What do you expect from the AI in Civ 4

[eaglefox]

Yes, this would be very interesting. I like the idea a lot. Although I think one would have to go further and have a mechanism for "conquered" civs to still be in existance, as long as it still has citizens of its type. For example, Zulu takes over Rome. Well, as long as there are still some Roman citizens in there, Rome is not dead as a civ (but not active either). If Zulu go about killing all of the remaining Roman citizens, Rome is completely eliminated, but other nations get ticked at Zulu for commiting such an act.

Also, I think the counterbalance for having large emipires in the period before (and still after) Nationalism should be civil wars. A simple mechanism where if many citizens are "unhappy" for extended periods of time, the cities who contain the said citizens would revolt, firing up a civil war.

Back on topic, as to the AI, I want it to be able to make general plans for what it wants its empire to do. I want it to (for the most part) remain faithful to allies who it has traded with for years, and hate those who've had disputes and wars over time. I want geniune allies to help you, gifting you with techs or gold and sending units to protect your territory. I want an AI who ponders whether war is worth it, and struggles to get out of it when losing, and presses the advantage when winning.

also the citizens of conquered cities should not change their allegiance as soon as they do in civ 3. so in your examply, kids born to romans should be loyal to rome and not to zulu. and the majority in a conquered city should remain the locals who originally lived in that city for a long period of time, so that we can have successful civil revolts after nationalism is discovered.

 

[Nobody]

I expect them to die and have a cheap funeral

 

[Phoenix_56721]

I believe that they looked at the AI from Civ.3 and thought that it needed to be improved, that being said I hope they really did something about it!

 

[eaglefox]

The developers have said that the focus in cIV is no longer on building a huge empire, but a smaller empire with specialized cities. In civ 3, although i used to focus on building large empires, i did have well develped and moderns cities all the time. in fact most of my cities used to be pretty good. so what I don't understand is that how is cIV going to stop you from doing the same thing as in Civ 3. why can't you build a huge empire and still have specialized cities? what are going to be the detrimental aspects of a huge empire? Moreover, if in case we do manage to build huge nations, how is the AI, which is programmed to not make huge nations, going to stand up against us?

 

[HourlyDaily]

The law of diminishing returns or the economics favourite maximum marginal contribution or maybe "break-even" points for a certain amount of cities without required improvements in them. Don't know exactly but someone will provide a better answer to that one soon.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Mostly, Eaglefox, it will probably be the sheer cost-as was alluded to by HourlyDaily. Basically, all cities are going to have an underlying 'unimproved' cost-with the base cost probably determined by distance/tech level (admittedly this last bit was just speculation on my part). So the issue for player and AI alike is going to be 'based on the surrounding terrain, what likelihood will there be for this city eventually turning a profit-and over what time frame?' If the answer is none at all, then it is unlikely that a city will turn up in such a place-unless the civ in question is flushed with cash-wheras areas with lucrative terrain/resources will probably be worth settling-even if the initial cost is incredibly high.
i.e. due to costs, city placement will probably be much, much more tactical, rather than just trying to fill every empty space-with as little overlap as possible. Hope that makes sense.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[eaglefox]

so once we do manage to make money, we can again settle a few cities and start building them?

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Thats my understanding of the system, Eaglefox. It will be more of a 'staggered expansion' rather than an Infinite city sleaze. Much better all-round IMHO.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Robi D]

Having played all the civs going back to civ 1, the ai has improved alot and i don't see civ4 being an exception. If you don't believe me go back and play civ1 (if it still possible on modern computers) or civ2 and you'll appriciate how good the ai is in civ3. I guess thats the penalty of success, lots of people play the game long enough to find the problems.

 

[The Dark Master]

Actualy having a huge empire can be a serious disavantage, wan't prof go read about the Russo-Japanese war. Having a small specilized empire can be a huge advantage. Because you will have troops close to the home front and more advanced cities to produce men and equipment witch are close to the front.

 

[Fredric Drum]

I want: RESPECT FOR MY FRIKKIN BORDERS!!

That's all. Or else Civ4 will be a very short-lived affair on my HD.

Kthxbye

 

[warpstorm]

Then you will be happy, Fredric. In one of the articles they said that the AI respects borders unless you grant them passage (or they are at war with you )

 

[Fredric Drum]

Really?? I mean, really really?? Because that's my number 1 gamebreaker from Civ3, maybe I can play Civ4 without going insane....

 

[joethreeblah]

Really?? I mean, really really?? Because that's my number 1 gamebreaker from Civ3, maybe I can play Civ4 without going insane....

Really really. This is a fact.

 

[eaglefox]

yes the ai is going to respect borders, which is a good step forward. it always sickened me to the bone when the ai would cross my borders without my permission and keep persisting till i was forced to declare war and ruin my reputation with everyone.

 

[eaglefox]

so the guys in firaxis say that they have made many changes to the AI. anyone wanna guess what they could be.

1) respecting borders,
2) not building large empires,
3) acting according to the learder traits,
4) using a more diverse array of units in wars,
5) supposedly better at diplomacy,

anything else you guys think/hope.

 

[Sirian]

so the guys in firaxis say that they have made many changes to the AI. anyone wanna guess what they could be.

1) respecting borders,
2) not building large empires,
3) acting according to the learder traits,
4) using a more diverse array of units in wars,
5) supposedly better at diplomacy,

anything else you guys think/hope.

You think not building large empires is an upgrade?

Ever play Civ2 with every AI on the map ganging up on you, and you still manage to lick them all? I wouldn't want to go back to that.

I hope they're better at managing their lands. How many times in Civ3 have we seen an AI city sitting on size 12, unable to grow, yet still running a tile configuration that gives them +6 food per turn, all of it wasted?

I would also like to see them able to target more than one city at a time. Oh gosh, I probably could go on and on about what I'd like to see. I'd better stop now.


- Sirian

 

[eaglefox]

Sirian:
I never used the word upgrade. I said changes. They could be bad or good. And yes, not building large empires is in a way an upgrade, since now you aren't gonna see the ai sending settlers all over the place and making a mess on the map. That was one of the turn-offs in civ3.

 

[apatheist]

2) not building large empires,
3) acting according to the learder traits,
4) using a more diverse array of units in wars,

Hopefully, that means it is superior (or at least equivalent) strategy to 1) have smaller, higher "quality" empire, 2) govern according to your strengths, and 3) use combined arms. The AI should play the game in the way that maximizes its chance of success. Changes to the AI that reduce its chances of success in the game, even if they satisfy the above criteria, are only superficial changes that will frustrate players more in the long run.

 

[Fredric Drum]

One more thing, the AI needs better tactics during combat, i.e. focusing fire! Don't send single units wandering around as barns with 'SHOOT ME' painted in big, white letters. I almost feel bad about fighting the AI, because it's so utterly stupid. True, once in a while they'd launch a big attack, but only on rare occasion, and only because it happened to have lots of units piled up and then declared war.

Of course, IF the AI gets more intelligent, they'd have to let go of some of their cheat bonuses

AI won't get human-like in CIV4, but a few things should be really easy to program, like if you have several units, move them as a gang, or if you have one unit versus a huge army, then wait for backup, don't just do a suicide run. Basic stuff like that.