AI does ICS!

[Destroyer]

I am nearing the end of my first BTS game, on turn 566. Actually I am probably nowhere near the end, as I have eliminate rivals as the only victory condition.

Either way, I lost this game 100s of turns earlier.

The Koreans and I were stuck on the same huge landmass, in the shape of a "C". Only I got the top bit, and he was positioned to take the rest.

He just kept expanding. Basically I had researched gunpowder first, and got bogged down a bit, having to go across water to expand which was rather expensive. And as it currently stands, he has finish researching everything, and I have just started radio. This is on Prince level. I really dont know what I could have done differently to compete.

The other AIs were miles behind the two of us. It amazes me the difference in AI ability. Maybe I have just been unlucky.

Also, in all my civ4 games, I alaways end up right next to the most powerful ai civ. Is this just me?

[Kuciwalker]

ICS doesn't work in Civ4.

[Willem]

All the AI civs will continue to expand if the conditions are right, just like the human. But they're smart enough to know whether they can afford to or not. Obviously the Koreans did a good job of managing their economy, which isn't really surprising considering they're a Financial civ.

[snoopy369]

Probably just you. Part of it though may be your lack of taking him out early

When you have an AI civ that's going to block your expansion, focus on taking it out early. That's pretty important (just as it is in MP).

[Destroyer]

Okay, not a literal civ1 ICS, but he has crammed a city into every space on the continent. Basically expanding continually. Whcih I was unable to keep up with. CIV4 was meant to force players to play with less cities. But it hasnt worked very well in this game.

[Theseus]

The rich get richer. And you got owned. Gam sa, ham ni dah!!

Sounds like the game is truly lost. I am not familiar enough with BTS yet to prescribe a last-ditch solution.... a bit earlier, would a concentrated offensive have been feasible?

[Stromko]

The same thing happened to me today, but it was the French. When I was just getting set up and they started moving in huge stacks of axemen, swordsman, and bowmen when all I had was archers.. I knew I was screwed. That was just on Noble difficulty.

I usually get torn a new one if I don't have horses, as they're the only thing I can build with enough quantity/quality to possibly hold off the AI.

I'd say the AI has gotten a lot more cut-throat, even on Warlord difficulty. I'm playing a game right now where the Mongols, Zulu, and Khmer have been constantly pulling eachother into wars with me. Meanwhile I'd been buttering up the Dutch the whole game and they were always Pleased, but they always refused to give me any techs.. then, when I was moving a full transport over to take ove a Celt island, they declared war, sunk it, and now their destroyers are swimming all around my continent..

I finally quit in disgust, not because I was losing, but because despite having a whole bunch of fighters and bombers they can only take ships down to 50%. That really makes no sense. Don't even get me started on how much this rule screws up the Pacific WWII scenario.

re: I'm playing without aggressive AI. I have 'tech brokering' disabled and Time/Space victories turned off though.

[Wiglaf]

Is that with or without aggressive AI?

[DrSpike]

If he was expanding fast that means less resources for military. It should have been clear to you early on that you were going to have to whack him over the head - depending on resources the windows in the circumstances you describe are early axe rush or 4/5 cities then attack late BC/early AD with siege support. If he has better land and you wait too late (even with the old AI) it's easy to get bogged down.

This may have changed with the new game as I don't have it yet, but I doubt it.

[I_pity_the_fool]

I finally quit in disgust, not because I was losing, but because despite having a whole bunch of fighters and bombers they can only take ships down to 50%. That really makes no sense. Don't even get me started on how much this rule screws up the Pacific WWII scenario.

I believe they introduced lethal bombardment in Civ III: Conquests.

It was not universally hailed as a wise move. Many saw it as over-emphasizing air power, and making the game a good deal more, uh, cheesy.

[Destroyer]

I am not particularlly agressive in terms of starting wars unless I have a considerable tech advantage, which I never had, although I was at one point ahead.

The problem with early wars is that:

1. The are expensive in terms of having to shift your economy.
2. Being my nearest neigbour, he was still about 40-50 odd squares away (capital to capital). It appears he expanded my way first, to cut me off, and then expanded unimpeded to the south. Dunno if this was clever AI, or not. Either way, Iby the time we were border to border, my economy couldnt handle many more cities.
3. I didnt have a tech advantage in terms of a killer unit which could hav taken his cities down.

What has really annoyed me since, is that Justin, the Byzantine bloke, had a huge landmass, and was technologically backward - easy pickings. So I ammassed a huge army, many settlers and started a huge new settlemeny right in his backyard - declared war, took out several of his cities, and was literally right outside his capital, when my good friend the Koreans, oncce again screwed me over, by declaring war on Justin, and then within a couple of turns have him become his vassal, denying me further expansion on that bloody continent as well.

And it gets worse, The final continent was mine for the taking (well the Sumerians has settled the entire landmass, but they were using muskets against tanks, what did they expect). So I upped my entire army there. If the Koreans declared war against me it was game over. The only other civ was also their vassal, so it was pain sailing.

All of a sudden Justin attacks me. I crap my pants thinking The Koreans have declared war (which they hadnt) Only to find he was no longer a vassal, and was itching for some payback against my relatively undefended cities.

I cant often remember seeing 6 stacks with at least 20 riflemen or cavalry in each before in 15 odd years of civ playing. Thankly, the magic of flight was already mine, and after sacrificing a few cities to slow the advance, I have my chance to take his capital again.

I am just waiting for Wan Kong to screw me over yet again.

This has to be the most eventful civ game I have played in, either by design of the ai, or chance.

I cant win this one, but I may just come in second...

[jkp1187]

Originally posted by Stromko
The same thing happened to me today, but it was the French. When I was just getting set up and they started moving in huge stacks of axemen, swordsman, and bowmen when all I had was archers.. I knew I was screwed. That was just on Noble difficulty.

I usually get torn a new one if I don't have horses, as they're the only thing I can build with enough quantity/quality to possibly hold off the AI.

I'd say the AI has gotten a lot more cut-throat, even on Warlord difficulty. I'm playing a game right now where the Mongols, Zulu, and Khmer have been constantly pulling eachother into wars with me. Meanwhile I'd been buttering up the Dutch the whole game and they were always Pleased, but they always refused to give me any techs.. then, when I was moving a full transport over to take ove a Celt island, they declared war, sunk it, and now their destroyers are swimming all around my continent..

I finally quit in disgust, not because I was losing, but because despite having a whole bunch of fighters and bombers they can only take ships down to 50%. That really makes no sense. Don't even get me started on how much this rule screws up the Pacific WWII scenario.

re: I'm playing without aggressive AI. I have 'tech brokering' disabled and Time/Space victories turned off though.

I don't know -- sending unescorted transports full of military units? Sounds like you were asking for it....

[marvinkosh]

Not all starts are necessarily balanced in your favour. However, it is quite possible to get a huge leg-up if you put your mind to it and have a spot of luck.

For example, if you start really close to some Marble and your Civ has Mysticism as a starting tech, it's quite possible to snag the Oracle and get yourself a Medieval tech while everyone else is still polishing the tips of their bronze spears.

Theology doesn't have quite the same zing as Civil Service, but it does allow you to use the Theocracy civic, affording +2 XP to all your units built in cities with your state religion. Provided you have actually located your neighbour, you can start laying into him while he's still developing. You don't even have to finish him off, the loss of just a couple of cities may prove to be the decisive blow which will alter the balance of land on that continent.

If you think a Civ is expanding too much, your settlers should be founding cities which will allow you to block further access when you renege on Open Borders (assuming you sign in the first place). If he gets around you and plants a new city on a prime spot, don't be afraid to declare war to smash it into the ground. While you're at it, put together an invasion force and take one of his outlying cities. You don't necessarily have to hold it, but if you do it can come in handy as a bargaining chip if he later rejects a peace treaty.

I'm not saying that you can wage a full-on war with Archers but you can certainly make yourself enough of an annoyance that your neighbour will sue for peace.

[CreepyD]

I've noticed that since BTS, they seem to be able to expand much faster.
recently I was playing a standard size map with about 10 civs, 1 of those managed to put out 14 cities to my 4.
A similar thing happened the next game I tried.
I'm playing on Prince level, and they never used to expand this fast! They don't seem to be suffering either, getting a huge tech lead by the time gunpowder comes along for me.

[marvinkosh]

Well, more cities does mean more commerce, which in turn means more beakers and faster research. If they're not defending those cities well enough against attack then those cities can be put to use for your empire, or if they're too far away to be of use, you can burn them to the ground so your rival's advance is checked.

The thing to remember is that the more cities you have, the more things you can produce at the one time. This allows some of your cities a chance to grow while the others work on producing workers or settlers.