Is Warlords easier v. the AI than Vanilla Civ?

[Forwarn45]

What do you think - which is easier when you play SP against the AI?

[Blake]

Warlords is easier, largely because the AI can't use Great Generals to much effect, but also because the AI trains too many mounted and siege units and seems to have gained some new dumb tricks. Another thing is that Warlords AI's ends up in war more often, and on the whole war is far more harmful to AI's than humans - when two AI's fight each other only rarely will cities change hands, mostly they just exhaust themselves and become easy pickings for the human. In Warlords it's easier to get momentum going and keep it going, moving on from one weakened AI to the next. Vassalage means the AI often declares war on the human, avoiding the "you declared war on our friend" diplo hit, making it easier to bribe others into the new war.

[Martinus]

I wouldn't say it's neither easier nor more difficult. The AI now plays a bit more like a human player in early game, in that it expands very rapidly, rather than building up, like it did in vanilla.

So, on one hand it is much harder for a player to expand peacefully, as very soon all good spots around your borders are settled by neighbouring AIs. On the other hand, the AI does not stack its cities with so many units as before, which makes conquest easier.

[Nugog]

I haven't really noticed any real difference.

[Adagio]

Can't say I've noticed any difference either

[alexman]

Originally posted by Blake
the AI trains too many mounted and siege units and seems to have gained some new dumb tricks.

Could you please elaborate on those dumb tricks? A save or two would be nice, if you have them.

Also, the AI does not train more mounted and siege units in Warlords. It just uses them slightly differently.

[GeoModder]

I did notice in my present game a tendency from Kublai Khan to use his cavalry mainly as pillagers. And he managed to take a city of mine with an army mainly consisting of cavalry as well. All his rifleman stayed home guarding his cities.

[couerdelion]

I’ve too little experience to date but it seems that the game has hit a few of the strongest human tactics. The reduced benefit from chopping is a big loss while more intelligent barbarians counter a purely defensive strategy which counteracts the super-strength anti-AI chariot units they’ve introduced.

Since these are all early effects, I’m inclined to think that the game has got a little harder but it’s a bit too early to say

[rah]

Yes, the AI doesn't handle generals at all well.

The only thing that seems harder is that barbs and the AI won't destroy themselves attacking units parked on superior defensive terrain as much as they used to. They just go around and force you to attack them at not quite as favorable odds as they used to attack you.

[Nikolai]

The game seems a little easier, but not much.

[kiky]

Originally posted by alexman
Also, the AI does not train more mounted and siege units in Warlords. It just uses them slightly differently.

I have not play lots of Warlords, but my experience so far that early in the game AI build a lot more Chariots than other unit.

Warlords is easier if you are playing aggressive. More combats means more GG means better units.
Some AI has come out with 2-3 promo units, but they're not specialise enough for specific function.
That would mean benefit for human players.

[YC4B4U]

Found Warlords hard to begin with, but now that I have strategies and tactics that fit the changes I have found it slightly easier.

I note that at the end game the AI seems to find it harder to keep up in Technology. But then that is only on Noble

[AFsoccer]

Wow, I think it is much harder. In fact, I've had a few games where I've just turned off the computer in disgust because I think the AI is cheating it's butt off.

I've also experienced three separate games where the barbarians have attacked relentlessly. I'm talking 10 or more attackers each turn, with more moving in each each turn. It was ridiculous. There's no way a barbarian city or the fog of war should be producing that many troops. In Warlords I've lost to the barbarians twice (which never happened in Civ4 vanilla).

So back to the AI cheating. I was in first place... was producing troops and had research on 90-100%. Then the Romans declared war on me. The stack they attacked with with had (no kidding):

5 SAM
9 Marines
12 Tanks
20 Artillery
28 Cavalry
and quite a few infantry!

It was ridiculous. Then I thought, okay, I bet I am ahead of him on research if he's spent all that time building troops. But no... I get a message that very turn about the Romans building "casing" for the spaceship. They had half the territory I had! How could this be?? I've played Civ since it came out and I've never lost this many games in a row. ugh.

[sparkyal]

Just because they are half your size does not mean thay they have half your production ability or research. and since his upgrades are cheeper then yours his troops may have been built up over time.

As for dealing with those stacks? Hit them with artiliary. You may loose them, but the damage will be done. If you have some planes, you may want to bomb them (SAM's...well, it's a risk). Find a poinbt that you can fall back to, especially accross rivers, peaks and such. Protect your high production cities the most. These stacks will represent the vast majority of his army. So, if you can survive the initial onslaught, you are home free.

sparky

[MikeH]

Originally posted by kiky


I have not play lots of Warlords, but my experience so far that early in the game AI build a lot more Chariots than other unit.

I build a lot more chariots than I used to, they actually have some usefulness now!