1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

What do you think about AI combat bonuses?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by stealth_nsk, Sep 8, 2016.

?

What do you think about combat modifiers for difficulty levels?

Poll closed Oct 8, 2016.
  1. I like it. Combat should be challenging.

    32 vote(s)
    22.4%
  2. I'm ok with it.

    33 vote(s)
    23.1%
  3. I'm ok with them for highest/lowest difficulties, but most levels shouldn't have such modifiers.

    41 vote(s)
    28.7%
  4. I dislike it. Combat should be fair.

    37 vote(s)
    25.9%
  1. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    We've seen it for a second time, so now we can be nearly sure - AI gets bonuses to combat strength on higher difficulty levels and penalties on lowest ones. Of course, there's some role of new combat mechanics, which allows easier operating precise numbers and easier handling different modifiers.

    So, what do you think about the feature?

    EDIT:

    Just watched the last live stream. Ed seems to be playing King difficulty level (there's a number 5 in the pause screen). AI (except city-states) have +2 bonus in both regular and religious combat. Just to compare - penalty for wounds id -1 for each 10 HP (out of 100 HP); bonus for fortification is +6; bonus for perfect terrain is also +6; base difference between Missionary and Apostle is 10.

    The +2 is noticeable, but not that big, however that's King only. If there are +2 for each difficulty levels, Deity has +8 combat modifier for AI, which is significant.

    EDIT2:

    It looks like there are only 6 difficulty levels at the moment (based on the bars on the difficulty level icons). So, is fifth has +2 bonuses, the last, sixth is likely to have +4 or +5.

    Spoiler :
     
  2. rastak

    rastak Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2005
    Messages:
    1,567
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Works for me.
     
  3. Furycrab

    Furycrab King

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    914
    I'm kinda on the fence.

    I voted that I dislike it, but honestly I'm not sure.

    On the one hand I want higher difficulty AI to be harder... But I'm also sick of that being mostly in the form of yield modifiers. Like you could have a sick beeline build order to go for religion or a wonder... but in CiV, it just wouldn't work.

    If they want to put combat modifiers and that somehow lets them go easy on the growth/production bonus to where I can actually get a Classical or Medieval Wonder every now and then... I'm ok with it.
     
  4. isau

    isau Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    3,068
    I see the AI as an obstacle rather than a human player so I am fine with whatever bonuses they get, as long as those bonuses still leave the player options on ways to injure them. Was not a fan of how in Civ V they made this cool religion system and then made the AI so much better at grabbing it you rarely saw it. Same with how Happiness worked, where doing things to limit the AIs Happiness had no real detrimental impact on them.
     
  5. Ryika

    Ryika Lazy Wannabe Artista

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Messages:
    9,395
    I dislike the sound of it, but I'm sure they put some thought into it.

    Maybe it's an alternative to them having tons of extra units. Then it's fine with me.
    Or maybe it's to combat OP promotions. Then I really dislike it.

    Or maybe they've managed to make the Combat AI so bad that they looked at it and were like: "Nope, unit quantity alone won't do this time."

    Either way, I voted for "I dislike it. Combat should be fair.", but I realize that's more of an idealistic stance than something that could really happen.
     
  6. spfun

    spfun King

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2010
    Messages:
    655
    The combat AI so far has been at least as bad as Civ 5, if not worse. I think combat bonuses are necessary as an attempt to make the game even remotely difficult on deity and yet i still don't like it.

    I think everyone here would prefer better combat AI than a load of bonuses... I really hate taking candy from a baby.
     
  7. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    1. With real tactical combat it's impossible to have AI on the level og human for a game like civ. This was discussed several times - for the same reasons why AI for Go was much more difficult in making than AI for Chess.

    2. Calculating tactical AI involves heavy cycles. The more things you take into account, the bigger turn times are.

    3. Even with the best tactical AI, say Vox Populi, there's an imbalance. With Civ5 bonuses, high level AI could have a lot of advantages in peace, beating human player in Wonders, Religions and so on till the second half of the game. But once it comes to combat, human player beats AI badly. I believe that was the most important reason for AI tactical bonuses - to make AI equally challenging at war and peace on all difficulty levels.
     
  8. Miravlix

    Miravlix King

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    645
    The AI combat bonus just creates more questions, with no official answer.

    It's fair to say that the Civ V AI was borderline broken in combat, so it's positive that they seem to be considering how to improve this element in VI.

    Sure it would better than chocolate if a computer player could get much closer to playing like a human opponent, but people has been whining and begging for that for a long long time, that I'm fairly sure that Firaxis would love to give us that, if it was possible.
     
  9. spfun

    spfun King

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2010
    Messages:
    655
    1) I don't want human level AI - That would be stupidly unrealistic. But how about AI that isn't completely brain dead? :rolleyes:

    2) With 2k marketing things like 64bit and multi-threaded AI, why do we have AI as bad as Civ 5 still? Just more marketing rubbish talk then...

    3) I don't expect AI to not need any bonuses, the more the AI is improved the less bonuses they need to provide a challenge. Ideally we could have deity AI that doesn't need over the top bonuses but instead slight bonuses that wouldn't allow it to have guaranteed all early/mid wonders and religion etc...
     
  10. VicRatlhead5199

    VicRatlhead5199 King

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    966
    Location:
    Michigan
    Personally Id rather they just had tons of units. Was never a big fan of them having innately better units. Was it III where they did that? Honestly couldn't stand it.

    The only thing Id really support is giving AI units the cover promotions for free in immortal and deity. Mostly to help stall out focus fire tactics and force the player to use melee units for real dmg.
     
  11. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    1. It's completely brain-dead by definition, it's AI. The problems with Civ5 AI is what it's mistakes are immersion-breaking, but that's area of psychology, it doesn't affect the level of challenge.

    2. 64-bit have nothing to do with AI. Multi-threading could increase the performance up to about 20%, probably less.

    3. Well, wait 20-30 years for hardware (and software) to catch up with those requirements. Probably in Civ12 it will work like this.
     
  12. Magil

    Magil Monarch

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,618
    I think it's crude, but I will withhold my opinion until I play with it. If it works I won't have many complaints.
     
  13. Matthew.

    Matthew. Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,179
    It worked rather well when I modded something similar in Civ 5. It is FAR better than just giving the AI a ton of production and have them spam a billion military units.
     
  14. kaspergm

    kaspergm Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    4,966
    I dislike this. I agree with spfun, I have a bad feeling that this is an attempt to compensate for the AI's incapability.

    Actually, I would actually rather have extra units like in Civ5. The beauty of the 1UPT system is that it allows the human player to compensate for smaller numbers by strategic placement, which the human inevitably does better than the AI. You can't really do the same with a flat combat bonus.
     
  15. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,886
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    Wait and see when the game comes out.

    AI definitely should get some bonuses at the top two difficulty levels, anyway.

    As far as the choice between extra units for the AI and combat bonuses, no carpet of doom please!
     
  16. Plus Ultra

    Plus Ultra Conquistador

    Joined:
    May 27, 2016
    Messages:
    702
    Location:
    Spain
    AI combat bonuses are a necessary evil.
     
  17. Windsor

    Windsor Flawless

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Messages:
    1,385
    Location:
    Norway
    I like it and even suggested it myself 6 years ago. By giving the AI help where it needs it the most you get away with smaller bonuses than if you try to fix the problem by helping it elsewhere. This makes it possible to make it feel less unfair in the economic/empire management part of the game.

    Better combat AI would of course be preferable over bonuses, but that's really not an option.
     
  18. cazaderonus

    cazaderonus Actual Dad.

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2014
    Messages:
    640
    No no no and no. Difficulty level already rely on insane bonuses for the AIs. Still so far they remain rather "invisible" as it s not obvious on the map. If now we get deity ai with a constant +5 strenght or worsee for equivalent units, it s just gonna be ridiculous.

    At some point, you got to work on ai combat properly. It s already embarrassing that some modders managed to do with civ v ai what devs failed to achieve.

    For me it s a big no no. A sorry excuse for lazyness
     
  19. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    Yes, modders made AI look better. But they didn't make it significantly more tactically challenging. These are totally different things. Good players still beat Deity militarily without significant problems.
     
  20. Nick31

    Nick31 Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2014
    Messages:
    421
    Personally, I find Diety unit spam completely game-breaking. You know you're only winning, if you do, because of sheer AI incompetence. It hammers you in the face.

    By the way, in BNW, you're essentially giving AI modifiers anyway, as all the units are heavily promoted. The AI spams barracks' and other combat modifiers.

    I'd much prefer a flat bonus that can be anticipated and dealt with. But, it simply has to work. If they can make the experience fun, I'm all for it.
     

Share This Page