[GS] Yet (Not) Another AI Thread

[GrumboMumbo]

Haha, I just started up a new game and Rome is near my start, on turn 16 I settle near Rome and he tells me I am a disgrace and denounces me. Then literally 2 turns later I get another message from him saying my empire reaches from jupiter to the heavens! He has a lovely smiling face during the animation and then that turns immediately to a frown because apparently he has now remembered how upset he was originally. This happens in every single game, and while kinda funny, it is completely immersion breaking and nobody here or anywhere can tell me that is even remotely acceptable from a AAA game. This is part of the reason I didn't pay full price. I waited for a sale, because honestly, this is garbage and I knew these things going in because I had read the reviews and played the demo. This stuff DOES affect FXS bottom line profits, and I am sure some people at the studio are aware of that and want it to change, but I know that large companies like this often have completely out of touch, idiotic management, who I'm sure have no idea what is important.

This is very simple stuff, I am not talking about complex combat situations and district micro, although that would be nice. This is the core foundations, the most basic level stuff, and I am sorry if criticism hurts, but it is garbage. Is the AI intended to be so Comedic?

 

[BlackWizard]

AI goes better day by day... Why is AI in CIV worse everyday? any reason for this?

 

[GrumboMumbo]

Erm...there has been a lot of 'AI is bad' threads recently, so I don't know how well this thread is gonna go down with the regulars here, but the short answer is:

Civ 6 has more complex mechanics which requires A LOT of forward planning, AI is never gonna handle advanced district placement. The new movement system also seems to hamper the AI's ability to war effectively.

Having said that, there is lots that could be improved on. As discussed in previous threads, I think the Agenda system was a step backwards. In it's current state, I think it makes the AI leaders seem schizophrenic at best, which breaks through any immersion that may have been there. In civ 5, dicision trees were less complex and improving the AI actually ended up being as simple as increasing their standard trait scores across the board. Have you ever seen the chart I have attached? I actually made my own mod of civ5, mainly to improve balance of the policy trees, but also, I just dialled up all the AI traits, it made all the leaders far more competitive. but it might be that the average civ player doesn't want a competitive AI on 'terminator mode' so perhaps that is why they don't bother implementing that.

If they release the source code, perhaps somebody will improve the AI...



Moderator Action: Merged with existing thread — Browd

 

[Timewarp]

A few things from the thread so far:

- I'd LOVE an Ironman option! Since its optional, people can switch it off
- I don't know why the AI is the same for all difficulties. Then it really isn't 'difficulty' so much as it is 'handicap'
- I don't think AI (Civ VI AI, to be specific) will ever be as good as people expect because, even accounting for exploits, human players are just able to micromanage on another level.

It feels good when you time the stars to align such that you'll finish a Tech to boost that Civic which will finish and unlock the extra builder charge card when the five cities building builders are just about done.
No ways the AI is ever competing with that AND managing to juggle all the other quirks of the game.

Loving the feedback, even the critiques

AI computers beat the top chess players 10 games out of 10. AI computers beat the top go player as well, though I don't think the top AI go computers are quite as dominant.

Firaxis could definitely build an AI that, with no bonuses, would give humans exactly a zero percent chance of winning. It would not make for good entertainment from a human standpoint - I guess you could sell it as "which human could last the longest". It's disappointing that they made the AI so weak

It was pointed out that having different AIs for different levels would substantially increase maintenance costs. I agree with this assertion. Firaxis has its reasons for choosing the AI that it did, as well as for making barbarians as raging as they are. Sometimes the reason is: this is what we've got, and we don't got the cash to make it better.

 

[Lord Shadow]

The simplistic chess comparison doesn't fly, because Civilization is several orders of magnitude more complex than a game with a fixed, featureless board, a fixed amount and distribution of pieces, a tiny number of hardly interlocking rules, and a far more finite number of decisions to be made.

 

[Victoria]

There is no way you can say Firxis is stupid, for a start there is a lot of investment there so they get the right poeople, and then there is the profit they make. We can fantasize all we want about a good AI but the reality is if one is required they will use one, if one is not required they will not. And we are not talking about an AI anyway, really just an expert system or some mild hybrid.
There are plenty of good reasons for a status quo being kept, especially as I have seen many players quit because they cannot own. It is a very dangerous path to assume the majority of people want a harder game.
And so it ends up in yet another release being left to the dll release which is at least a solution and as said event the brilliant volunteers cannot make it so.
There was a vote on fanatics a couple of years back... do you want bugs fixed and better AI or new content. And the response was overwhelmingly for new content, and that was on fanatics. The beat deity fan base is a pretty small % but damn loud and these threads get just so repetitive.
I guess any fantasy game will involve fantasy.

 

[Pure24]

The beat deity fan base is a pretty small % but damn load and these threads get just so repetitive.
I guess any fantasy game will involve fantasy.

Just to be clear, I created this thread in DEFENSE of the current AI. Poorly worded? Maybe... I could have gone directly to ask about ways in which players have an advantage over the AI in which the AI can never catch up on (e.g. exploits and cheats. The best AI in the world can't handle the Pantheon cheat, and an AI that always chops in wonders with Magnus, buys all relevant late-game districts with Reyna and beelines only the key techs in a victory path isn't that interactive, interesting, or immersive).

I feel like the criticism of AI, while warranted, sometimes overlooks how players maximise their advantage. Yeah, complaints about the AI have been done to death... and I for one am not saying the AI is perfect or whatever.

Just wanted it to be a 'pro-AI' thread for once. But hey, it is what it is

 

[Kaan Boztepe]

we are not talking about an AI anyway, really just an expert system or some mild hybrid.

i think it is a series of if statement like actions with every possible result getting a number attached to the outcome. the higher the number the more likely it will be picked.

 

[Victoria]

I created this thread in DEFENSE of the current AI.

It was a perfectly fine thread but I knew it was just a matter of time until dogma and mantra arrived.

 

[snakeboy]

There are plenty of good reasons for a status quo being kept, especially as I have seen many players quit because they cannot own. It is a very dangerous path to assume the majority of people want a harder game.

Exactly, I think AI is how they want it. Most casual gamers like to win, and perhaps have the illusion of a challenge but not a real challenge. Personally, I like to dominate my games as well when I play. However, I do mind immersion-breaking behavior, like the AI contradicting itself, or not building any planes for instance.