Conquests AI changes - Page 4

Arnelos · November 12, 2003, 12:38

I'm playing a game as Portugal at Monarch level with Large, Archipelago, 12 civs, 80% water, warm, arid, 5 billion years.

I'm researching Education right now and none of the AI's have even made it out of the Ancient Age yet (most are still Despotisms).

I've already conquered the Dutch (on my island) and the Hittites (on the neighboring island, with colonies on 2 other islands on the other side of me which they formed while I was taking out the Dutch).

Given how REDICULOUSLY easy this game has been on Monarch level, I agree with others that the game has gotten a good bit easier. The fact that the AI didn't build curraghs certainly didn't help it, but I've noticed that seafaring trait AI civs seem to beeline for Map Making and build plenty of galleys, so the seafaring AI civs are far better off than the non-seafaring civs right now (moreso because of the 80% water archipelago map).

Now the fact that I built the Great Lighthouse and I'm a seafaring civ myself is just absolutely incredible. I had 5-movement galleys that could travel on sea tiles by the end of the Ancient Age, which was also when I started my GA (under Monarchy, since I had a number of high pop cities in a fairly compact island civ). Understandably, I had contact with every civ on the board while all of the AI civs only had contact with their immediate neighbors. Their inability to trade maps with each other while I've been able to map most of the map is a huge advantage.

Larger archipelago maps already disadvantaged the AI by separating them from one another, but I imagine that the new corruption rules and the lack of building curraghs are what has made things worse for the AI.

I'll grant that having my GA at the start of the Middle Age as I was maping the entire planet certainly boosted my power and building the Great Library is always critical on a large archipelago map, but STILL.... this game is a cakewalk.

Fried-Psitalon · November 12, 2003, 12:47

You'll note there are two more difficulty levels higher than Monarch now, yes?

Also bear in mind you're playing a seafaring civ in an environment tailor-made to the strengths of said civ, much like playing the Maya on a barb-raging pangea, or the Russians on a sedentary-barb pangea.

I dare say Portugal on a Pangea might not be quite so overpowering, much like the Maya enslavement would be rather dull with no barbs on an archipelago.

Arnelos · November 12, 2003, 13:00

As for the last game I played, it was as the English, though on a SMALL archipelago map (only 70% water, temperate, normal, 4 billion years, 6 civs). I was lucky to start on a fairly sizable island with no neighbors, but I got royally screwed to start on an island without iron, horses, and NO luxuries!.

I quickly expanded to a neighboring island that was half tundra and mountains, but at least had a source of iron. I also expanded to a tiny 6-tile island with a source of horses. I got my only luxuries (fur and gems) along with a second source of iron by expanding to the large island that the Americans never finished working across (since the entire central area of that island was tundra, that was little surprise and I took the fertiles lands on my side of the tundra).

The English are INCREDIBLY powerful as a civ now, with commercial and seafaring together giving them quite an impressive boost to their income on maps with lots of coasts (which archipelago maps have in abundance). In fact, the English are IDEALLY suited to archipelago maps, which result in more spread out empires (for which commercial is good) with many coastal cities (at which seafaring excells) and lots of water in between (for which seafaring movement bonus and sea-based improvement building bonuses are very handy). Combine with this their rather upgraded UU the delay in the coming of ironclads (not to mention that ironclads may not even come at all given that it's now an optional tech) and the English are the powerhouse they should be.

I expanded so well and was able to keep up with my opponents on Monarch level in tech without much trouble. By the start of my GA (using Man-O-War's against the Aztecs, who were trying to conquer the Sumerians on their shared continent-sized island), I was already pulling well ahead of the AI in tech and it wasn't anywhere close by the time I was getting into the Industrial Age. By the time I was working on techs in the Modern Age and using bombers and modern armor to conquer the Americans and then bomb the Russians back to the stone age, the AI was still running about with cavalry and riflemen and was still trying to face my battleships, cruisers, destroyers, submarines, and carriers with frigates! My Man-O-War's (including all of the enslaved extra Man-O-Wars) were useful up to the end of the game!

So yeah, Monarch level seems a bit easier than it used to be. I mean, I invaded the Americans (the tech leader among the AI) with Marines, Modern Armor, Battleships, and Carriers with Bombers while they defended with cavalry and riflemen. They never had a prayer.

I won a space race victory simply because (as normal), not only do I love the space race victory, but I'm typically too lazy by that point in a game to bother going for a domination victory

One thing to comment on is how incredibly cool the enslave ability is for the Man-O-War. I parked a few Man-O-War's off of the Aztec's only source of horses (a coastal tile!) and just kept bombarding it every time the Aztecs came back with workers to clear up the craters and rebuild the roads. Since the Aztecs came at me with a steady stream of frigates throughout the game which I could reliably kill with a stack of Man-O-War's and every few of which would be enslaved into ANOTHER (regular) Man-O-War, that stack just kept growing in size. I don't remember how many Man-O-War's I had at game's end, but since the AI was still using frigates, they were still pretty useful when I fought the Russians (though obviously my enormous force of bombers combined with my fleet of battleships, cruisers, destroyers, and submaries was far MORE useful).

Arnelos · November 12, 2003, 13:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Fried-Psitalon
You'll note there are two more difficulty levels higher than Monarch now, yes?

In PTW, I typically would play Monarch or Emperor. That said, even when using the Americans on a pangea map or an easy civ like the Persians or Egyptians, Monarch has still rarely been that easy.

Emperor level used to present more of a challenge to me since I have refused (on the principle that it prevents the game from being fun) to micromanage in most of my single-player games (I do micromanage in PBEM games... competition brings that out and in a PBEM you have lots of time). I can certainly play at Emperor level and beat it under PTW and it is challenging, I just didn't find it particularly fun.

It seems that if each level has gotten easier, perhaps I should progress to normally playing at Emperor and playing my challenging games at the levels higher than that

Quote:

Also bear in mind you're playing a seafaring civ in an environment tailor-made to the strengths of said civ, much like playing the Maya on a barb-raging pangea, or the Russians on a sedentary-barb pangea.

I dare say Portugal on a Pangea might not be quite so overpowering, much like the Maya enslavement would be rather dull with no barbs on an archipelago.

This is a good point. It certainly does make a game easier if you play a civ well suited to the map conditions. That said, that wouldn't by itself explain just how easy these games have been.

Dominae · November 12, 2003, 13:21

I agree with Fried that people stating that their Monarch games are way too easy are not exactly giving the game a fair chance. First of all, most of you guys should be playing Emperor. Second, abusing the new traits by choosing the right map settings (restarting to get that super Rivers Agr. start, or selecting Large Pangea maps for Sea.) will not give you a great idea of how the game is supposed to work on average.

Nonetheless, I must reiterate that there is most definitely a problem with Seafaring. It's major advantage revolves around exploiting the AI (suicide runs, Curraghs, tech whoring).

Three solutions (not perfect, but realistic):

1. Teach the AI to build (and use!) Curraghs.
2. Increase the cost of Curraghs, the idea being that if it's a human-only unit making it more expensive balances it.
3. Give Seafaring civs a Curragh at the start, and remove the option to build more of them.

I would be happiest with the third option (go ahead, let your sole Curragh commit suicide!).

Dominae

vmxa1 · November 12, 2003, 13:47

I only played one game (with seafaring) and it was only mid way into middle ages, but I went to all islands and never saw any either. They waited for gallies and never went to any squares that were out of range.
I have yet to see any of the curraghs or whatever they are called.
So I have to agreee with Dom, that is going to make exploiting a real issue on maps with lots of water.

Arnelos · November 12, 2003, 13:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
3. Give Seafaring civs a Curragh at the start, and remove the option to build more of them.

I would be happiest with the third option (go ahead, let your sole Curragh commit suicide!).

Which is a perfectly good balancer as long as the human player isn't using the reloading exploit

Traelin · November 12, 2003, 13:50

Quote:

Originally posted by DrSpike
Hehe Alva, in 1.07 and the earlier patches I was one of the most active Civ3 posters. Now the game looks like it might be sufficiently improved for me to return.

[throws down gauntlet]

Last one to beat Sid smells bad!

Believe me, it's worth the return. Once I finish this game I gotta step away though, it's just eating up way too much of my life.

Arrian · November 12, 2003, 14:51

Perhaps the AI doesn't build curraghs because it has no transport capacity. Ever see an empty AI ship? They ALWAYS stick something on there before they send it out. You can't do that with a curragh. Perhaps that's why the AI doesn't build them.

Oh, and the Iroquois rock, btw. I like them much better now.

Armies also rock. 3x Cavalry is just a MONSTER. 6/3/4 with blitz. My Cav army is destroying China almost all by itself.

The AI appears to be ignoring Literature... but again, small sample size.

-Arrian

notyoueither · November 12, 2003, 15:19

Quote:

I agree with Fried that people stating that their Monarch games are way too easy are not exactly giving the game a fair chance. First of all, most of you guys should be playing Emperor. Second, abusing the new traits by choosing the right map settings (restarting to get that super Rivers Agr. start, or selecting Large Pangea maps for Sea.) will not give you a great idea of how the game is supposed to work on average.

There is such a thing as playing something managable to figure out what's new, not to mention to have fun.

And I didn't think playing Rome with no luxuries within 18 tiles of my start was that overpowering.

Now, whatever level we are playing the game, we do have some idea of how the game should play out. We know that the AI is falling way further behind in tech than it should.

We can observe that the AI is never building certain units. The best solution for that would most likely be to add 1 unit capacity to the Curragh.

alexman · November 12, 2003, 15:29

I wonder if adding missile or aircraft transport capacity to the curragh would be enough to convince the AI to build it...

Catt · November 12, 2003, 15:36

On the issue of "overall AI effectiveness" (not addressing specific builds like curraghs and strategies around specific builds) I think the GPT Bug is so significant that it is very difficult to properly evaluate the AI's changed abilities, if any, regarding tech advances etc. In my one game, the Sumerians became a gigantic Killer AI that secured and held the tech lead for a long time -- they did so in part because they successfully sucked gpt deals from other AIs and of course received double their money. While the Sumerians were spending 100% on science, they were also piling up 10,000+ gold in the treasury and rush-buying numerous improvements all over the place. Conversely, when I started raking in gpt payments, everyone but the Sumerians fell back pretty quickly.

The GPT Bug distorts an awful lot, since mountains of gold allows the Ai to upgrade, to build better infrastructure, etc. The specifics in my game wouldn't have happened without the GPT Bug and so it makes it very hard for me to realisitically evaluate any overall changes (not to mention the fact that I've only played one game

)

Catt

Arrian · November 12, 2003, 15:39

I can't remember the last time I built the Pyramids *and* the Great Library (built, no leader rushing) on Monarch. I even switched to republic (4 turns of anarchy, IIRC) during the GL build.

There is more going on than just the contact thing. There were three decent AI civs on my continent, and I blew them away (there was also a 4th civ, but I crippled them early by buying a worker and bopping their first settler team).

I suspect too much wonder building... I could be wrong, but with the addition of Zeus, Mausollos, and Artemis there just may be too many.

Oh, and I think I'm going to agree with those who feel the new bombard rules are the wrong way to go. With 2 catapults & a stack of archers, defended by 2 spearmen, I crushed the Maya. I had no iron and no horses. But with the cats, the number of which eventually increased to 4, pretty reliably taking 1 hp off of the defending spears/Javs, my casualties were very low. In fact, I killed about 10 Jav chuckers* before finally losing to one, in the last city they had, and it enslaved my unit, so I ended up getting a worker back out of the deal. Good luck was involved, of course, but IIRC, every Jav I attacked had 2hp, due to the cats. After that, I had iron and horses. Horses. Iroquois. Can you guess what happened to the English?

-Arrian

* - 10 Javs = 300 shields, folks. That, plus the fact that the Maya built Massollos in Chichen Itza = 600 shields of production. No wonder they went down so easily.

Dominae · November 12, 2003, 15:43

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
There is such a thing as playing something managable to figure out what's new, not to mention to have fun.

My point is that there's no use in complaining when "manageable" is actually "easy". Maybe I'm just bitter because my first game on Demigod was actually rather difficult (all Horses claimed before I had The Wheel, closest Iron source over 20 tiles away in the middle of Jungle and Mountains).

Concerning the Curragh: I'm not sure it's a good idea to give it transport capacity. The AI would probably load units onto it right away, which is not that great in the early-game. alexman's idea/hack is intriguing...will it work?

I still prefer the "only Seafaring civs get a Curragh" solution. It has nice symmetry with the Expansionist trait. It makes Seafaring civs unique by making only them able to explore coastlines before Map Making. It keeps the trait powerful while addressing the major problems (Curraghs are an unfairly good unit against the AI because of the suicide strategy, even in non-Seafaring hands).

Dominae

Arrian · November 12, 2003, 15:50

It would suck if that first curragh got sunk by a barb galley, though. Still, I think that might be a good solution.

And I'm not complaining, per se, about doing really well on Monarch. I'm enjoying myself, and I recognize that the "solution" to this "problem" is to move up in difficulty. That being said, we're talking about how the AI is doing here, and I think it is good that we have people reporting their experiences on various difficulty levels. NYE, myself and several others are trying it out on Monarch. You're playing Demigod. Others are no doubt trying Emperor. Between all of us, we should get a good idea of what the AI is doing right, and what it's doing wrong.

The initial feedback is that Monarch level is now easier. Again, it's not a complaint (at least from me). It's an observation.

-Arrian

Stuie · November 12, 2003, 15:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
Maybe I'm just bitter because my first game on Demigod was actually rather difficult (all Horses claimed before I had The Wheel, closest Iron source over 20 tiles away in the middle of Jungle and Mountains).

Hah! Sounds like the Monarch game I just started. Only source of iron is 22 tiles away from my capital on a mountain in the middle of tundra (which I flagged for no cities...). And there are no horses anywhere in site. Now I know how the Native Americans felt.

And my "over powered" curraghs in this game keep getting whacked by stacks of barbarian galleys, so I've only contacted four out of 19 other Civs.

On top of that, the AI actually beat my Philosophy beeline for the first time.

I couldn't believe it when I picked my "free" tech and all that happened was I started researching it.

This one looks challenging to me.

I like alexman's idea for the AI curraghs, if it works. Otherwise I think I'll do as Dominae suggests and give all the seafarings one to start, and no one gets to build them.

Dominae · November 12, 2003, 15:58

Maybe one of these is in order:

List of things that make the game easier:

1. Free tech with Philosophy
2. Agricultural trait with Granaries
3. Seafaring trait and Curraghs
4. Curraghs in general
5. Double unit support costs for Republic
6. New Specialist citizens
7. New rules for bombardment of cities
8. Barb hunting with Javelin Throwers

Notice that these are all things the AI has trouble with. Number 5 I'm pretty sure hurts the AI more than the human player.

Dominae

Panag · November 12, 2003, 16:13

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
I wonder if adding missile or aircraft transport capacity to the curragh would be enough to convince the AI to build it...

hi ,

still nothing , .....

have a nice day

alexman · November 12, 2003, 16:17

Then we need one of these too:

List of things that makes the game harder:

1. More expensive upgrade cost
2. No Map trading in ancient age
3. No Contact trading in ancient age
4. Free tech with Philosophy
5. Double unit support costs for Republic

Granted, these are for higher difficulty levels where you can't keep up with the AI in research and production, and where the AI gets free unit support.

Stuie · November 12, 2003, 16:18

6. Less frequent Great Wonder rushes.

Arnelos · November 12, 2003, 16:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
I still prefer the "only Seafaring civs get a Curragh" solution. It has nice symmetry with the Expansionist trait. It makes Seafaring civs unique by making only them able to explore coastlines before Map Making. It keeps the trait powerful while addressing the major problems (Curraghs are an unfairly good unit against the AI because of the suicide strategy, even in non-Seafaring hands).

You could just teach the AI to use suicide curragh/galley/caravel missions.

Fried-Psitalon · November 12, 2003, 16:24

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
Then we need one of these too:

List of things that makes the game harder:

1. More expensive upgrade cost
2. No Map trading in ancient age
3. No Contact trading in ancient age
4. Free tech with Philosophy
5. Double unit support costs for Republic

Granted, these are for higher difficulty levels where you can't keep up with the AI in research and production, and where the AI gets free unit support.

You really think the prevention of contact trading makes the game harder? I rather thought the suicide curragh/tech whoring made things a good bit easier. (Map conditions allowing, obviously.)

alva · November 12, 2003, 16:25

N6 depends on dificulty levels too (easier or harder)

Arnelos · November 12, 2003, 16:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
Maybe I'm just bitter because my first game on Demigod was actually rather difficult (all Horses claimed before I had The Wheel, closest Iron source over 20 tiles away in the middle of Jungle and Mountains).

Well, in my monarch game as the English my entire island/continent didn't have a source of iron, horses, OR A LUXURY! I still steamrolled the AI, but was because the game is easier, it was only Monarch level, and I was playing the English on an archipelago map.

Dominae · November 12, 2003, 16:48

Do the things on the "harder" and "easier" lists balanced each other out?!

No World/Territory Maps trading benefits the AI for sure.

No Contacts trading is a mixed bag: on the one hand, it's harder to get all the Contacts speed up the tech race; on the other, it's easier to keep the AIs segregated and stay ahead in research. It's good because it slows down the tech pace; it's bad because suicide naval missions are more powerful now.

Quote:

You could just teach the AI to use suicide curragh/galley/caravel missions.

More difficult that it sounds.

Dominae

ZargonX · November 12, 2003, 16:52

One thing I feel that does make the game harder now is that the AI definatly seems to handle military action better. As has been pointed out elsewhere, they mass their forces for attack instead of dribbling units into your territory.

Arrian · November 12, 2003, 16:55

Or perhaps you could simply make suicide missions really suicide: 100% galley (and curragh) sinking in ocean tiles until Astronomy.

-Arrian

Stuie · November 12, 2003, 16:58

Or go back to the "wheeled" galleys/curraghs and no wheeled units in oceans idea...

alexman · November 12, 2003, 18:04

It's not possible to give ships as starting units with the current editor, AFAIK.

I made the AI build a curragh without allowing transport of units! If you give the curragh the AI "Naval transport" flag (possible, even if it doesn't carry any units, if you give it the unload command), the AI builds them.

Edit: The problem is that the AI then builds these vessels too often, and keeps many of them in its cities waiting to load them (even if they can't be loaded).

Edit: After playing some more in debug mode, I now see that the AI does indeed build currahs, just not as urgently as it builds settlers and military units, which is actually a good thing, I think.

dexters · November 12, 2003, 18:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Arnelos

In PTW, I typically would play Monarch or Emperor. That said, even when using the Americans on a pangea map or an easy civ like the Persians or Egyptians, Monarch has still rarely been that easy.

Well, in my monarch game as the English my entire island/continent didn't have a source of iron, horses, OR A LUXURY! I still steamrolled the AI, but was because the game is easier, it was only Monarch level, and I was playing the English on an archipelago map.

Difficulty has a lot to do with starts and you seem to have set yourself up for an easy game. Try playing a civ that's not natural to the map. There are plenty of nice civs out there that aren't bad for archipelago maps, they just aren't seafaring. Sometimes, you get lucky and have a great start. I've played or at least attempted to play 5 or 6 monarch starts. I've completed 2. One was a space race victory the other was a defeat (island start, no iron, in a pangea game). My current one is looking good. That other 3 starts I quit, after falling behind (on pangea). Watch for those wild swings where the AI go from 3 techs behind you to 4 techs ahead of you. Those happen quite frequently now.

Certainly, the AI not using currah probably hurt it on the archipelago game. But that will probably be fixed in the next patch.

My current Monarch game had the Sumerian capital located next to a volcanoe, which went off, twice. Destroying the capital and slowed their expansion in my direction, allowing me to grab iron there. Had that not happened, it would have been a difficult struggle to get iron.

I've noticed, as you have, the resource distribution is vastly changed. Instead of getting one of each resource in a relatively short distance, resources tend to cluster. If you get lots of iron ,or horses, or saltpeter, you're sure to be low or have no sources of other resources.