Thoughts on New Patch Strategies

Discussion in 'Civ5 - Strategy & Tips' started by fromar, Apr 29, 2011.

  1. CYZ

    CYZ Toileteer

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,376
    I'm pretty sure it is calculated. I've had a damaged warrior on one side of the river and a barbarian spearmen kept moving back and forth, without attacking. Kindof as if he was trying to find a weak spot to attack.
     
  2. Shylock76

    Shylock76 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Messages:
    52
    Location:
    Dublin, Ireland
    I'm really enjoying the AI behaviour, i'm currently playing as America with China to my north and Ottomans off to the east somewhere. Suleiman DOWed me early on and I luckily had a spearman scouting out to the sotuh east and seen his 6 warriors on the way the turn before he declared, assuming correctly they were meant for me which luckily gave me a turn or two organise a defence and hold him off. He seemed to withdraw some units when he could see he was beaten and offered peace after this.

    He later DOWed me again but when i set up my defesive line he stopped his advance and withdrew his forces gradually, i did hit some with archers, and offered me a chunk of change for peace. China DOWed me later and when i bet him back he posted a couple of scouts on his borders assumingly for line of sight.

    I'm a 'peacemonger' by heart but i'm enjoying the AI, making the game interesting. Suleiman was declared for a third time and so far not sent forces hopefully I dont see a huge number of units emerge on my eastern border, i think its time to take a city or two off him and teach him a lesson. ;)
     
  3. Merri

    Merri Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    231
    I just was disappointed by AI. I DOWed Alexander (as he was wondering if I'm about to attack), without noticing he had had a CS ally south of me. I pretty much had most of my units on offensive against him, so I had very minimal defense. The first turn of war, before my moves, he moved an Archer right onto my 6 Iron mine (and I only had 8 total). I was cursing that turn, because I only could bombard from my city and had nothing else available in three turns or so.

    Then he did the silliest thing possible. Instead of pillaging my mine the Archer simply walked away. The AI considered preserving the unit more important than removing the edge of my attack force.

    So, AI still fails with the big picture. An essentially free, outdated Archer from a CS should pillage an Iron mine if the opportunity rises. Even if it means an almost certain death of the unit the next turn.
     
  4. LAnkou

    LAnkou Breizh A Tao

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    1,315
    Location:
    Paris, première ville bretonne
    well, that's really, really situational...
    Besides, i don't know if in other cases where you have different iron sources, it is that good to pillage one mine.
    personnally, i never pillage mines from AI...
     
  5. Lokos451

    Lokos451 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2010
    Messages:
    77
    Cavalry denying the enemy resources, and to a lesser extent tiles themselves, is often what makes them so very good. Either that or placing them behind enemies before the infantry attack for the flanking bonus, or sniping ranged units. It's these uses where their advantages really show, and the changes to road infrastructure and general numbers of units.

    Of course, pillaging only means something if you're not rolling over the opponent in the first place, but that's fairly boring anyways. I personally think the AI has improved quite a bit...but it still needs some work. Just the fact that they'll look to attack you for simply being weak forces people to play more like they would against living opponents!

    I'm going to go ahead and give the recent patch a general endorsement for forcing quite a bit more of strategic thought into your military, and slight improvement in tactics as well. A step in the right direction for sure.
     
  6. ras9929

    ras9929 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    52
    I go back and forth with your statement here.
    I'm guessing you are assuming the AI could see your entire map-space, and thus know this was your only source of iron.

    One thing I would caution here is remembering this is a city state. Even if you can assume, like a player, it can see all your other city state relations and know they don't provide iron, and less likely that a non-exploring city state would have mapped out your entire territory (or essentially the whole world, since you could have a stray city / puppet out there).

    Another aspect to this might be how the AI values its force strength vs your force strength. If you had a large army, even in a foreign territory, its not unreasonable for a small AI / CS to fear losing a unit when your relative force strength is so much stronger.

    I'm assuming a CS counts no relative strength from its ally. That's probably appropriate because of some of the responses I've seen to "I've seemed to have attacked..."

    All in all, I'm hoping this is somehow because a CS AI isn't omniscient and I really don't think they should be.
     
  7. roguepro92

    roguepro92 Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    218
    haven't played in a week due to school but a friend who is avid player is reporting that allies CS are still horrible at war and doesn't help you much?
    did the change/new patch log show any change in CS?
     
  8. Lokos451

    Lokos451 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2010
    Messages:
    77
    From what I've seen so far, a CS will help you fight about as well as any AI does...but they will not go much further a few spaces from their borders to do so. Nor will they pillage enemy lands intelligently even given opportunity. They can hold a flank, depending on terrain and relative army strength of their opponent. They tend to build defensive structures and have a fairly credible city strength relative to era. If you want a city state to help in an offensive action, I think your best bet is to rely on free units from the militaristic ones.

    This is probably a good thing, otherwise you could see players buying several simultaneously right before declaring war, and then winning simply off the tide of units that would effectively generate. Proxy wars from halfway across the map by players going for diplo wins, or gold crazy high difficulty AI's would suck....well coordinated invasions as the meatshield moves in would operate as a win more mechanic.
     
  9. Merri

    Merri Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    231
    ras9929: sorry if I wasn't clear, but the unit was Alexander's Archer (gifted by the city state). I wouldn't expect a CS to hit my iron mines, but an Iron mine with 6 is quite automatical for AI that is in (or should be in) defensive mode. I guess the problem here was that I had a slightly weaker army than Alexander, thus Alexander didn't want to sign a peace treaty until he suggested it himself and my military advisor stated I was losing the war, when in fact I had just conquered three cities - very much winning in my eyes!

    This does relate to another AI "stupidity". I wouldn't have started a war against Alexander in the first place, but he placed a city about two tiles away from a spot where I had planned to have a city. That doesn't sound very bad in itself, but the next closest city of Alexander was over 15 tiles away with a mountain range partially in-between, with a lot of hill and forest tiles, which means there is no way he can pull off a good offensive let alone defend his newly found city. There was plenty of territory for safe cities.


    I'm partially playing my current game to see the limitations of current AI. At the moment I haven't been impressed. I have Washington who is still in the Warrior era, who've maybe had his next-to-his-capital Silk improved for 100 turns, game currently in turn 682 (year 1574). His capital is in a good spot yet it is only of size 5. This is the result of raging barbarians & lots of space for war camps, combined with "incompatible" AI personality :) Wu Zetian and Gandhi are also struggling.

    I guess current AI does much better in tight maps where space is an issue. Barbarians are currently an issue for AI players.

    Spoiler :
     

    Attached Files:

  10. CossackProblem

    CossackProblem Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    131
    I think the AI gets messed up on occasion. Last game Elizabeth went OCC for inexplicable reasons. However, London was huge and she was actually a very relevant power for most of the game. On the other hand, Washington look over the entire other continent by games end. This was not a total swoop, either, he slowly just gobbled up the powers along with Napoleon until they split the territory 50/50. Then the two butted heads and Washington came out on top.
     
  11. snarzberry

    snarzberry Emperor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2010
    Messages:
    1,240
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Also, I've found that late game the AI has still been woeful. Random artillery roaming around like headless chickens entering my lands one at a time and units diving into the water for a turn just for the hell of it when they should be attacking.

    On the plus side, I've been pillaged more often and in the early game (which I think it handles better) the AI is cleverer about retreating and focus attacking.
     
  12. grandad1982

    grandad1982 Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2007
    Messages:
    2,552
    Haven't played through beyond the early game yet but it seems that the more aggressive barbs and AI have forced me to maintian a large military at the expence of REXing. In fact both games I have started I got DoW very early. Hang on both times it was by Sulieman as well. The little @&%#! Any way first time I had REXed like pre patch and only had 4 warriors for 4 cities and 5th city on the way when I was DoW and then a CoD turned up on my door step. Last game he sent about 6 warriors and I saw them of with 4 warriors of losing 2 (one got caught away from home when the DoW occured). A nice touch is that his diplo status after peace say you have been at war but he holds no grudge.

    So as it stands build more units early and keep them handy.

    This is on Emporer.
     
  13. jagdtigerciv

    jagdtigerciv Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2007
    Messages:
    468
    This is a fantastic post. I've noticed very similar things and i'd recommend giving this a read if you're having trouble with higher difficulties and the new AI aggressiveness/strategies.
     
  14. Louis XXIV

    Louis XXIV Le Roi Soleil

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    13,579
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    Yeah, that's an odd one. At least upgrading in City-State territory would be nice. I had one game where having a foreign base was essential for my victory. It was diplo victory, so I didn't want foreign conquest, just liberation and having an army there was essential for this.
     
  15. Lyoncet

    Lyoncet Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,676
    Location:
    Minnesota
    I'm going to assume that this was changed to balance out city state beachheads, since it was so laughably easy to slap 500g onto a CS and have your safe haven on a distant continent.. At least this way, you have to make investments (even if it's just capturing a city and then razing it) to get that effect. I can see how that would make your scenario much more difficult, but I think that's OK really.
     
  16. nokmirt

    nokmirt Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2009
    Messages:
    5,088
    Location:
    Iowa USA
    Could someone tell me what tech blocking is? Thanks :)
     
  17. Eat_My_Brains

    Eat_My_Brains Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    38
  18. nokmirt

    nokmirt Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2009
    Messages:
    5,088
    Location:
    Iowa USA
  19. Deau

    Deau Emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,367
    Location:
    Quebec, Can
    With regards to how the AIs go with zerging your frontline units (as I explained in my previous post in this thread), pillaging a resource can do miracles. Here's the picture, if you manage to push their strategic resource count to -1, every unit using this particular resource will have the combat effectiveness penalty. As such, there are little to no chances they will send their swords/longswords all to one of your units because their expected dmg goes way low in the calculation. On top of that, their defending catapults will do half the dmg, much less threatening your frontline during siege. Then, instead of plowing through their longswords, just let them slowly retreat as you push to ensure they always retain that resource penalty. No casualties war at "even tech" simply by pillaging enough of a strategic resource to bring them to <=-1

    *edit* in fact, if you have extra strategic resources, it may be wise to sell them to the AI you intend to go after 5-10 turns before DoWing them. This way, they will build extra units to reach the cap and will turn into negative strategic resource, allowing you to do as mentionned above right off the bat, not even needing to move around to find the first resource to pillage. It is one of my favorite trades to do when I have horse sources on longswords rush

    *edit* thanks Jagdtigerciv for the comment, much appreciated :)
     
  20. roguepro92

    roguepro92 Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    218
    is it me or are all post patch wars have basically turned into a stalemates?
    i can't seem to get a decisive victory but i never really LOSE a war where i HAVE to make peace to continue.
     

Share This Page