1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

What are your new AI Civs' rankings?

Discussion in 'Community Patch Project' started by LukaSlovenia29, May 19, 2017 at 4:53 PM.

  1. LukaSlovenia29

    LukaSlovenia29 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2016
    Messages:
    350
    It's been a while since we talked about which civs are the best, worst and the most "meh" when used by the AI. Since then, we've had quite a few new version with lots of changes. So what are your current impressions on the AI Civs? And if possible, Gazebo, could you give us a glimpse into how the AI Civs fare in your simulations/tests? Thanks to all!
     
  2. PapaRockett

    PapaRockett Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2016
    Messages:
    201
    I don't know why but Hiawatha ALWAYS steamrolls in my games. His UA is similar to Askia and Dido but they're not at the top of the board as often as he is, I don't understand.

    Brazil too, he goes Tradition, has ~20 cities and yet he's still the cultural superpower. Do these culture/science penalties per number of cities not affect the AI?

    As for the worst, in my experience at least, Japan and Rome are just terrible. They always cripple themselves by building a **** ton of units and then run out of income.
     
  3. Gazebo

    Gazebo Lord of the Community Patch

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Messages:
    12,176
    Location:
    Aquidneck Island
    Mongolia is the best AI, hands-down. I love to watch them conquer all. The most common under-performers are CS-related civs (Germany, Siam), Venice, and Japan.

    G
     
  4. CrazyG

    CrazyG Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    947
    My experience, on higher difficulties.

    The Mongolian AI is by far the strongest. He consistently expands at a disgusting speeds and belongs in a tier by himself.

    There are a few other high performers, Ethiopia, Songhai, and Iroqious. I think its the early UB which puts these guys ahead. After that I'd say most civs are pretty close together, sometimes failing and sometimes thriving, but usually in the middle.

    At the bottom I usually see warmongers without early game war boosts. France, Spain, Rome, Sweden, and especially Japan. I cannot recall Japan every doing well at all. Or whoever was next to Mongolia.
     
  5. Enginseer

    Enginseer Trade Agreement

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,558
    Location:
    Nottingham, UK
    Mongolia is the best AI because he has the best flavors.

    His UA synergies with his flavor already because he likes to build a huge army. Huge army means huge intimidation for city-states to be forcefully annexed giving them easy UA bonuses. Meanwhile, he's a loyal warmonger with those who are indebted to him as his friends and cruel to his enemies with no mercy.
     
  6. HalfEmptyMug

    HalfEmptyMug Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2016
    Messages:
    8
    For reference, I generally play on the middle difficulties, and almost exclusively on large/huge Communitas maps as I find them very balanced and interesting.
    I've actually seen all of these civs do extremely well, but they are fairly hit or miss - particularly Japan like you mentioned. For some reason, in my experience, Japan barely settles at all in the early game and focuses on their capital. I imagine the lack of outside trade they receive during this period compounds some of the AI's money management problems early on as well.

    The only warmonger I've never seen do well is Assyria, they always fail to break out and get conquered by the Renaissance. This may have to do with them mismanaging their siege towers, as they can be monstrous if used properly and kept alive.

    Besides the CS-focused civs, The Byzantines and America tend to be the most common under-performers in my games. Washington remains tiny and irrelevant throughout even when starting next to other, more peaceful civs, and Theodora often focuses on faith far too late to utilize and evangelize it.

    England almost always under-performs too. She generally stays small, and because of this can't seem to field enough of her SotL to take advantage of them. In my current game where she shares an island with Nebuchadnezzar, she's barley able to defend herself during their prime. Even when I fight against her I don't find myself fearing her navy like I probably should.

    If Mongolia doesn't have too many city state neighbors, then I find The Zulus to be the most consistently successful warmonger. Also, surprisingly, The Inca tend to over-perform with their mountain fortresses, eventually breaking out and forming a large empire.
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2017 at 12:44 AM
  7. randomnub

    randomnub Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2017
    Messages:
    70
    Gender:
    Male
    Any plan about putting them in line? Not sure how much you can do for the AI to understand 'how to Venice' but could others flavours be altered a bit to give a more solid early game and no silly early rushes without uniques for Japan for example?


    Generally speaking early warmongers with early uniques hit more than they miss, and among them Mongolia has the best snowballing potential so they rank high to me. Persia and Iroquis are also always performing well no matter their neighbours.
     
  8. LucidAPs

    LucidAPs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2016
    Messages:
    19
    Gender:
    Male
    I like playing with Egypt , Babylon , Carthage and Morocco. I don't like to play with "barbarian" civs or natural war mongers.
    I wish Japan - Greece and Spain where more buffed so they'll be more worth playing with.
     
  9. saamohod

    saamohod Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2014
    Messages:
    277
    Location:
    Unoccupied Ukraine
    I second this. Japan in undeservedly weak.
     
  10. Der_Zorn_gottes

    Der_Zorn_gottes Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Messages:
    660
    In my experience, on higher difficulties conquering civs alway come out on top.
    Of those, the Mongols (despite that I still think their UA is atrocious) and the Aztecs have the most constant performances.
    I think the reason behind that is that on high difficulties, all civs will have a lot of units, so the bonus the conquerors get from killing those is just immense (especially culture. I play on Marathon, so you have to scale this number down, but it is not unusual to have the best conquering AI have over a million culture in the atomic age. Of course, a cultural victory is out of the question then.).
     
  11. LucidAPs

    LucidAPs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2016
    Messages:
    19
    Gender:
    Male
    I usually disable war hungry civs because i find them really annoying and they make the game one sided and monotonous, things are far more interesting with the "Aztec , Incan , Iroquois , Mayan , Shoshone and Zulu" banned! Barbarians begone!
     
  12. documental

    documental Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 3, 2017
    Messages:
    3
    Every time I try to play with Celts they dominate the scoreboard. Shoshone (most of the time) as well. Japan is always on the bottom.
     
  13. bigcat88

    bigcat88 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2016
    Messages:
    152
    Gender:
    Male
    AI almost always play better for authority policy branch ) Exception is Zulu, Mongolia.
    The worst branch for AI is statecraft.
     
  14. saamohod

    saamohod Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2014
    Messages:
    277
    Location:
    Unoccupied Ukraine
    My personal observation with the starting three policies is the following. The strongest is Tradition, the weakest is Progress. It's understandable that Tradition is strong early game and Progress is weak, but later in game the trend remains. Usually the high scoring AI's are the ones who picked Tradition. And the bottom ones or the dead ones are the ones who chose Progress. Again, it's my personal observation.
     
  15. Enrico Swagolo

    Enrico Swagolo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,310
    My experience is that early warmongerers who get little to help them get crushed. Rome, Japan and France always suck (with rare exceptions that do confirm the rule). The best runaways are typically the likes of Songhai, Arabia, Carthage, Mongols, Ethiopia and oftentimes Inca. Monty is close behind, but he will typically gain a huge advantage he somehow wastes. Hiawatha is close behind, but if he gets a bit too peaceful, he falls off not much later. Portugal does well enough but rarely runs away. Someone should tell her to go Industry. Isabella almost always does awfully. She is either too mellow or too aggressive, and I've only seen her found a religion ONCE, and I've seen her dozens of times. I don't know how she does that, Bismarck with God-King somehow founded before her Spain with God of Commerce once - how? Bismarck almost always founds somehow no matter the version. Does that mighty, manly moustache of his put Germans into a state of religious fervour or something?

    Policy things I've noticed: Tradition/Progress/Authority have little impact on whether someone runs away, but Authority contains by far the most of the absolute failures while Tradition is stable (unless aggressive civs go there to declare wars) and Progress is in between. Statecraft goers typically fall behind sooner or later, most likely sooner. I never go that tree myself, even if I play Portugal I typically am so wide its benefits wouldn't ever be worth losing Piety's bonuses as they seem more focused on a small civ. Runaways/guys who go Aesthetics don't lose their positions, especially if them going there makes sense. If they take Piety, they lose steam a bit intially before slowly regaining it later. Industry/Imperialism/Rationalism I have too little experience on current version, but before Imperialism and Rationalism's heavy buffs in the last patch, Imperialists were very rare and whenever they appeared, they always sucked. Someone who by a weird twist of fate went Statecraft>Imperialism would typically end irrelevant sooner or later no matter the civ. Rationalists did very well and will likely only do better now that the tree became even better for some reason. Industrialists kept on doing however they were doing, sometimes improving with time.
     
  16. Deadstarre

    Deadstarre Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2015
    Messages:
    311
    yeah thats not coincidence or just for the AI, the branch is just simply horrible compared to the other options (particularly aesthetics).

    but hey, it's taken this long for someone to notice how Industry was a clear winner next to rationalism and exploration and thats why rationalism just got an enormous buff. i'm thinking... perhaps by christmas of next year you can expect to see something done about statecraft as well? *fingers crossed* :lol:


    AI winners

    Hiawatha, Ethiopia, China


    AI losers

    Those already mentioned as obvious plus William
     
  17. tu_79

    tu_79 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2016
    Messages:
    2,342
    Location:
    Malaga (Spain)
    It seems that there needs to be a 'late warmonger' flavour, if it isn't already.
    About Statecraft, most of it depends on maintaining CS alliances, what gets difficult as the game progress. AI is quite jealous about nearby states. The spy thing is good IF you are backwards, which usually isn't a great idea.
    Having CS friends is good for everyone, not only Statecraft civs, but maybe the advantages we get by policies can't overcome the competition for CS alliances. Is it happening since the addition of the new diplomatic buildings? That would explain the increased competition for CS.
     
  18. CrazyG

    CrazyG Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    947
    I'm glad I'm not the only person noticing statecraft underperforming. I find its not a great choice as a human either
     
  19. PapaRockett

    PapaRockett Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2016
    Messages:
    201
    Statecraft always feels boring to play for me. It's annoying keeping track of CS alliances and such. The only time I'd pick it is if I'm playing as England because of the level 2 spies. It CAN be okay if you're playing against Greece too.
     
  20. randomnub

    randomnub Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2017
    Messages:
    70
    Gender:
    Male
    I might be taking 2 (or 3 if some cs ally) ranks in it if I'm terribly behind in science, but it's not that hot of a tree in generic circumstances where the other two provide way better yelds.
     

Share This Page