Tone down AI Settler spam

[Forkandles]

The biggest source of frustration and annoyance for me with this game is the AI settler spam. Is it really necessary to code them to cover every single tile of the world with a city? I hate having to monitor every single possible city location around, and even worse within, my borders that would compete for my cities 2nd and 3rd rings. Im fine with reasonably settled stuff, thats part of the game, but when they settle miles away from their core for some tundra and a fish it seems a little OTT.

Judging by how sluggish the AI mid and late game science is, it must hinder more than help the AI to compete so perhaps it would provide a much needed boost to their competitiveness if they didnt plop settlers everywhere.

Another downside to it is that it usually makes opening borders a bad move as the AI will settle on the land you have usually reserved to grow onto culturally. Given that we are now almost forced into playing 4 cities and letting them grow as much as possible, theres a lot of tiles you need to reserve to grow onto. Open borders could be an interesting mechanic but in almost all my games its never something I can agree to. Ill pay them to open their borders to get my scouts and triremes thru and thats it.

Also given how objectionable they find it when you settle anywhere near their capital, perhaps it would make sense if they understand the same mechanic in reverse. It could be so that aggressive AIs or AIs that you have bad relations with will settle wherever they please whereas your 'friends' would be a little more respectful.

 

[McSaucy4418]

In the fall patch they have toned it down quite a bit. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the threshold for desirability (aka fertility) has been quadrupled which should stop the one hex island and tundra spam.

 

[Forkandles]

Fantastic! Hope its true and comes to pass.

 

[McSaucy4418]

Try it out for yourself http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=510757

 

[fyar]

I too hope that the patch fixes those things. However, it sounds like you have two issues with the AI settler spam: 1) building crap cities in crap locations in the middle of the ocean or on the north pole, and 2) building cities right up in your face. The patch should address #1, but I suspect that it might actually exacerbate #2. Whereas before they would just spam cities in seemingly every random location, now that they're going to be choosier about it, they're probably more likely to choose the locations that we humans also wanted.

Does the patch affect the AI's decision whether or not to build a settler in the first place? I hope it does, and they actually will build fewer cities. Otherwise, they would probably build just as many cities, but then be more likely to take the sites that I would otherwise settle.

 

[Forkandles]

I dont have a problem with them building cities right up next to me. If theres land there and resources there, why not? Its something you just have to deal with. Its the really crap cities that you just would not settle and can only be a drain on the economy as a whole that get my goat. Grabbing the best land especially early doors is a big part of the game.

 

[Slip de Garcon]

From my limited time playing Civ5 I find the AI less bad for this than in Civ 3 and 4. What I do find odd is they keep churning out cities in - as someone remarked - really random locations quite late in the game.

 

[fyar]

I dont have a problem with them building cities right up next to me. If theres land there and resources there, why not? Its something you just have to deal with. Its the really crap cities that you just would not settle and can only be a drain on the economy as a whole that get my goat. Grabbing the best land especially early doors is a big part of the game.

I mostly agree... the exception is when they build right next to me, and their capital is half a continent away. Then my objection is that it's immersion-breaking, and it was also stupid for them because it's much harder to defend.

 

[MisterBoomBoom]

i mostly agree... The exception is when they build right next to me, and their capital is half a continent away. Then my objection is that it's immersion-breaking, and it was also stupid for them because it's much harder to defend.

^this!

 

[Aldor]

Funny thing is that the settling rate was increased a good while ago in response to complaints that "the world feels so empty because the AI only settles a few cities"

I really hope they get it right this time.

 

[fyar]

Funny thing is that the settling rate was increased a good while ago in response to complaints that "the world feels so empty because the AI only settles a few cities"

I really hope they get it right this time.

Hah, I only started playing Civ V in January so I must've missed that complaint.

 

[bcaiko]

Hah, I only started playing Civ V in January so I must've missed that complaint.

Yeah, that was a weird time; Modern Age, yet half the globe left unsettled.

 

[Iry]

Settling on my front lines? Perfectly fine.

Settling behind my front lines? Where they can't defend? Where they can't expand more than one tile? Just to claim one luxury? GTFO!

I get tired of eating warmonger penalties uprooting those little cities like the weeds they are.

 

[darden]

Settling on my front lines? Perfectly fine.

Settling behind my front lines? Where they can't defend? Where they can't expand more than one tile? Just to claim one luxury? GTFO!

I get tired of eating warmonger penalties uprooting those little cities like the weeds they are.

things like that make me miss city flipping.

you'd think that if Atilla dropped a 4-tile city in the heart of my flourishing empire, on the other side of the world from his capital city, it wouldn't take long before the city revolted to join me.

 

[Loucypher]

I think they got it pretty spot on so far. I've seen far less travelling to get new cities done in the early game, only come late rennaisance (once ocean travel opens up) do you see the AI really go out of their way for certain cities, but the heightened fertility treshold helps a lot.

 

[fyar]

I think they got it pretty spot on so far. I've seen far less travelling to get new cities done in the early game, only come late rennaisance (once ocean travel opens up) do you see the AI really go out of their way for certain cities, but the heightened fertility treshold helps a lot.

Good to hear!

 

[GamerFlair]

The late game thing is probably down to maps though. Its basically an attempt to mimic the expansion into the new world. The problem is, Pan has no new world and even Continents only sometimes has an island that might be big enough to settle 2-3 cities on (total not per civ).

 

[phillipwyllie]

There is also another side effect to AI settler spam and that's when it takes rival's cities. If too unhappy it then razes the newly conquered city even if it is worth more(has wonders for instance) than it's 1 hex tundra city that has never grown.

Although in defense of the AI I've seen the majority of these "silly" cities having some kind of resource(strategic, antiquity site or luxury). Also sometimes these locations are just in bomber range of it's intended target.

 

[Johnnymac1418]

I have not seem AI spam cities. If anything they settle too few cities

 

[Pysces]

... but I suspect that it might actually exacerbate #2. Whereas before they would just spam cities in seemingly every random location, now that they're going to be choosier about it, they're probably more likely to choose the locations that we humans also wanted.

This actually might be the case (possibly a deity only problem though) and I was going to make a post about it myself.

I've run through 6-7 openings, and each game, I've been significantly more crowded in then I have been in the past. It could be random, but the choice spots near my capital are being gobbled up exceptionally fast to the point of being lucky if I get 2 extra spots. Prior to beta patch, I could normally guarantee at least 2 extra cities with little to no contested borders and a good chance for a third city. After the patch, I've been lucky to get 2 and contested borders are a problem.

Could be coincidence...