-
📚 Admin Project Update: I've added a major feature to PictureBooks.io called Avatar Studio! You can now upload photos to instantly turn your kids (and pets! 🐶) into illustrated characters that star in their own stories. Give it a try and let me know what you think!
Who is the hardest AI?
- Thread starter Bigv32
- Start date
slobberinbear
Ursine Skald
This is a great question, but it's situational.
Shaka, Zara, Pacal, Cathy, and Mansa Musa come to mind -- all of which are very dangerous if left alone and allowed to do their thing.
Monty can be a pain early in the game if he has good land and you're in his crosshairs.
Julius SHOULD be a badass, but in practice he's a middle-of-the pack AI for some reason.
Shaka, Zara, Pacal, Cathy, and Mansa Musa come to mind -- all of which are very dangerous if left alone and allowed to do their thing.
Monty can be a pain early in the game if he has good land and you're in his crosshairs.
Julius SHOULD be a badass, but in practice he's a middle-of-the pack AI for some reason.
MrCynical
Deity
Mansa, Zara and Gilgamesh all have a tendency to pull ahead in tech which makes them problematic to deal with at high level.
On the military front I find Shaka and Ragnar the most difficult to deal with. Monty may be annoying, but he always attacks before he's ready, and tends to get himself killed by other AIs before he even get to me.
On the military front I find Shaka and Ragnar the most difficult to deal with. Monty may be annoying, but he always attacks before he's ready, and tends to get himself killed by other AIs before he even get to me.
Pacifist46
King
Tough leaders - Zara, Suryavarman, Joao, Willem, MM and obviously Montezuma if you're anywhere near him
NintendoTogepi
Noble Pacifist
Zara Yaqob and Sury are very, very dangerous. I've seen both carry away the game easily. It's mostly the Creative civs that do best for some odd reason. (Creative is far from the best trait...)
Huayna Capac, Mansa Musa and Willem van Oranje are pretty dangerous too, but they're rather peaceful so it's not as big of a deal. Zara and Sury will invade easily, and when they do they attack with FORCE.
Huayna Capac, Mansa Musa and Willem van Oranje are pretty dangerous too, but they're rather peaceful so it's not as big of a deal. Zara and Sury will invade easily, and when they do they attack with FORCE.
DMOC
Mathematician
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2007
- Messages
- 5,594
The reason creative AI's do well is because the AI's are generally slow expanding their borders (for instance -- Genghis usually doesn't research mysticism on high difficulty levels until almost the AD's and he usually gets screwed as a result). This is also why Stonehenge is a great wonder for AI's. In my game as Boudica, Pacal II built stonehenge and is currently the tech leader.
I made a thread about this but it kind of died.
futurehermit
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2006
- Messages
- 5,724
Out of the warmongerers only Shaka really worries me. Most of the other warmongerers in my game don't actually end up doing anything tbh. Sure, if they attack you in the first few eras, they can cause you grief, but that is usually easily handled through good diplomacy. Once they start to lag behind in tech, they're never a problem again. Shaka seems to keep up well enough on tech...primarily because he has a large empire (his UB helps him sustain it) because he took out an opponent early on, kind of like a human player 
It is mostly financial civs, often on another continent, that cause me the most threat to legitimately win the game. Alternatively, it is civs that tech well enough to get to the renaissance in a timely manner and then come out swinging...hard. France and Russia in particular (mainly Nappy and Cathy) are good examples of this.
If I had to pick one leader from the warmongering club, it would be Shaka hands down.
If I had to pick one leader from the tech club, it would be Mansa hands down.
These two consistently do the best at what they are designed to do. Mansa is generally a threat to win via space and Shaka is generally a threat to DoW on you and screw you over (despite the fact that he may not be a threat to win the game himself).
Most financial civs though will cause problems. Ragnar (fin/agg), I don't know why, but I've never really had a problem with him. He seems easy enough to manage via diplo and for a warmongerer, he doesn't really cause me as many problems as others seem to report.
It is mostly financial civs, often on another continent, that cause me the most threat to legitimately win the game. Alternatively, it is civs that tech well enough to get to the renaissance in a timely manner and then come out swinging...hard. France and Russia in particular (mainly Nappy and Cathy) are good examples of this.
If I had to pick one leader from the warmongering club, it would be Shaka hands down.
If I had to pick one leader from the tech club, it would be Mansa hands down.
These two consistently do the best at what they are designed to do. Mansa is generally a threat to win via space and Shaka is generally a threat to DoW on you and screw you over (despite the fact that he may not be a threat to win the game himself).
Most financial civs though will cause problems. Ragnar (fin/agg), I don't know why, but I've never really had a problem with him. He seems easy enough to manage via diplo and for a warmongerer, he doesn't really cause me as many problems as others seem to report.
Bandobras Took
Emperor
If I'm playing a Protective leader, I rejoice when I get the psychos near me. They'll spend all their effort trying to kill me instead of out-settling or out-teching me.
The hardest AI is the one getting the most land. This often is a creative civ.
I consider creative the second best trait, after spiritual. It's not all about the advantages you see easily (like commerce boost by financial). It's nice to always have your full BFC in your border cities. Theatres and coliseums are required for warmongering. Fast libraries = fast GS = fast liberalism = fast tech lead.NintendoTogepi said:
This kinda reminds me of myself, ingame. Begging really works BTWCivCorpse said:
I do like the idea of having a protective civ as your ally, orhave them start a war against a future thread. I havefound that most protective civs are not good at attacking, but excel at defense. This way, neither becomes to powerful, and the warmonger loses valuable troops. This is why in team games I try to get Churchill on my side.
NintendoTogepi
Noble Pacifist
Creative and Spiritual? Really? I find they are pleasant and make the game more relaxed, but I wouldn't say they are the best.
Top tier traits
1. Philosophical
2. Industrious
3. Financial
Medium tier traits
4. Creative
5. Charismatic
6. Expansive
Low tier traits
7. Aggresive
8. Imperialistic
9. Spiritual
Bottom tier traits
10. Organized
11. Protective
That's just my opinion of course
@NintendoTogepi:
I think favourite traits depend on difficulty level. If you play on a level where it's hardly possible to get a wonder, let alone the one you really want, you'll think differently about Industrious. And if you have so small empires because you're boxed in early by the AIs (and you can't even work all the tiles in the BFC), you'll think differently about financial and probabely creative.
Philo otoh I consider a nice trait but not that strong as you can have its effect by a civic or a building. Say you run pacifism and have the NE. 1 spec produces 2 * 200% = 4GPP, and if you're philo too, it makes 2 * 300% = 6GPP so its not THAT much of a difference.
I should add that the GPs - when they're important, and that's early game till midgame - mostly come from one city so NE has a big influence, and that I run pacifism mostly when I have a state religion.
I think favourite traits depend on difficulty level. If you play on a level where it's hardly possible to get a wonder, let alone the one you really want, you'll think differently about Industrious. And if you have so small empires because you're boxed in early by the AIs (and you can't even work all the tiles in the BFC), you'll think differently about financial and probabely creative.
Philo otoh I consider a nice trait but not that strong as you can have its effect by a civic or a building. Say you run pacifism and have the NE. 1 spec produces 2 * 200% = 4GPP, and if you're philo too, it makes 2 * 300% = 6GPP so its not THAT much of a difference.
I should add that the GPs - when they're important, and that's early game till midgame - mostly come from one city so NE has a big influence, and that I run pacifism mostly when I have a state religion.
@ topic: The hardcore warmongers aren't too much of a problem if you play correctly (don't make peace at the first opportunity; you'd rather have small groups of units coming at you continuously compared to letting them build up a huge SoD in peace).
I agree that CRE seems an excellent trait for the AI, and it's often coupled with a reasonable personality; Catherine, Zara Yaqob and Willem usually do well throughout the game (most warmongers fade to insignificance unless they get lucky, some late bloomers like Gandhi will usually be crippled before getting their chance to shine).
@ mystyfly: Do you play exclusively on Deity with map settings designed to give you a harder game?
From my experience Industrious is strongest on Immortal (below you don't really need the help and might as well pick PHI for more rewards from the wonderspam). While I don't rely on wonders when playing on Deity, I definitely make sure I get a decent-sized empire one way or the other... and cherish any trait that makes supporting it easier.
@ NintendoTogepi: Interesting rank list. While I agree that the first 3 are high-impact traits, I consider ORG the next best thing with a unique advantage: Allowing you to abuse your economy while you're grabbing land (by war or peace).
I agree that CRE seems an excellent trait for the AI, and it's often coupled with a reasonable personality; Catherine, Zara Yaqob and Willem usually do well throughout the game (most warmongers fade to insignificance unless they get lucky, some late bloomers like Gandhi will usually be crippled before getting their chance to shine).
@ mystyfly: Do you play exclusively on Deity with map settings designed to give you a harder game?
From my experience Industrious is strongest on Immortal (below you don't really need the help and might as well pick PHI for more rewards from the wonderspam). While I don't rely on wonders when playing on Deity, I definitely make sure I get a decent-sized empire one way or the other... and cherish any trait that makes supporting it easier.
@ NintendoTogepi: Interesting rank list. While I agree that the first 3 are high-impact traits, I consider ORG the next best thing with a unique advantage: Allowing you to abuse your economy while you're grabbing land (by war or peace).
ICNP
The Third Superpower
Creative is an Expander/Warmongers Dream. It allows you to start pushing the border on your outlying cities early. Awesome for Pangea maps where you need to get that extra space. Organized is nice to I'd say Medium Tier but Financial is just so hard not to love.
@Iranon: No, I usually play on immortal, but I don't use only overpowered/strong civs and leaders. My opinion of industrious is pretty low as I often don't have the hammers to spare for wonders earlygame as I prefer staying alive, diplomacy comes later in the game and getting a decent sized empire with some workers. After those initial wonders up to the mids I rarely find a wonder worth building besides the GL, MoM, Taj, Shwedagon paya, which you all get rather easily with beelining and ressources.
On lower levels you might not need it, I wouldn't know as I only played a few games on noble before quickly going to monarch and further.
RE empire size: Usually you're limited in most directions by coast, mountain range, jungle, desert and there aren't that many good sites. Often the map (if not pangaea) allows some nice blocking or you have to avoid being blocked which makes creative a great trait. There's no comparing being cre with non-cre neighbours and not being cre with cre neighbours.
On lower levels you might not need it, I wouldn't know as I only played a few games on noble before quickly going to monarch and further.
RE empire size: Usually you're limited in most directions by coast, mountain range, jungle, desert and there aren't that many good sites. Often the map (if not pangaea) allows some nice blocking or you have to avoid being blocked which makes creative a great trait. There's no comparing being cre with non-cre neighbours and not being cre with cre neighbours.
OK, CicCorpse's List O Trait strength
Top Tier Traits (In no particular order because individual game strategies/AI/terrain can vary their effectiveness0
Finanicial
Expansive
Organised
Tier Two
Creative
Spiritual
Philosophical
Tier Three
Industrious
Imperialistic
Charismatic
Left overs
Aggressive
Protective
Top Tier Traits (In no particular order because individual game strategies/AI/terrain can vary their effectiveness0
Finanicial
Expansive
Organised
Tier Two
Creative
Spiritual
Philosophical
Tier Three
Industrious
Imperialistic
Charismatic
Left overs
Aggressive
Protective
Suryavarman is the absolute worst. I'm not one of those people who instantly quits and restarts games when they don't like something, but if I happen to get the Khmer capital right next to mine then I won't exactly be too eager to continue playing, either. I don't know how he does it, but Suryavarman is a monster with expansion and he will not stop pumping out those damn settlers until there is a city squeezed in every possible corner of the map (most of which are pressed right up against my cities and I don't have a chance in hell to win the culture battle with him since he's also creative and often manages to found an early religion).
Zizon
Chieftain
I do agree that there usually is one dominant AI per game.
HC has never been that AI for me. He spams wonders but has never EVER posed a threat.
Monty is always a crazy backstabber, Izzy is always a crazy religious fanatic and it seems like Willem is always really good as well. Zara Yaqob seems to do amazily well too.
Mansa is always an annoying tech trader, but never a real threat.
HC has never been that AI for me. He spams wonders but has never EVER posed a threat.
Monty is always a crazy backstabber, Izzy is always a crazy religious fanatic and it seems like Willem is always really good as well. Zara Yaqob seems to do amazily well too.
Mansa is always an annoying tech trader, but never a real threat.
