Two small tips

[atreas]

Again, I don't know if there are already posted. If they are my apologies.

1. The well known worker exploit during battles (this idea worked in many previous versions as well): Grab a worker (usually very easy) and leave it unprotected into the area of the opponent. The idea is that AI is so stupid that will do whatever possible to get it, usually uncovering his well fortified forces just to get exactly into the fire of your archers/catapults/cannons. In my last game I had a terribly timed attack against China at the time they had those amazing Chu-Ko-Nu. Still, they wasted ALL of them just to get a useless worker (which they didn't eventually).

2. The Metallurgy skip: for some reason, I believe due to oversight, Replaceable Parts (i.e. Infantry) doesn't depend on Rifling. In other words, if you skip Metallurgy you can arrive to Infantry without getting Riflemen first. This can be very useful to catch the opponent with outdated military for a short period in an almost equal science race - but you have to be very fast since you can't upgrade units.

 

[teddybroosevelt]

2. The Metallurgy skip: for some reason, I believe due to oversight, Replaceable Parts (i.e. Infantry) doesn't depend on Rifling. In other words, if you skip Metallurgy you can arrive to Infantry without getting Riflemen first. This can be very useful to catch the opponent with outdated military for a short period in an almost equal science race - but you have to be very fast since you can't upgrade units.

I remember you could do this in Vanilla, but is this still the case in G&K?

 

[Unresolved]

I don't think so. Isn't rifling required now?

 

[atreas]

I am playing vanilla. But I checked on the tech tree posted here in civfanatics and there is no change on that mentioned.

 

[Arachnofiend]

In Gods and Kings Replaceable Parts (the tech for Great War Infantry) requires Steam Power which requires Rifling. So no, you can't get modern infantry without rifling.

You can, however, get Civil Service without Bronze Working. So Pikes before Spears, a situation that will happen often because unless you have jungle luxuries Bronze Working is kind of a crappy tech.

 

[atreas]

This is a nice idea (it didn't occur me because I was playing Greece and Hoplites are almost as good as Pikemen, but much earlier).
But, on an aside note, I have also read elsewhere how almost useless is Iron in God and Kings land games, probably due to CB (otherwise you wouldn't think of skipping Bronze anyway). Which, of course, means that they fixed a bug in the wrong way - probably the Walls should have been given an extra bonus against archery units, as it was the case in reality.

 

[dpunk]

I don't understand the worker thing, in my games the AI usually just ignores workers and I often just keep them working unguarded while a whole army will walk right by them.

 

[atreas]

I don't understand the worker thing, in my games the AI usually just ignores workers and I often just keep them working unguarded while a whole army will walk right by them.

Maybe because he is attacking you, and not the opposite. The point is to steal his worker and have him to try reclaiming it.

Although I don't know if it has also something to do with the traits of the specific leader.

 

[tyro3]

Yes, if you swipe one of his workers and leave it within range of your units he will sacrifice units to try and retake that worker, another example of the brilliant AI.

 

[Kazdum]

Not to be rude, but whats the point of "exploiting" the AI just to win? If you are not ready to move up a difficulty just stay on prince or whatever...

 

[Vintage Port]

Not to be rude, but whats the point of "exploiting" the AI just to win? If you are not ready to move up a difficulty just stay on prince or whatever...

I'm failing to see what the exploit is here that you are talking about? Many times the AI will bait you into their lands only to unleash a carpet of doom on you, very similar to baiting the AI to come into your territory and try to get or reclaim a worker.

Everyone who is successful at war in Civ uses pathing/choke points/rivers/terrain to their advantage and IMO this is no different. When the AI has ridiculous production and happiness benefits you can't expect to win battles going unit for unit. This is the case in most games where humans find ways to make things work. The AI sucks at war, not much we can do about it and I don't think it is an exploit. Maybe I'm missing something here.

 

[Kazdum]

I'm failing to see what the exploit is here that you are talking about? Many times the AI will bait you into their lands only to unleash a carpet of doom on you, very similar to baiting the AI to come into your territory and try to get or reclaim a worker.

Everyone who is successful at war in Civ uses pathing/choke points/rivers/terrain to their advantage and IMO this is no different. When the AI has ridiculous production and happiness benefits you can't expect to win battles going unit for unit. This is the case in most games where humans find ways to make things work. The AI sucks at war, not much we can do about it and I don't think it is an exploit. Maybe I'm missing something here.

The reason why computers get those extreme advantages is because their AI is under developed, compared to a human brain they cannot stand a chance. Thats why as the difficulty goes up, their advantages gets extreme. Once you are "exploiting" the AI intentionally like "steal a worker just to run with it around so their units chase them like ducks" it just does not seems to be right to me.

Its fine if you want to steal their workers and declare war, but using that to your advantage towards their military it just feels like and exploit to me, just like the "trade lux for gold and then declare war" because the gold will stay and the supply of luxury will fade is an "exploit".

Thats just in my point of view anyway, if I cant beat deity without using those "exploits" I am just not ready to face deity yet, because I know there are great players out there who beat deity without using cheap tricks like those, but people have a hard time accepting that they are just not good enough at the game, then comes the cheap tricks.

 

[Vintage Port]

I agree with you on the trading lux for gold and then DoW'ing. I tried it once about a month ago to see what it was all about and how it worked over the course of a game, especially with diplomatic relations with other Civs due to all teh DoWs.

Over the course of the game I found it not that pleasant and a bit cheap. The extra gold at the beginning no doubt helped kick off my expansion/cities but over the course of the game I could not sell excess Lux or make trades as I would have liked as a large group denounced me or believed I was a warmonger. RAs were basically non-existent.

It definitely felt cheap and I don't do it now, just doesn't fit my play style. But I'm going to continue to steal workers when possible because I use them to improve my cities as well as to hinder the AI. Again I can't help with the "dumb" AI and what they do when they start sending units at me. I want the worker and they want it back. I don't run it around the map as they chase me but I am going to kill their units if they come at me.

Anyways I know what you are getting at but I don't see it as an exploit really. If you want to discuss worker stealing... Stealing a CS worker and instantly being able to make peace without the CS being able to fight back. And yes I do steal CS workers

 

[Kazdum]

I agree with you on the trading lux for gold and then DoW'ing. I tried it once about a month ago to see what it was all about and how it worked over the course of a game, especially with diplomatic relations with other Civs due to all teh DoWs.

Over the course of the game I found it not that pleasant and a bit cheap. The extra gold at the beginning no doubt helped kick off my expansion/cities but over the course of the game I could not sell excess Lux or make trades as I would have liked as a large group denounced me or believed I was a warmonger. RAs were basically non-existent.

It definitely felt cheap and I don't do it now, just doesn't fit my play style. But I'm going to continue to steal workers when possible because I use them to improve my cities as well as to hinder the AI. Again I can't help with the "dumb" AI and what they do when they start sending units at me. I want the worker and they want it back. I don't run it around the map as they chase me but I am going to kill their units if they come at me.

Anyways I know what you are getting at but I don't see it as an exploit really. If you want to discuss worker stealing... Stealing a CS worker and instantly being able to make peace without the CS being able to fight back. And yes I do steal CS workers

I do steal workers from CS and from Civs as well, I just don't steal their workers to keep them in the front line so their troops chase it like there is no tomorrow, I put them back into my borders to improve tiles.

But as the OP said, the trick is to steal a worker with the purpose to keep it in front like so they try to recapture it.

 

[Novalia]

Here's an exploit sort of... If you're in a war and you aren't winning but the AI wants all your gold + all your gpt just switch your workers around so they're all working no gold tiles.. Take the peace deal.. Reset your workers back =)

 

[atreas]

I had forgotten how easily we forgive the fact AI in this game is completely naive. According to this logic, AI in chess would be sufficient to be good enough so as not to lose easily with an extra Queen from the start - not exactly how reality is.

But this hasn't anything to do with the absolutely normal stealing of workers/settlers to hinder the opponent and use the unit yourself. It is just the opposite: you take the worker and immediately you leave it "on prise". You don't need it at all, and it would be more than sufficient if the AI had a simple rule saying "don't expose weak units". For example, "don't leave the defending archer of a city" when under attack.

That was about the programming side - the gaming side is just a simple fact: you can do that and profit from the stupid AI. It is an exploit, since you would never succeed on that against a human player (a kind of "Turing test" for AI), but the point is just to give a hint about a fact of the game. And, of course, the game creators wanted to make a game that can be won, otherwise they wouldn't sell...

 

[Arachnofiend]

Chess is a lot less complicated than Civ because chess is inherently solvable. You play on a simple board with simple rules with zero luck element. An AI built for Chess has to consider much fewer scenarios and future scenarios than one built for Civ (or any other tactical video game).