What is it with the AI and AA guns?

[Smokeybear]

Just finished a culture win (king, large, epic) and was amazed at the sheer amount of AA guns and mobile SAM's that Washington spammed all over the place- he was a massive runaway early on, I never figured I'd win, but I kept on playing just to see what would happen. Was lucky to have a decent choke spot to hold him off at, and I placed a couple of GG fortresses to help a bit more. But I figured he'd eventually roll in the storm of massed B17's, battleships, tanks and infantry to blow me away...

But no. He decided he was going to off me with AA weapons. Even though I was entirely a defensive ground force, trenched in with little or no air support (none, until close to the end of the game), he kept pushing waves of AA crap at me. Was pathetically easy to hold them off and kill a lot of them.

After I eventually and miraculously built the utopia project (he had all but one or two of the rocket parts already built, he should have finished it long before that), I took a screenie of his AA Army, just for chuckles. See link:

Washington the AA lover

I have noticed the AI favoring AA stuff a lot, but this episode was completely ridiculous. He had no serious military opponents in the game, and definitely none with any airpower to be even mildly concerned with. He was several eras ahead of everyone else.

Oh, and for those who think not being the high score on the board means you don't have a chance to win- check out the board on that screenie. He had me by 3x my score, and I still waxed his silly bum. All things are relative, and the score in CiV is relatively pointless.

 

[GeoModder]

Perhaps he had a couple city states sending him the 'wrong' troops?
On top of the usual AI tendency to spam AA's of course.

 

[Shadow717]

Honestly I hate how much the AI spams AA... seeing them make full force assaults with SAM units as the backbone of the attack is just silly

 

[Browd]

The problem is that AA Guns and Mobile SAM have far too high combat strength (50 and 65 combat strength, respectively, which compare quite favorably to GW infantry (50) and Infantry (70)).

Given that AA guns and Mobile SAMs offer additional benefits (obvious anti-air defense, but also Mobile SAMs have 3 movement points, vs. 2 for Infantry), we should be spamming these units as much as the AI does.

Of course, the right outcome is to nerf AA Gun and Mobile SAM combat strength.

 

[budweiser]

The problem is that AA Guns and Mobile SAM have far too high combat strength (50 and 65 combat strength, respectively, which compare quite favorably to GW infantry (50) and Infantry (70)).

Given that AA guns and Mobile SAMs offer additional benefits (obvious anti-air defense, but also Mobile SAMs have 3 movement points, vs. 2 for Infantry), we should be spamming these units as much as the AI does.

Of course, the right outcome is to nerf AA Gun and Mobile SAM combat strength.

Yup. Its poor programming.

 

[RedFuneral]

I've seen this too. Often late-game AI attacks in my games are lead by AA guns. I figured it was a bug caused by one of the modpacks I use, but I guess not.

I'm seeing two very obvious solutions to this problem. Either make it so AA guns need to setup ahead of time to fire(like siege units) or make them so that they are really only effective against air units. Probably a combo of both, it wouldn't really make sense for the modern AA units to waste time setting up.

 

[Dogmouth]

The problem is that AA Guns and Mobile SAM have far too high combat strength (50 and 65 combat strength, respectively, which compare quite favorably to GW infantry (50) and Infantry (70)).

Given that AA guns and Mobile SAMs offer additional benefits (obvious anti-air defense, but also Mobile SAMs have 3 movement points, vs. 2 for Infantry), we should be spamming these units as much as the AI does.

Of course, the right outcome is to nerf AA Gun and Mobile SAM combat strength.

I'm not sure that this is a fair comparison. The anti-air gun and mobile SAM are the analogs of infantry and mech infantry, not gw infantry and infantry, right? Mobile SAMs get trashed by mech infantry, and they cost more. Also, why the heck doesn't the AI build more rocket artillery?

 

[tommynt]

its so hard to figure that ai is dumb?

Ai NEVER builds counter units or units for a specific task, its just not able to look onto battlefield and figure - I neet to do X to achive Y.

If ai were clever and played to win these forums d be flooded by complains that the game is too hard as most user are same "good" as ai and do rnd stuff.
So things even out.

 

[Browd]

I'm not sure that this is a fair comparison. The anti-air gun and mobile SAM are the analogs of infantry and mech infantry, not gw infantry and infantry, right? Mobile SAMs get trashed by mech infantry, and they cost more. Also, why the heck doesn't the AI build more rocket artillery?

Actually, AA Gun, GW Infantry and Infantry are all Modern Era units, and Mobile SAM is Atomic Era. Mech Infantry (90 combat strength) is Information Era.

 

[Smokeybear]

I've seen this too. Often late-game AI attacks in my games are lead by AA guns. I figured it was a bug caused by one of the modpacks I use, but I guess not.

I'm seeing two very obvious solutions to this problem. Either make it so AA guns need to setup ahead of time to fire(like siege units) or make them so that they are really only effective against air units. Probably a combo of both, it wouldn't really make sense for the modern AA units to waste time setting up.

Don't like the first idea (don't like the wasted turn penalty for artillery setup either, but that's another story), but the second idea is what needs to be done. AA units should never be the forward ground assault units of an army, and should always be used for their intended purpose, air defense. They should be able to defend themselves if attacked on the ground, as an automated response ability- but neither you nor the AI should be able to choose to offensively attack another ground unit with one. Particularly Mobile SAMs- you simply can't effectively use a dedicated anti-air missile to attack ground units with, period. And hull-mounted machineguns are purely minor defensive armament, and would be worse than useless if some idiot actually tried to use a thin-skinned, hulking, high-profile Mobile SAM vehicle to assault any kind of enemy ground units. They'd just be dead, and quickly. The implementation of AA units in this game is truly a major WTH head scratcher.

 

[Browd]

Don't like the first idea (don't like the wasted turn penalty for artillery setup either, but that's another story), but the second idea is what needs to be done. AA units should never be the forward ground assault units of an army, and should always be used for their intended purpose, air defense. They should be able to defend themselves if attacked on the ground, as an automated response ability- but neither you nor the AI should be able to choose to offensively attack another ground unit with one.

Agree - just as ranged units have melee defensive capability, but cannot affirmatively melee attack.

 

[Smokeybear]

Agree - just as ranged units have melee defensive capability, but cannot affirmatively melee attack.

I actually use the mod that makes that happen- AA units defense only- but sadly the AI doesn't understand that change very well... and that's quite possibly the reason I won that game. But I'll be damned if I'm going to lose to anyone who tries to roll me over with an endless freakin' wave of mobile SAM 'assault' vehicles.

 

[Seabastian Civ]

What map script is that? Looks great.

 

[joncnunn]

Also, why the heck doesn't the AI build more rocket artillery?

I'd never build rocket artillery. By the time you can build that, you've been able to build fighters & bombers for quite some time.
I may upgrade some regular artillery I already have, but even then because rocket artillery requires aluminum, it's going to be low on my upgrade list.
(I'd first upgrade tanks to modern armor and maybe Fighters to Jet Fighters.)

 

[BrokTheFanatic]

The end-game military AI has always been wonky, typically building hordes of 1 unit. I can recall in civ4 battling off 100+ bombers right after a war declaration. 100+ ground forces would have been superior.

And the end-game sea AI as well, huge 20 battleship forces + all otehr ships just roaming around doing nothing, heh.

I'd really love it if civ6 just took civ5+expansions and added really great AI. I'd pay 100$+ for a civ game with a good AI expert system. It is hard to do but it is doable. I can also dream... . Of course, what they have been trying to do instead of AI is multi-player, since that "solves" the AI problem. But it really doesn't because civ is a long game and speed play just doesn't do it justice.

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

AA guns/Mobile SAMs shouldn't be able to attack other land units, just blast aircraft out of the sky when necessary.

 

[Smokeybear]

What map script is that? Looks great.

Map script? What do you mean?

 

[Browd]

I think he's referring to the map in the screenshot you originally posted. Pangea-ish with an extended eastern leg.

 

[smallfish]

Seems like an ole fashioned fractalgaea

Nice mod btw, wished AIs would build that many in me games.

 

[smallfish]

digging out some ole books, your screenshot reminded me of this blurb

Here the Germans made a better start to their drive for conquest by breaking Leningrad's defenses in 1941. By 1945, only Germany and Japan succeeded in developing nuclear weapons, which they used to cement their victory. Heavy investments in U.S. antiaircraft defenses were negated by German ballistic missiles, whose first strike destroyed industrial centers and troop formations alike. American resistance was brave, but ultimately futile.

a bit too funny (eerily coincidental?) to pass up