Wanting to get units to preset places would explain an odd behavior I've seen in wars between AIs. The AI descends on a city with a huge army but instead of attacking its units just seem to mill about for several turns. The AI needs to be told, if you have an overwhelming force, just use it.
War AI Needs Help
- Thread starter budweiser
- Start date
Wanting to get units to preset places would explain an odd behavior I've seen in wars between AIs. The AI descends on a city with a huge army but instead of attacking its units just seem to mill about for several turns. The AI needs to be told, if you have an overwhelming force, just use it.
I had some success in a recent game using workers as bait to draw out defenders. Seemed a little expoity so I haven't repeated it.
Attacking with insufficent forces is a common characteristic of AIs in strategy games. It's a different context but recently I had backward Arabia dow me. A few turns later a longswordsman enters my territory. My cities kill it. A few turns after that he gets really serious and invades with a longy, a catapult, two archers and a gg. My riflemen don't have a problem beating them off.
Speaking of ggs the AI has gotten better at handling and combating them. I've had mine picked off in surprise keshik attacks so I've had to guard them better. I still find AI ggs hanging around unguarded at times though. Also I've noticed they tend to accumulate them. I've invaded AIs to find they have 3 ggs near their capital!
They don't beeline for workers anymore. They will take them if there's an opportunity. But they appear to have target prioritizing, which is nice.
Just experienced this again in one of my games. Was exacuating workers from a city under sierge, Alex continued attacking the city and ignored it even though my worker was well within the range of his horse unit. Moving it to take the worker would cost him 1 turn to reposition his unit and he'd rather attack and take the city, which he did.
Just experienced this again in one of my games. Was exacuating workers from a city under sierge, Alex continued attacking the city and ignored it even though my worker was well within the range of his horse unit. Moving it to take the worker would cost him 1 turn to reposition his unit and he'd rather attack and take the city, which he did.
I tend to disagree with the the Chess argument on the basis that a human can be creative. Even the most sophisticated chess programs simply asign numbers against known variables, it can't use that system to it's own advantage. You should always be able to reach a stalemate against a computer and avoid defeat.
But that's my real point here, the machine will never be able to think creatively. So it's strategies will ultimately, when you get down to the nuts and bolts, follow a formula which when cracked, you can sail through time and again.
Until you're actually playing against something that truely cares if it wins and more importantly wants you to lose, the human player should always be able to win.
Although I will be very happy to play against the game that can really think about what it's doing.
I agree and many people are talking about minimax AI being only for two players and not being a viable choice to solve CiV's AI war problems. This is not the case, but even still it will be based on algorithms. The AI will not learn and I do not want that anyway. I just want it to make better decisions and that much is a possibility. The AI right now is a village idiot let's at least make it into an intelligent chimp! Now that should not be too much to ask, now is it? Besides they have to start somewhere and take baby steps forward to improve the AI.
Similar threads
