The Civ V AI Does Not Want To Win

[Donald Trump]

.

 

[apocalypse105]

The only thing I noticed that the only victory the Ai goes for is a science victory and they do it verry slow even if you are behind in tech you can still win a science victory i've seen AI having 100% literacy knowing all techs and still dont built spaceships dont now whats going on there.

Olso the warmonger penalty isnt fun at all sometimes the Ai ask you lets go to war against this player to whipe him out he is a problem when you do whipe him out you warmonger you are the problem denouncing and embargo's.. Really?

 

[Sclb]

The only thing I noticed that the only victory the Ai goes for is a science victory and they do it verry slow even if you are behind in tech you can still win a science victory i've seen AI having 100% literacy knowing all techs and still dont built spaceships dont now whats going on there.

Olso the warmonger penalty isnt fun at all sometimes the Ai ask you lets go to war against this player to whipe him out he is a problem when you do whipe him out you warmonger you are the problem denouncing and embargo's.. Really?

Obviously you don't play on deity, but AI does go for culture and diplomatic also. Diplomatic is rare but I've seen it happen. AI can pull off culture on deity if they also went for science aggressively. AI can never pull off domination even if they try for it due to their horrible at warring. I've never seen an AI at 100% and not have SS, maybe they don't have enough aluminum or something blocking their path to capital.

When an AI asks you to go to war, there is nothing that says you actually have to send troops, or capture any cities. As long as you don't capture cities, you don't get much penalty, only very minor one for starting war. You can even get a huge diplo boost if you let them have very generous peace treaty

 

[poxpower]

To be fair there's lots of ways that you can abuse the AI's stupidity for trades.
In a lot of instances they won't offer you trades that would benefit them ( like 2 for 1 unique lux trades just so you get a we love the king day ) but in many other instances they will accept the dumbest trades like loaning you 4000 gold so you can buy spaceship parts and win.

Also yes they generally play to hinder you.

They settle egregiously bad cities that hurt both of you.
They declare futile wars and crap on your trade routes / trade deals then peace out 20 turns later having lost 20 units and gained nothing.
They randomly denounce you for no benefit whatsoever.
They often plant citadels in your lands when they have generals
They constantly spam you with prophets even if you have a religion and they gain nothing from theirs spreading. They just waste thousands of faith.

The AI is very bad at knowing what is good for itself, but it's a complicated game so..

 

[Socratatus]

Play Xcom 2- The AI in that wants to win- and win HARD!

 

[docbud]

^^Which is a totally different game and has nothing to do with Civ V.

 

[nebaciv]

Why? For instance, it is impossible to ever fairly trade with a civilization. If they have a resource you don't have, they will demand a copy of every single resource you own in return for it. If you have one copy it will do a one for one swap. If they try to trade with you they will only offer you 4 GPT in return for a resource.

Totally with you there, that really gets my goat. I have this problem constantly, even when there are no negative diplomatic modifiers in place, I'm on the other side of the map from them (no border complaints), etc. Yet still, they try to utterly clean me out just for 25 turns of salt or something! So often I have to just give up on trading and rely on allying with city states in order to get more unique luxuries and strategic resources instead...

 

[Socratatus]

^^Which is a totally different game and has nothing to do with Civ V.

yea, but Civ 5 is never going to get any better. And Xcom 2 does have a lot of strategy. It is a sort of world builder in its own way.

Basically, you`re gonna have to find another game with an AI that really wants to win if you want to see it happen. It`s what I do. I always play Xcom2 when I want a real challenge without needing to play top difficluty since even on Normal with no bonuses it`ll kick ass. I don`t like playing higher difficulties in CIV5 cos it just wallops it with ridiculous higher bonuses and stuff.

 

[poxpower]

yea, but Civ 5 is never going to get any better. And Xcom 2 does have a lot of strategy. It is a sort of world builder in its own way.

Basically, you`re gonna have to find another game with an AI that really wants to win if you want to see it happen. It`s what I do. I always play Xcom2 when I want a real challenge without needing to play top difficluty since even on Normal with no bonuses it`ll kick ass. I don`t like playing higher difficulties in CIV5 cos it just wallops it with ridiculous higher bonuses and stuff.

You can download acken's mod for CIV V.
Emperor is harder than Deity on his mod, but mostly because he nerfed science into the ground and upped waring and culture
In his mod you are very rewarded for going wide and domination and the AI is really good at declaring an endless number of wars and killing cities. Acken added a policy where culture buildings give tourism so now the AI basically stumbles into culture victories without trying just by spamming 15 cities, so you have to stop them.

 

[beetle]

I find Emperor level to be hard, although King is quite easy. I am just no good at exploiting the AI through the game mechanics. ... I just can't play against the AI and it pisses me off.

I cannot figure out what you mean by exploiting game mechanics, as V has much less of that than IV or III. It is pretty much a guess, but I think you need to try and figure out the diplomacy angle of things better.

For instance, it is impossible to ever fairly trade with a civilization. If they have a resource you don't have, they will demand a copy of every single resource you own in return for it. If you have one copy it will do a one for one swap. If they try to trade with you they will only offer you 4 GPT in return for a resource.

Those are all indicative of an AI not liking you. If every AI is treating you that way, then you are not playing well.

When the time came, I declined, thinking that once he attacks Siam, I will sneak by and capture his capital.

That makes you a liar, and all the AIs will know it. The AIs hate the player for lying.

Except he never went to war with Siam.

Yes, your backing out meant that he backed out. You could have DOW’d Siam (as you promised) then DOW’d Syria after he was engaged with Siam.

I had to retire from the game, because we all bordered one another and they overwhelmed me to the point of no return with siege towers and a couple dozen other units.

I am sure you would not enjoy the game being too easy either. I think it is a feature that the AI can put up a good fight sometimes!

...but their true goal is not to win, it is to make YOU lose.

That is not correct. If the developers had wanted to program the game that way, it would have been quite easy. The AIs pursue VC agendas, it is just that they are poor at doing so.

If each civilization were to only look out for their own interests, it would be good.

I do wish some of that was better because it is sometimes immersion breaking. For example, I have played peaceful all game, but because I am a different Ideology, an AI will not lux trade at even 3:1 with me -- even though they are 10+ unhappy and the rest of the world hates them. It seems to me that Ideology differences should come after selfish best interests. (Of course, the rest of the world hating them is because of my war bribes -- but the AI does not know that!)

Then trading would be fair, wars would not always be seen as acts of aggression, and diplomacy would be a real thing.

Trades deals are more about friendship than anything else. Which is okay, at least to a point. The diplomacy is a real thing and has quite a good bit of logic to it. The diplomacy is gamey, but that is okay too. You will enjoy the game more as you figure out the diplomacy logic and accept it for what it is.

There are several other circumstances I can think of, but I don't want to type them all out and I'm sure everyone here has noticed several obvious instances of AIs extreme prejudice against the human player.

The player is held to a higher levels of behavior than the AIs, but that is okay as well. If an AI backstabs, they get a little bit hate. When a player backstabs, it destroys relations for the rest of the game with every AI. Not fair, but it works.

I will wager that every single circumstance that you can think of could have been predicted by an experienced player.

 

[Volcanon]

^^Which is a totally different game and has nothing to do with Civ V.

Except for Xcom units being the top tier infantry unit in this game.

It's somewhat more frustrating in this game to lose a city than in other games, because you have fewer of them. In Civ 1 - 3 or Alpha Centauri it's pretty common to make carpets of cities everywhere even if you get them to be 100% corrupted like in civ 3 (where they are good for absolutely nothing except to stake a claim to the land and be good for a few tax collectors and scientists).

In this game it's often optimal to have four or fewer cities. So losing one is a problem.

 

[nebaciv]

Those are all indicative of an AI not liking you. If every AI is treating you that way, then you are not playing well.

Could you explain in a little more detail please? I've had situations where the AI is incredibly reluctant to trade, even before we've had a chance to build up any bad blood, we have no contested borders, etc. Not sure how to play better in this sense, any help would be appreciated!

 

[beetle]

I've had situations where the AI is incredibly reluctant to trade, even before we've had a chance to build up any bad blood, we have no contested borders, etc.

Interesting! The next time that happens, I think you should post about it while the game is fresh in your mind. If you have exchanged embassies, and not built up any bad blood, you should be getting 1:1 lux trades out of the gate. Trades themselves are a positive diplo modifier.

I also maintain two-way open borders to help keep up relations. The dialog screen there is bugged. I ask what they want for OB and they say it is impossible. I offer OB+2gpt for OB and they agree!

When you first meet a civ, say the WC screen, that is good opportunity to start trades rolling. If you have multiple copies of a lux, do not be shy about trading away your last copy for a spare lux of a new contact.

Some AI, say Oda, get hostile for no apparent reason. But if I do nothing to aggravate him, he will still do close to 1:1 trades. Maybe a lux+2gpt for one of his spare lux.

Buying a spare lux for 9gpt is a good deal in my opinion.
Selling a spare lux for 7gpt is not so great, but indicates that relations are good.

If the AI does not have an extra copy of a lux, they will only take 3:1 lux deals. You can swap out one of the lux for 5 resources or 9 gpt. Mix-and-match as needed. And 3:1 for last lux is when relations are good!

If the AI does not value a resource, which happens early and often horses or iron, they will ask for up to 5 of each on top of every trade. That is not bad relations, just a bugged UI. So you have to keep deleting those off your side of the trade.

 

[nebaciv]

That's really helpful, beetle, especially all the details. It's really great to get some more input on what sort of trades work for others, thanks! I'll post next time something like this happens - I think from what you've said it may be the finer points of my diplomacy that's going awry...

For example, it's interesting you mention open borders, I'm quite often wary of OB for a couple of reasons: 1. unwanted religious influence, 2. aggressive civs scouting out my cities and units. I almost always have an embassy though, except if their an aggressive civ and I know they haven't found my cap yet. Would you still recommend a bit of caution in those cases?

Perhaps also I've overlooked whether they actually have a spare of those luxuries! Do you normally just look at their cities to check this, or is the fact they'll only offer rubbish trades a good enough indication? I also wonder whether I can fully trust the listed relationship modifiers on the interaction screen too!

 

[Acken]

If its witten 1 next to the luxury then its their last one most of the time. The only exception is if they have one from a city states in which case they ll trade their last one at the normal rate.

 

[beetle]

For example, it's interesting you mention open borders, I'm quite often wary of OB for a couple of reasons

Lots of players never give the AI OB. I can only assume that works. It feels immersion breaking to me, so if the AI will give me OB, I will usually give it to them.

The unwanted religious influence can be managed, but I do like watching missionaries wither and die. Not having OB does not protect against GPr, and they are the only real risk anyway. So, at least after the early game, OB (or not) is not a significant factor with regards to unwanted religious influence.

I make an exception if I think the AI wants to DOW me and I am not yet ready. So your point 2 is fair enough.

Exchanging embassies is certainly safe once you have finished your first wave of expos. Some people say it does not matter, but if I do not SIP especially, it seems to me the AI will do crazy things with settlers. Not prematurely exchanging embassies seems to me that it helps.

Perhaps also I've overlooked whether they actually have a spare of those luxuries!

Yes, I think maybe so. This may be OPs difficultly as well.

Do you normally just look at their cities to check this, or is the fact they'll only offer rubbish trades a good enough indication?

No, look at their their trade screen which shows their actual numbers available on that turn. If it lists (1) then it is their last copy and they will only trade it away on a 3:1 basis. If they have spares, and only offer rubbish trades, then relations are bad.

If you look at their lands, and see that they, for example, have multiple Pearls but only one improved with a finishing boat, then you might coax them into improving the spares buy taking a bad 3:1 deal the first time. The AIs are poor at making improvements generally, but in particular they assign a low priority to improving spare lux plots. Or maybe you see multiples, but the trade screen shows only one? That could be because the AI has already traded away their spares.

I also wonder whether I can fully trust the listed relationship modifiers on the interaction screen too!

Fully trust? No, not really, and that is part of the fun! Modifiers are accurately listed, but you can have all green and still get DOW’d without provocation. When an AI displays as “Neutral” but you are getting fair trades, they will probably not DOW. If an AI displays as “Friendly” but will not give you fair trades, then you should start to worry!

Periodically, but especially prior to a surprise DOW, AIs will assume a deceptive stance. You cannot read this directly, but with practice many of the “tells” are pretty obvious. When an AI is in a deceptive stance, red modifiers may disappear. Some AIs will DOW during a DOF. If you can see those coming, borrow all their gold, sell them lux and resources for lump sums, and sign up defense pacts!

 

[nebaciv]

The unwanted religious influence can be managed

That's good to know, I've always been under the impression the combination of OB and trade routes would leave my cities exposed to other religions. How would you manage the influence?

Exchanging embassies is certainly safe once you have finished your first wave of expos.

That makes sense I guess, so you give yourself the best chance of securing your borders. On higher difficulties I find other civs like to forward settle me!

No, look at their their trade screen which shows their actual numbers available on that turn. If it lists (1) then it is their last copy and they will only trade it away on a 3:1 basis.

Ah of course! Sometimes little things like this trip me up.

Fully trust? No, not really, and that is part of the fun!

That makes a lot of sense too, I can think of so many times that Japan and France have done this to me! I'd never thought of fleecing them for gold if I think they're going to declare war, very crafty.

Thanks for your help, getting to grips more with how the AI behaves will definitely refine my game!

 

[beetle]

How would you manage the influence?

1. First, don’t worry at all early. If they convert your cities, buy their faith buildings.
2. 2nd GPr to enhance. You can enhance even if your Holy City was converted. No real time limit on this step. Buy faith buildings first. Maybe one, and only one, missionary -- if no faith building purchases are available.
3. 3rd GPr to convert your cities back. There is no hurry. If some of your cities have Jesuit education, wait until after Labs! GPr costs are fixed. Other faith purchases you want early.
4. It is not uncommon for two religions to be fighting over just one of your cities. That means you are not getting the option to faith purchase buildings elsewhere. If this is going on, purchase an inquisitor from your Holy City (or from a city of the faith you want elsewhere) and station him at the city the two religions are fighting over.
5. If there is just one spammer near you, you might be able to ignore him. It is only when they start sending GPr after your 3rd GPr that you might need to start being seriously defensive. If you do not want a war, bite the bullet and purchase an inquisitor or two and have them on station.

The best use of inquisitors is not in deconverting your cities (use your GPr for that) but with preventing your cities from flipping.

 

[nebaciv]

1. First, don’t worry at all early. If they convert your cities, buy their faith buildings.
2. 2nd GPr to enhance. You can enhance even if your Holy City was converted. No real time limit on this step. Buy faith buildings first. Maybe one, and only one, missionary -- if no faith building purchases are available.
3. 3rd GPr to convert your cities back. There is no hurry. If some of your cities have Jesuit education, wait until after Labs! GPr costs are fixed. Other faith purchases you want early.
4. It is not uncommon for two religions to be fighting over just one of your cities. That means you are not getting the option to faith purchase buildings elsewhere. If this is going on, purchase an inquisitor from your Holy City (or from a city of the faith you want elsewhere) and station him at the city the two religions are fighting over.
5. If there is just one spammer near you, you might be able to ignore him. It is only when they start sending GPr after your 3rd GPr that you might need to start being seriously defensive. If you do not want a war, bite the bullet and purchase an inquisitor or two and have them on station.

The best use of inquisitors is not in deconverting your cities (use your GPr for that) but with preventing your cities from flipping.

Sound advice, thanks I think in the past I've wasted too much faith early on by getting into a conversion war, although this is also partly because i've been keen to convert other civs' cities!

 

[beetle]

Yes, conversion wars are a waste of faith, especially as you progress with difficulty levels. It’s very hard to win (harder than domination or CV, and religion is not tightly linked to any VC), and just makes any AI (that have founded) hate you.

OTOH, sometimes you will be the only civ to found on your continent. Or maybe a more remote civ that is doing well collecting CS allies, but has founded, is a good target for conversion. I really appreciate the religion mechanic in the game, as it adds a lot of interest, but you cannot really force it (like you can dom or CV).