Who else is sick of people complaining about the AI?

[Warlord Sam]

I sure am.

 

[eyrei]

You have my vote. I am generally impressed with it. It is obviously not as smart as I am, but what can you expect?

 

[MikeV]

First, I think Soren is a great sport for monitoring these message boards and posting so many helpful items.

As a software geek myself, I understand how difficult it is to get all the features you want into a software product with a hard delivery schedule and tight resource constraints.

I also realize that many of the people using the product do not have this kind of experience, but are doing their best to point out the deficiencies they observe. I tend to read most of those kinds of posts as people trying to help. (Of course, some folks are chronic whiners -- about anything -- but we'll just overlook them ).

In general, I think more feedback is better than less. Notice how many things raised in these forums have been fixed in the latest patch. Obviously, there are limits to what can be fixed (especially in a patch, and especially given they're probably working full-time on multi-player).

So, I say let the folks continue to "complain," and keep it all in perspective. AI programming is hard, but it gets better every year. My hat's off to those who keep plugging away at it, especially with so much public scrutiny of their work.

 

[gpsmith]

I hear what you are saying.

I am getting bored by people labouring the point over known issutes. I know this is a forum, and the idea is to contribute your views.

But, I get tired of "The AI sucks" thread #105 I reckon some ppl just contribute to be heard to be saying something.

But, my view is... "If I don't like the contents of a thread, then I don't have to read it and then ***** about it"

 

[VoodooAce]

Hhhhhmmm....does the AI suck?

Relative to Civ2, no.

Relative to a human player, heck yeah, it sucks.

Let's face it, all AI sucks. All. Once you've played against human opponents, youi can never go back.

Give me MP!!!! And I'll stop complaining as that is the only complaint I have remaining. Most others have been fixed w/patches.

Better late than never.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

Having played humans via the internet at civ2 and numerous other games sometimes you have to say that A.I is often better...and with civ3 it has been given certain advantages so there will be alot of people the A.I will beat in difficulty and indeed making the best decisions.

Human intelligence is often not what it is cracked up to be.

 

[Exile_Ian]

I tend to think that the AI is far superior to the human player in certain areas:

The AI doesn't forget to review trade agreements when circumstances require it (e.g. 'gift' you made of Gems for a Civ advance that has done its 20 turns but you forgot to renegotiate) - I lose more stuff this way than anything!

The AI continuously monitors every city and unit and attempts to make best use of them. (I constantly have cities churning out food units but they're stuck on pop level of 6 because I didn't get around to building an aquaduct yet).

The AI makes it decisions based on facts and changing situations - whereas I often make subjective decisions based on previous prejudices (such as hating the French but somehow believing that the Indians are a peace-loving race).

The AI manages its 'strategy' by using short-terms plans and objectives - and sticking to them. It can be very single-minded when it comes to capturing one of your cities and tends to commit 100% to that single aim. I often forget what my objective was and get diverted easily.

We could all probably become much better players if we applied just some of those points to our own strategies.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Exile_Ian
I tend to think that the AI is far superior to the human player in certain areas:

The AI doesn't forget to review trade agreements when circumstances require it (e.g. 'gift' you made of Gems for a Civ advance that has done its 20 turns but you forgot to renegotiate) - I lose more stuff this way than anything!

The AI continuously monitors every city and unit and attempts to make best use of them. (I constantly have cities churning out food units but they're stuck on pop level of 6 because I didn't get around to building an aquaduct yet).

The AI makes it decisions based on facts and changing situations - whereas I often make subjective decisions based on previous prejudices (such as hating the French but somehow believing that the Indians are a peace-loving race).

The AI manages its 'strategy' by using short-terms plans and objectives - and sticking to them. It can be very single-minded when it comes to capturing one of your cities and tends to commit 100% to that single aim. I often forget what my objective was and get diverted easily.

We could all probably become much better players if we applied just some of those points to our own strategies.

I have been training myself to review trade pacts, and to watch for cities that have ceased to grow. I had real problems with this for a while. I still make decisions based on emotions sometimes, but this is part of the fun. The Indians are one of the worst war-mongering civs I have encountered, and I therefore never quite trust them. As far as strategy, the AI would probably do just fine, if it learned to patiently use artillery on offense, but its single-minded strategies are feeble against a defensive minded human.

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by VoodooAce
Hhhhhmmm....does the AI suck?

Relative to Civ2, no.

Relative to a human player, heck yeah, it sucks.

Let's face it, all AI sucks. All. Once you've played against human opponents, youi can never go back.

Give me MP!!!! And I'll stop complaining as that is the only complaint I have remaining. Most others have been fixed w/patches.

Better late than never.

It sucks even compared to a dumb human player. Talk about stupid, stubborn Diplomatic AI's. You have to grind them into the ground to get them to make a peace, that after they attacked you.

Like alot of dumb people, this AI also feels the need to cheat regularly. And that also irritates me.

 

[Black Fluffy Lion]

I do hate threads complaining about the AI. It think that it is really excellent and that firaxis did a great job on it.

however, another thing that is starting to annoy me are the hundreds of threads complaining about people who complain about civ3.

 

[siredgar]

Originally posted by Warlord Sam
I sure am.

Stop complaining.

 

[Anglophile]

The AI is pretty good - not Deep Blue but then I don't have a few million to spend for a game. Hey it cheats, well so do I; I have been known to reload after a particularly unclever move or series of moves - or even to get something better out of a goody hut next turn. When the game starts doing that to me, I'll be complaining about the cheats; meanwhile, I'm just glad that I can stay a bit ahead of it with only the occasional reload.

 

[Minuteman]

For me, it's the AI, as intransigent as it can be, that has made Civ III so entertaining to play.

To address your point, yes, the lamentations about the AI have been belabored. There are some individuals who, for a myriad of reasons, just refuse to accept this game as it is; all the while hoping against hope that this game will be miraculously transformed into something that conforms to every minute demand that they have.

I don't intend to be mean-spirited here, but this mentality is assuredly counter-productive, and betrays something inherently disturbing about these individuals.

I have never bought a soda and wished it was wine. Nor have I ever looked up at the moon and wished it were the sun. In other words, it might be better to simply accept things as they are, especially when you realize that you have no control over the things you want changed. AND especially when you realize that the things you want changed will never be changed.

To conclude, this isn't a question of good vs. evil, light vs. darkness, or even the Yankees vs. the Red Sox.

Civ III is only a game, and not intended to replace the actual process of living through sudden vicarious thrills.

Once some people begin to accept this, then perhaps they too will begin to enjoy the game, and stop wishing upon the star of their own fantasies in the hope they mind find something to fill the terrible void that clearly exists in some of their lives.

Just my humble opinion guys. You can take it or leave it.

 

[Umask077]

So what the ai is dumb. It really does some stupid things and there are alot of shortcomings but there all fixable. Point them out and firaxis will fix them. I cant imagine playing a network game of civ3, having to sit for 3 days in front of the computer on a huge map. Human players will be more challengeing but Ill play single player which is slow enough towards the end.

The ai cheats, but it mainly to make up for the fact that the AI isnt up to human standards. Its well balanced cheating so I have no complaints about that. If I complain about the AI its because I see a deliberate fault may have just been overlooked by firaxis.

Also note that you can just skip to the next message or thread but hopefully if you dont like AI complainers your not even seeing this line.

 

[Beam]

Originally posted by Warlord Sam
I sure am.

Me too.

 

[Alexnm]

The AI is not bad... Soren managed to do a great job on it, considering all the things that the AI cannot do.

But I don't think that those who complain about the AI should be despised. After all, this is a forum, its purpose is to exchange ideas and points of view... If you don't like a particular thread, then don't read it.

 

[markv]

I think part of the problem is that experienced players have learned how to counter the AI's tactics -- in other words, the humans have adapted -- and the humans become disappointed when civs that used to crush them with ease now present little challenge.

This is true of every game.

I think we all need to step back for a moment and think about how long it took us to reign supreme in our civ games.