1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

They need to hotfix AI agression now

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by godman85, Jul 11, 2013.

  1. VenGyr

    VenGyr Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2012
    Messages:
    43
    The one thing i have noticed that needs to be fixed is the Indonesia AI. Played about 5 continents/small continents games against them on prince, and only once did they expand to another continent, and that was because they captured a city built by someone else.

    They need to be tweaked to expand more, like the zulus & soshone, otherwise their UA is rendered useless in the hands of the AI.
     
  2. hr_oskar

    hr_oskar Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    624
    Location:
    Iceland
    Wow, never seen the AI attack that early :eek:

    They used to "go maniac and DoW you on turn 50" before G&K was patched (not the patch just before BNW but months ago). It made the game annoying and predictable because friendship didn't mean anything and all you could hope to gain from diplomacy was to milk the AI's gold while they weren't at war. This behavior changed considerably after that patch to G&K, after which the AI's had a lot less gold available for trade because they were spending it more and they also stopped the mindless attacks. Peaceful games became possible. My impression of BNW so far is that the aggression-level is unchanged.
     
  3. DemonMaster

    DemonMaster A.K.A. Fenhorn

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,648
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sweden
    Regarding Attila and turn 11, yes it was the first time I have been DoWed that early. A funny detail in that story is when I met him the turn before he asked if I wouldn't join him in an attack against the Portuguese. I said no. He only had a battling Ram and a Warrior but I had nothing but capital on flatland.

    Regarding when AI become what and how, well, before BNW I haven't played the game for a month so this last patch before BNW I don't know what did or didn't do.
     
  4. Nickel_lion

    Nickel_lion Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2013
    Messages:
    102
    NOBODY actually said that. We NEVER stated a desire of easy victories (otherwise, we would all playing settler), The AI DOES DECLARE WAR, but in this expansion, it does it in LATER ERAS!! So, for my playstyle, I'll have it.

    Besides that, someone made a post about recommendations or proposals about how we think this could be fixed:

    http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=12604384#post12604384

    I agree with this:

    OH! And please guys, DO NOT forget this:


     
  5. Buccaneer

    Buccaneer Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2001
    Messages:
    3,562
    I agree. In the other thread, you said "Sure, it's not a turn 40 10-warrior attack, it's more like a turn 110 6-spearman 4-CB 4-catapult attack." I was think more of the turn 40(?) Impi(?) or Jaguars, Atlatists or Battering Rams attack. By turn 110, wouldn't that be too late for those with very early game UU? The window for those units are not that wide and they should be wired to take advantage of that instead of waiting and missing their opportunity, esp. when other civs and (and human player) are busy with religion, trade or settlers.
     
  6. Buccaneer

    Buccaneer Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2001
    Messages:
    3,562
    I think that is the fallacy. As I said in the post above, there are several civs that must not wait until later eras because they are designed for early warfare. It would be like the religious civs (Celts et al) waiting until later to try to establish a religion. Just because a human player does not like early warfare, that should not preclude certain AI from doing exactly that.
     
  7. gunnergoz

    gunnergoz Cat Herder

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Messages:
    2,287
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Southern California
    If the AI is not attacking, why do I keep seeing notices that "So and so has lost their capital?" True, they do come later in the game, but I still find the change refreshing.

    At the same time, and even though this is said to be the last expansion for Civ V, I do expect at least one and probably two patches before they wrap it up and seriously focus entirely on Civ 6. Those patches may well deal with some of the balancing issues that some argue are needed.
     
  8. Balerune

    Balerune Prince

    Joined:
    May 19, 2010
    Messages:
    373
    Create the "Godman" mod with the "Turtle Victory" condition.
    Briefly everyone hates you all the time and are constantly at war with you. If you last to 500 turns you get the "Turtle Victory" with a pix of a green turtle(s) http://www.funnyrush.com/funny-pictures/2380/ninja-turtles.jpg and the legend "Everyone thought that you couldn't survive the combined hordes of the world as they came to your door but you in your magnificence and superior tactical ability have managed to thumb your nose at all those who thought you were puny and have lived to tell the tale of your Brave Mew World (sound of the cats mewing.)

    "Long live the turtles."

    "Long live the cats."

    "Long live the Emperor of the world"

    And if you conquer everyone else in the world you get the "You're an Ant" victory conditionhttp://www.montgomerypestmd.com/images/ant.jpg (I didn't want to upset anyone with the x rated "dead ant" pics but use at your own discretion) with the sound bite "They are all ants crushed by my mighty foot" (sound of crushing ants.)

    "Long live the non-ant"

    "Long live the boot"

    "Long live the crunch"
     
  9. Nickel_lion

    Nickel_lion Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2013
    Messages:
    102
    SURE, buddy. But remember NOT everybody is having the "docile and wait until industrial Era" Ai behaviour. In fact, I haven't had it IN SOME games, where the AI has attacked me way in early eras, just like in G&K.

    So, what I also want to say is, why changing the game when FOR MANY gamers the "docile AI" or even the "early warmongering AI" are just RANDOM and not a RULE in their new BNW??

    And as I always have said, just like the example of early religious civs, if you want early faith, GO FOR IT! So, if you want early wars, START THE WARS!!! Not a game must be changed, and contradict their own DYNAMICS (early gold for trade routes anyone?) just because John and Andrew want some "drama" and "threat" at the beginnig of it.

    And I agree with this guy:

     
  10. Teholb

    Teholb Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2012
    Messages:
    204
    You know, it's funny, I've always played this way. Always. I like to be diplomatic, or, if another civ hopelessly outpaces my culture/influence/tourism, I go for a scientific victory. I did this from Vanilla through G&K, and now in BNW. The AI might threaten me if I don't trade with them and generally "appease hitler," but I almost always avoid a war until the Medieval/Renaissance era. At which point my economy, science, and culture have expanded so vastly, that fielding an army is a relatively simple and quick affair.

    I'm only on King difficulty, and I know that makes a huge difference, but I honestly believe we're all going to perceive the AI quite differently based on our individual playstyles. I hope the AI doesn't become too aggressive, I like to develop my empire (I guess I'm just a builder-type at heart).
     
  11. Buccaneer

    Buccaneer Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2001
    Messages:
    3,562
    I know, it's hard to sort through the reasons for the difference...

    ...and part of it could be playstyle and perceptions. Since you are a "builder-type", would want the AI to be builder-types as well but aggressive in outbuilding you or would you prefer more passive AI builders?
     
  12. Nickel_lion

    Nickel_lion Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2013
    Messages:
    102
    Well, "the passive in early game and then declare war" AI is definitely my playstyle, and I love when the AI behaves so in some of the games it does. I'm like the "I'll crush you in the Renaissance, or Industrial Era" type, not to mention the modern and subsequent eras, where I'm more a warmonger than anyone of them. But it just depends of the game, sometimes I like to go for a cultural and even a diplomatic victory, the kind this new expansion has focused on.
     
  13. BluegrassGeek

    BluegrassGeek Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    Messages:
    140
    Location:
    Kentucky, USA
    Okay, I'm still (slowly) playing through my first game. From my experience, plus what I'm reading here, I think a combination of factors are in play. However, the big one seems to be that the AI is generally as aggressive as you are. For the record, I'm on Prince, Standard size & speed, Continents.

    I was also surprised when I ran into two civs early (Babylon and Egypt), but neither DoWed me. In fact, I got on Babylon's good side through some nice trades and my first trade route. Later ran into the Ottomans, and we four were the only full civs on this small continent (plus about half-a-dozen city-states).

    Once I got some money flowing, Babylon suggested we attack Egypt. So I did. :D Took his captial, razed another city, then took a rather generous peace offer. At this point, I also had a trade route to the Ottomans, and things seemed alright. However, he shortly afterwards had reverted to Neutral stance, and denounced me for trying to convert his cities, since Istanbul was applying craptons of pressure to my nearest city. Less than 10 turns later, he declares war.

    This was the Medieval era. Wound up grinding to a stalemate, because terrain made it impossible for me to get close to Istanbul with his ranged defenders chewing me up. Wound up in an uneasy peace. Oh, and Babylon finished the job on Egypt, wiping them out entirely. I snagged one of the Egpyts two cities left, because I had just learned there was Coal next to it. :D Babylon took the other.

    In the meantime, I discovered that the other continent was pretty turbulent. Alliances kept shifting, based on the "We're glad you're friends with X/Don't get too cozy with X" statements. Monty wiped out one civ (I forget who) and went to war with Dido. That apparently wound up in a stalemate. By the Industrial era, Dido was at war with Russia, and finally took Moscow.

    The commonality seems to be that AI civs who have good resources or good trade routes seem less likely to declare war until they run out of expansion room or you start inconveniencing them with faith/culture & your alliances (including Ideology). Then they get aggressive.

    So, if you play traditional G&K openings, the AI has very little reason to be aggressive. Unless it just gets a bad start, it's more sensible to stay neutral or friendly while building up gold and Happiness. Actions by the player or other civs can push them into aggression, though.

    I am curious if there's a correlation with map size/type. I know lots of folks who play Diety/Immortal also play Pangea maps. Wondering if that's part of the difference vs. lower difficulties or map type (less room to expand = more aggression sooner).
     
  14. BluegrassGeek

    BluegrassGeek Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    Messages:
    140
    Location:
    Kentucky, USA
    At least on my Prince game, Babylon got an early lead in culture & science (not terribly surprising). In the modern era, I've finally surpassed them in culture, but the're still ahead of me in science.

    Also, the Ottomans are faith-nuts, and trying their damndest to convert the continent. Part of the reason why we went to war. :p

    So, yes, the AI will focus on other victory goals, it seems.
     
  15. Gucumatz

    Gucumatz JS, secretly Rod Serling

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2011
    Messages:
    6,181
    Just had Atilla, Shaka, and Asyria all spawn next to me and declare war on me at the same time as Poland... A combined Horse Archer/Siege Tower/Impi spam on Deity was not pretty. Incidentally my first Deity game on BNW [Been playing immortal] - Hopefully I'll get a winnable game after this one :p
     
  16. IdiotsOpposite

    IdiotsOpposite Boom, headshot.

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,718
    Location:
    America.
    Well, firstly I just want to mention that considering the Impi are a Pikeman replacement, if I'm seeing ten of those in turn 40 I've already lost. But I'm guessing you just thought they'd be a warrior replacement (a reasonable assumption).

    That said, while all Civs should try to take advantage of the era of their UU, I'm just not sure how you'd make such early war workable for the AI in BNW. If you can find a way to make it work, sure, Montezuma should attack early to make use of his Jaguars. But I think you can agree that the list of people willing to attack that early is VERY limited.
     
  17. iam2509

    iam2509 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    12
    Yeah they definitely need to put out a patch.

    I am playing on King (my usual setting from Gods and Kings) with Standard map with 8 civs and 16 city states.

    I quickly discovered it was just me and Poland on a small to medium size continent. I declared war on him and captured two of his settlers. No other fighting occurred and we eventually made an equitable peace with him giving me two gold a turn.

    After a time, I declared war on him again this time with three catapults, two spearmen and two composite bowmen moving on Warsaw. I knew from G&K I was going to have a fight on my hands.

    Lo and behold all Warsaw had was city walls and NO Garrisons of any type!! Unbelievable.

    He knew I was bent on his destruction from our earlier conflict but built no military at all to save himself.

    I captured Warsaw and a small city without losing a unit, and still have not seen a Polish military (I did kill a Polish warrior far to the western side of the continent).

    Something definitely needs fixing when a civilization won't even defend itself.....
     

    Attached Files:

  18. IdiotsOpposite

    IdiotsOpposite Boom, headshot.

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,718
    Location:
    America.
    Wait. How could he possibly know your intentions? Did you tell him that nothing will satisfy you but his death somehow? How exactly did you tell him this?

    See, another reasonable interpretation is that after taking two of his settlers and letting him buy off peace, he thought he'd be safe for a bit to try to build himself up economically, something that's badly needed since you just crippled his economy by stealing his settlers. Given that he likely didn't have much gold, buying up a large army to try to defend himself would have likely only made his situation worse.
     
  19. DemonMaster

    DemonMaster A.K.A. Fenhorn

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,648
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sweden
    So first you capture two of his probably very early (of not his first two built) settlers, crippling his start extremely much. Then you crippling him further to pay you (hard earned) gold. After this you expect him to be able to defend himself? Regardless of Civ 5 version you play, any AI that got this start only have one option in crises - to bend over.

    Like other have said above, some people fight like hell some don't. This means that AI at least choose different strategies now. In G&K they all seems to go for earlier warrior spams (especially on higher difficulty levels). But sure some balancing will probably occur in the upcoming patch. I have played three games so far and I have seen plenty of fighting. Sure there will always be AIs that do strange things, but that is nothing new, that happened in G&K and in Vanilla as well.
     
  20. IdiotsOpposite

    IdiotsOpposite Boom, headshot.

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,718
    Location:
    America.
    In my highly limited experience, turning on No Barbarians causes the AI to do strange things. The Zulu, for example, completely skipped settling near them at all to settle three cities on another continent, on separate ends of said continent at that! The Chinese built 3 settlers at once and shipped all of them to the continent the Zulu were on, building 3 cities that were nowhere near each other!

    Needless to say, myself and my friend took advantage of this nonsense for some easy war. Especially since the continent they were settling on was ours. :goodjob:
     

Share This Page