Civ 4.

Is the AI better than Civ 6? Yes. But it's like.. getting punched in the arm by a strong guy wearing brass knuckles is better than getting punched in the face. Yeah its BETTER but it still sucks. Needs a lot of work.

Also, competent AI IS possible. Stellaris and EU4 can both give me a good run. Civ games just always have bad AI and its unacceptable. Other people can do it so why can't Civ?

Considering that they made massive (and, for some, alienating) design changes to prevent snowballing and balance the game, I find it incredibly frustrating that the AI doesn't perform better.

 

[queenpea]

On this topic, I find that the game is usually decided by the middle of the exploration age in my experience.

 

[Melkus]

I don't know, my first game feels still competitive in different areas in Modern - I mostly refrained from crippling the AI early with my military though (and exploiting the stupid peace deals - my god). Their handling of legacy paths and civilian units (like explorers - they can stack them to enormous heights though - missionaries, merchants) is already in a decent state, I think.

Don't want to dispute that the AI has problems and I'm sure it can still be easily outmaneuvered on the battlefield.

But to be fair:

- They got rid of the extra starting settlers and units in high difficulties. That's the most important AI bonus in earlier Civs and the only reason it can at least challenge us in early ages in VI. And production bonuses have stayed about the same in Deity - so they gave their AI team a challenge here.

- It's early in the cycle, the AI people need time to work with the finished game. Also, the real testing just started - in-house quality assurance will never be as tough with them as people here or even streamers are. (I just hope that Firaxis keeps being committed to AI development.)

- Modding capabilities will ultimately decide how good the Civ7 AI gets, anyway - Firaxis can and will never commit the same amount of hours Vox Populi guys like Gazebo did to teach the AI.

 

[Acken]

As I and a few modders have watched AI only games through the tuner. It's pretty obvious it has a lot of issue.
And it's very likely we will have (again) to mod it to improve it alongside Firaxis own fixes and balance changes.

For example we all thought commanders would help the AI to make armies and move them around but in reality the AI has a lot of trouble forming those armies and moving them at the moment.

 

[Gehennas]

From what I've seen, AI is quite competent at using units in combat. It is not perfect and it starts doing weird things like sending a lone commander ahead when the units are gone, but other from that, what I have noticed is that it takes me many turns to capture big settlements, due to AI constantly retreating with wounded units to heal and replacing them with new ones. I also got my ass kicked twice in modern age by multiple AIs declaring war on me if I didn't prioritize tier 2 units, which certainly kept me on the toes. I'd say it is a good start. Economy-wise numbers still can be tweaked. Maybe AI should build less wonders, for example.
Also it should be noted that AI might have lower yields due to the specialist bug.

 

[fantsu]

Not an expert (yet). But its unfair to expect AI to outmaneuver human player ever in 4X games like civ. With infinite time to think about all the possible outcomes and acting so that you wont make any unfavourable decisions, when possible, AI cannot never do it better. And should not. AI needs quantity instead and with 1upt that will never happen.

I think this game does it about the same as V and VI. It doesnt feel good when you get familiar with it, sure. Still it has that exciting feeling when you get declared suddenly.

Its an videogame like any other. Its for fun and wasting time. Multiplayer aside.

So yeah. AI is still bad. But its not a bad thing. Videogames have certain life span. When you master the game, it does not give you challenge in the end. But there are always millions of ways to make it harder by limiting yourself or roleplaying or what ever.

 

[DizzKneeLand33]

- It's early in the cycle, the AI people need time to work with the finished game. Also, the real testing just started - in-house quality assurance will never be as tough with them as people here or even streamers are. (I just hope that Firaxis keeps being committed to AI development.)

- Modding capabilities will ultimately decide how good the Civ7 AI gets, anyway - Firaxis can and will never commit the same amount of hours Vox Populi guys like Gazebo did to teach the AI.

But this is the problem. This was all said at the beginning of Civ VI, and it never improved (neither the AI nor the Modding capabilities). So, I will now wait. They burned their bridges with me there with regard to buying the game on release.

 

[Ornen]

So yeah. AI is still bad. But its not a bad thing. Videogames have certain life span. When you master the game, it does not give you challenge in the end. But there are always millions of ways to make it harder by limiting yourself or roleplaying or what ever.

“when you master the game” it’s been out for a week, I’m still learning how it all fits together, and the AI just can’t keep up

I’ll be the first to say it: give the AI back its big dumb bonuses at higher levels. at the very least give them an advantage against IP, so they don’t get bossed around by barbs

and besides, some of the stuff I’m talking about is very basic… why do most of the AIs have 3 or fewer cities at the end of Antiquity? this isn’t rocket science

 

[Kwami]

I’ll be the first to say it: give the AI back its big dumb bonuses at higher levels. at the very least give them an advantage against IP, so they don’t get bossed around by barbs

It already has all of that. It's still really bad.

My second game (stepped up to 4/6 difficulty) is even worse than the first one. The AI has done barely anything at all in the first two ages. The second age is going to end before turn 100 because science and culture are just so easy to get. Once again, the AI will have no treasure points. One of them did settle near a single treasure resource, but he hasn't bothered to improve it.

 

[fantsu]

“when you master the game” it’s been out for a week, I’m still learning how it all fits together, and the AI just can’t keep up

I’ll be the first to say it: give the AI back its big dumb bonuses at higher levels. at the very least give them an advantage against IP, so they don’t get bossed around by barbs

and besides, some of the stuff I’m talking about is very basic… why do most of the AIs have 3 or fewer cities at the end of Antiquity? this isn’t rocket science

I am sure difficulties will be fiddledaround still. New age might give AI some leverage.

But I feel you sir. Modern civilization games havent offered me a challenge much.
Then again game has to cater new players also.
Try a game without leveling up or using commanders. Maybe use them only a fish bait scouts. Makes it to feel more dangerous. One city challenge maybe?

 

[pietro1990]

The diplomacy is a big mess i've had Ai denounce and declare war on me for no reason at all. And the fun part was i had a huge military and they had one city but they sitll declared war

 

[queenpea]

The diplomacy is a big mess i've had Ai denounce and declare war on me for no reason at all. And the fun part was i had a huge military and they had one city but they sitll declared war

I encounter this a lot too. Very weak AI civs declaring war on me and my massive army.

Also, once you have hit your settlement cap, it's kind of frustrating to engage in war at all because there is no real reward for it (it feels). I suppose you should just fight and add the settlements to go over the cap, but the game does a good job in disincentivizing you from doing this.

 

[pietro1990]

I encounter this a lot too. Very weak AI civs declaring war on me and my massive army.

Also, once you have hit your settlement cap, it's kind of frustrating to engage in war at all because there is no real reward for it (it feels). I suppose you should just fight and add the settlements to go over the cap, but the game does a good job in disincentivizing you from doing this.

Yep or just denouncing you for no reason and then i look at the tooltip and there is zero negative modifiers they just denouce you at random