Yes - It's More AI CHEATING! - Page 2

Grumbold · August 19, 2002, 09:50

Since I rely almost exclusively on autosave (to resist the temptation to reload if I discover some things I could have done better) I doubt I can provide one. I am personally satisfied that the nation whose galleys I was trailing did not have the technologies. I'll check at home but if not, when I next get lucky enough to be so far ahead in a game that I can repeat the experiment I will keep my eyes peeled.

narmox · August 19, 2002, 09:59

The galleys thing isn't a cheat. It's happened to me (very rarely) that my galleys would NOT sink on ocean. I think there's some kind of pattern (like sea/coast nearby), but I haven't really experimented to find that pattern.

Plus that pattern is probably just my luck

But it's not an AI cheat. Just probability. Look at the civilopedia, I'm sure it says something like "MAY sink" not "WILL sink".

Grumbold · August 19, 2002, 10:12

Thats why I shadowed them for a while to see if their luck would run out. I've never had a galley or caravel cheat death for more than a couple of turns but these guys were sailing round the ocean for ages. I've said my piece. I'll wait now until I find if I have a save file at home to back it up.

Catt · August 19, 2002, 13:12

* Sigh *

A good rule of thumb before someone throws out the allegation of cheating is to preserve the evidence for others to examine. If you don't have the evidence, don't post your question with a title of "cheating" - bide your time until you see the next instance of cheating and be sure to save some evidence. I mean, if the AI cheats like this in one game, surely it will do so again, right? It didn't cheat in this instance simply because it really wanted to win that game, did it?

A saved game allows others to explain how and why something happened - to the benefit of all readers. A thread on "cheating" just spreads more (possibly) misleading and inaccurate information about the game.

Catt

Thrawn05 · August 19, 2002, 14:09

Galleys will NOT sink in sea tiles when you the Great Lighthouse
Galleys will NOT sink in sea tiles when you research Astronmy
Galleys will NOT sink in ocean tiles when you research Navigation/Magnitism.

Just what I've seen when I play my games.

Gastric ReFlux · August 19, 2002, 14:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Catt
* Sigh *

A good rule of thumb before someone throws out the allegation of cheating is to preserve the evidence for others to examine. If you don't have the evidence, don't post your question with a title of "cheating" - bide your time until you see the next instance of cheating and be sure to save some evidence. I mean, if the AI cheats like this in one game, surely it will do so again, right? It didn't cheat in this instance simply because it really wanted to win that game, did it?

A saved game allows others to explain how and why something happened - to the benefit of all readers. A thread on "cheating" just spreads more (possibly) misleading and inaccurate information about the game.

Catt

Why bother providing proof? I mean, shouldn't my simple assertion be good enough! There is no freaking way I could have overlooked something!

JohnM2433 · August 19, 2002, 17:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Gastric ReFlux
Why bother providing proof? I mean, shouldn't my simple assertion be good enough! There is no freaking way I could have overlooked something!

You may know that. We don't. If we are to presume the AI to be innocent until proven guilty -- which should pretty much be a requirement to call something a "known cheat" -- you must be presumed to be an incompetent shmuck until proven otherwise. It's nothing personal.

"Spectacular claims require spectacular evidence", or something like that. Claims of AI cheating may not really be all that spectacular

, but what is said of spectacular claims can also be said of proof.

Theseus · August 19, 2002, 17:20

John, I have a feeling that GF is being sarcastic.

Catt · August 19, 2002, 17:23

GF is defintiely being sarcastic (and keep an eye out for his posts - he's one of the funniest posters around!).

JohnM2433 · August 19, 2002, 17:26

I'll take your word for it, although the sarcasm doesn't seem to register with me, even in retrospect. Am I missing some of the context here?

Theseus · August 19, 2002, 17:32

Well, I had to think about it too, but when I realized that GF had not previously posted on this thread, and was therefore being inexplicably huffy...

Gastric ReFlux · August 19, 2002, 18:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Catt
GF is defintiely being sarcastic (and keep an eye out for his posts - he's one of the funniest posters around!).

Well thank you Catt.

Yes, I was being sarcastic. If there's something I've observed from a long time of observing this and the CFC board, it's that nearly all claims of the AI cheating have not been supported. In some cases, when a save file has been posted, it has been shown that AI is simply making efficient use of the game mechanics and engine in a way we humans hadn't previously thought of using ourselves. There was, for example, at CFC a thread where it originally looked like the AI got a free unit when capturing a city at Deity level. Instead, careful study showed that the AI was playing by the rules--using its turn of production to rush a new unit. That also showed that the game turns have this pattern within them: Human production, AI production, Human moves units, AI moves units.

So it's extremely frustrating to have people make extraordinary claims, then provide nothing in support of those. We lose a chance to possibly find out something useful about the game, and instead are left with claims that the AI is like an evil and retarded person who uses sneaky and insidious methods to cheat.

Yeah, sneaky and insidious. Pfft.

Jaguar · August 20, 2002, 00:32

Here is what I think happened, from the information given.

1. AI starts building pikemen
2. AI discovers gunpowder. The pike cities continue with their pikemen. A player is allowed to continue building an obsolete unit if you started it before you got the tech for the upgrade. That is what the AI did. Probably because it wanted the defenses quickly.
3. AI starts the musketman
4. Its sources of Iron and Saltpeter get cut off
5. The pikemen and musketman finish.

Either that or:
1. AI starts building pikemen
2. Iron Gets cut off
3. AI finishes pikes
4. AI discovers Gunpowder and starts musketman
5. Saltpeter gets cut off
6. Musketman is finished.

Hurricane · August 20, 2002, 02:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior
2. AI discovers gunpowder. The pike cities continue with their pikemen. A player is allowed to continue building an obsolete unit if you started it before you got the tech for the upgrade. That is what the AI did. Probably because it wanted the defenses quickly.

I´m almost certain that this is not the case. In a recent game I was the egyptians, and just before I bought Chivalry I put most of my cities on producing War chariots (with the intent of using this particular exploit), but to my surprise, every city auto-switched to Knights.

I also remember from other games that cities that I have completed Much Inf the very same turn I discover Computers, which is due to the fact that cites auto-switch from Infantry to Mech inf.

Gen.Dragolen · August 20, 2002, 08:36

Hurricaine et al,

Don't forget that the default City Governor settings will affect production, too.

If you don't have the "Produce Last Unit" turned on when it comes up to the next item in your production queue, that will see the newest available unit going into production. Nothing like a newly captured 1 pop village trying to built a tank...

And like everyone else, I have a hard time keeping in mind that the AI Civ's all function as the programmers designed them to do: they consistently exploit the rules to their fullest advantage, and make use of things like Mobilization, and will pull off trades that you will never, ever get even a sniff at. They do so because the only way you can build the logic for a game like this. Programming requires hard and fast rules. Where to build, what to produce and when to do it, which leaves the AI Civ's more vulnerable than any experienced human opponent who adapts to changing cirumstances. You would get one hell of a headache if you had to trace the logic tree for any of the AI decisions.

Soren and coy at Firaxis have done a commendible job at making a computer opponent into a nasty, cut-throat backstabbing SoB/Bstrd, and on a standard map, you have 8 of them with which to contend. Yes, there are imbalances in game play and predictible exploits so that's why you post saved games and use the Multi-tool to check out settings. It will always help to have another set of eyes look at a problem. I rely on the limited espionage functions to determine my enemies disposition as much as my gold allows. Try writing down some of your intel information instead of relying on memory, and you'd be amazed at what you will find.

And you should try doing some reading on strategy. Books like The Art of War, the Book of Five Rings and The Prince. Life isn't fair and when others are all trying to out hussle and cheat to get ahead of you, you need to know yourself, know your enemies and make your plans accordingly. I know that when I get frustrated enough playing to start throwing heavy objects like couches or barbells across the room, I'm about 10 seconds away from realizing what I should have been doing in the first place.

Just whining that the game is cheating only shows you have a lot to learn about this game. I still learn new things every game I play, and despite loosing many close battles that I think/feel I should have won, I still win the war in the end. This is a complicated thinking game and not some simple Unreal Tournament frag session.

(Spleen fully vented)

D.

Jaguar · August 20, 2002, 10:34

Oh, yea, my mistake. You can continue building the obselete unit when you hook up the resource for the new one, and that was what I was thinking of.

Lord Merciless · August 20, 2002, 12:41

I think Firaxis made the mistake of creating a game that is intellectually too challenged for many people.

Grumbold · August 21, 2002, 05:44

Do you mean challenging? Intellectually challenged would infer the opposite, i.e. that the game is too stupid.

I certainly agree that the difficulty level is now significantly higher than Civ I or II so some people may be upset that they cannot defeat say emperor mode with the same consummate ease as the previous games.

Panag · August 21, 2002, 07:01

hi ,

the AI knows the nation behind a unit that is flagged 'hidden nationality" , ....

have a nice day

TacticalGrace · August 21, 2002, 07:16

Quote:

Originally posted by panag
hi ,

the AI knows the nation behind a unit that is flagged 'hidden nationality" , ....

have a nice day

So would I though. It should be pretty obvious. Having said that I've never seen the AI use a privateer...

Panag · August 21, 2002, 07:34

Quote:

Originally posted by TacticalGrace

So would I though. It should be pretty obvious. Having said that I've never seen the AI use a privateer...

hi ,

its not only with the privateer , its also when you flag it in a mod or scenario, with other units

have a nice day

Level · August 21, 2002, 10:22

If you pay attention you can tell also but you can't start a war with it.

Lord Merciless · August 21, 2002, 12:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Grumbold
Do you mean challenging? Intellectually challenged would infer the opposite, i.e. that the game is too stupid.

I certainly agree that the difficulty level is now significantly higher than Civ I or II so some people may be upset that they cannot defeat say emperor mode with the same consummate ease as the previous games.

Maybe the game is too easy for you, but most whinings I see here are people who got their ass kicked by the AI. Then they went on whining about how much the AI cheats. In most cases, their claims were unsupported and unsubstantiated, like the thread starter.

Grumbold · August 22, 2002, 05:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Lord Merciless
Maybe the game is too easy for you, but most whinings I see here are people who got their ass kicked by the AI. Then they went on whining about how much the AI cheats. In most cases, their claims were unsupported and unsubstantiated, like the thread starter.

That was my point - the game is intellectually challenging, not intellectually challenged. So some people understandably feel that, with the much stronger AI in the latest Civ game, that there is no need for it to play in an annoying style or by different rules to the human opponent. For example not respecting your borders for at least a few turns after agreeing to retreat. Areas where it seems the AI is cheating are therefore especially hot topics and produce a lot of extreme language on both sides. Kicking someone for not having savegame proof or using the emotive language like 'whining' is hardly helpful. Do you save all your games every turn in case you want to haul it up in evidence for the amateur judge and jury panel on Apolyton? I certainly don't.

TacticalGrace · August 22, 2002, 05:05

Well so far I haven't seen any evidence that the AI "cheats" more than human players.

Hurricane · August 22, 2002, 05:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Grumbold
Do you save all your games every turn in case you want to haul it up in evidence for the amateur judge and jury panel on Apolyton? I certainly don't.

If I decide to start a thread called "More AI CHEATING!!!" I will DEFINITELY back up my claims with some save game evidence.

Grumbold · August 22, 2002, 05:18

Well I'm sure the original poster feels the same way, if s/he ever bothers to come back to talk to such a hostile audience again. Perhaps they were expecting a slightly more sympathetic reception but all experienced Apolytoners know that if you declare something as a fact rather than stating it is your belief and humbly asking for enlightenment from the founts of wisdom then someone somewhere will rip your head off for doing so....

Galvatron · August 22, 2002, 06:54

Well I can back this statement 100% the AI cheats like hell it's even more than in Civ II. Furthermore the AI is overly aggressive: They reject my demands all the time, they often declare war due to minor incidents (e.g. some very small demands from my side) and in the end you are being hatred by the whole world. I assume the AI is special programmed to hamper the human civ whenever possible.

Zachriel · August 22, 2002, 07:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Galvatron
Well I can back this statement 100% the AI cheats like hell it's even more than in Civ II. Furthermore the AI is overly aggressive: They reject my demands all the time, they often declare war due to minor incidents (e.g. some very small demands from my side) and in the end you are being hatred by the whole world. I assume the AI is special programmed to hamper the human civ whenever possible.

I find it relatively easy to control the political situation in most games. I can usually avoid war for as long as necesssary, or attract allies to my side. In "German Valor," I had so much native land to settle that I put off war until the Age of Panzers. Plus I wanted to test my blitzkrieg technique against mature, culturally advanced rivals.

http://www.zachriel.com/gotm8/

If the AI is programmed to hamper the human civ, they shouldn't have let me advance unhindered until I had Panzers.

TacticalGrace · August 22, 2002, 09:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Galvatron
Well I can back this statement 100% the AI cheats like hell it's even more than in Civ II.

Example?

Quote:

Furthermore the AI is overly aggressive: They reject my demands all the time,

We have already established that you do the same. Why should they give up for free what they have earned?

Quote:

they often declare war due to minor incidents (e.g. some very small demands from my side)

Most human players will declare war with no reason whatsoever.

Quote:

and in the end you are being hatred by the whole world. I assume the AI is special programmed to hamper the human civ whenever possible.

What we have to establish is whether the AI civs give each other special treatment or whether it treats the human player just like any other civ. Given the way you seem to play, making demands of the other civs etc it shouldn't surprising that they declare war on you.