Does the AI ever go for Domination/Conquest?

[TieSolo]

I've seen the AI really shoot for a cultural victory and a space race win, but I've never seen it actively pursue a domination or conquest win.

I mean, they declare war, but generally with the goal of trampling on a weaker civ or capturign something strategic. They are generally willing to go for peace if you bribe them or they have completed their objective (ie capture a certain city).

So, my question is (to Blake as well if he reads this thread) does the AI puruse these victory conditions? Also, if I were to switch off every victory condition except domination and conquest, does the AI "know" this and pursue them?

Thanks!

[Solver]

The AI doesn't directly have the long-term goal of those victories. Indirectly, warmonger personalities may be declaring war just for the heck of it, leading to them growing to Domination-approaching sizes. In my experience, Shaka is the leader that gets it done most often.

In the 3.13 BtS patch, new logic was introduced that makes the AI realize when it's approaching Domination. If it finds that it has almost enough land for a Domination victory, it'll step up its aggression.

[Blake]

The AI can in principle, but generally the AI's are so evenly matched that they have trouble getting a good steamrolling going.

If you go to the "How often do you expect to win" thread, if you put an AI in a game with other AI's, such that the "winning" AI was that much stronger (say playing at a a couple of difficulties "higher" in terms of what it could produce), then it would likely win domination fairly easily, if it chose to pursue that kind of strategy. Because it could kill other individual AI's quite easily.

In an "even match" game, players win domination through clever diplomatic manipulation - basically "Don't fight fair one-on-one". The AI however can not manipulate diplomacy cleverly, however in BTS it is better at at least bringing in friends - but this goes both ways, the victims will also be more likely to bring in friends. But anyway, domination in an even-match game, involves a lot of diplomatic manipulation and not just declaring war on a succession of players.
It's difficult to replicate that diplomatic process for the AI, except through making some AI's use a "gullible fool" strategy (their current one) and a few AI's using the "manipulator" strategy. But the fact that AI's will bring in friends now, does make it harder for a human manipulator (meaning again, the sure-fire way to win a domination is to lower the difficulty).

Furthermore complicating domination in an "Even-match" game, is that in CIV, defense is generally easier than attack, then means you either need a large skill or tech advantage or both, in order to have clean offensive wars. Because the AI is not terribly skilled, it's wars tend to be very bloody and expensive, making it bad at steamrolling (it needs to keep on rebuilding the roller...).

The AI does recognize when Culture, Space and Diplomatic are turned off. In particular, when it gets to the end of the tech tree, it starts spamming units like crazy, this is in contrast with pre-BTS, where the AI at the end of the tech tree started "investing" heavily in "build wealth" and future tech while it's power flatlined. In those previous versions the simple way to win "Dom only" games, was to stay alive until the end of the tech tree, at which point you could take your time to build up a larger military. Now the AI would be more likely to nuke you off the map and swarm your territory with a bazillion units. Not necessarily fun because of the sheer unit spam involved, but nor does it create "dumb strategy".

[One_more_turn]

On the tactical level, the AI is just no match for human players. Despite some improvements in BTS, the AI is still lousy at conducting effective offensive operations.

[mkorin]

The AI will go for Conq/Dom wins on smaller maps and I have seen them collecting vassas, (before I destory them) which is the first step towards a Conq/Dom win on a larger map. The logic of Space is probably easier to understand from a limited AI 'thought process', thus you'll see it in the majority of the AIs win. And of course, anytime the player gets destroyed by the AI, he wins through domination at least as far as the player is concerned.

Mike

[Tattila the Hun]

Hmmm, I wonder if Suryiaman was heading for Domination in my last game. He was the master of everyone else in continent 1, while I was the sole survivor of continent 2. Annoying thing, he was Friendly with me, when he declared war. I was under the impression, that that was impossible, downright prevented in code. What's the point of having friends, who still come after you? One cannot trust anyone, it seems...

Though, I seem to recall having Domination disabled....

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by Tattila the Hun
One cannot trust anyone, it seems...

Of COURSE Not!

I am now forever suspect of a powerful (or warlike) civ suggesting a defensive pact. Last time, it was a devious ploy prior to an invasion -- so like a human!

[Krill]

[q=lBlake]In an "even match" game, players win domination through clever diplomatic manipulation - basically "Don't fight fair one-on-one". The AI however can not manipulate diplomacy cleverly, however in BTS it is better at at least bringing in friends - but this goes both ways, the victims will also be more likely to bring in friends. But anyway, domination in an even-match game, involves a lot of diplomatic manipulation and not just declaring war on a succession of players.[/q]

Clarification: by "Even match"do you mean where all the AI are even and the human player is an unknown variable, or where all the players including the human are even on skill?

[TieSolo]

I just had an interesting game in which France was within 4% more land of winning a domination victory. He impressively expanded his empire across three continents. Then he steamrolled me and the only way to get him to stop (and not get the land he needed to win) was to give him the tech superconductors...at that point he retreated and went for the space race victory...unfortunately Peter of Russia beat him to it.

Now, I would suggest in any upcoming patch that more emphasis is put on this victory if the AI is so close to achieveing it. I know there is already something in place to that effect, but France was SOOO close to achieving it that all he had to do was grab one more of my cities or attack an area that still had a barbarian city.

[Dominae]

Is it possible to create a mod that allows you to specify the difficulty level for each AI in the game setup, à la GalCiv? I know that the AI code is the same regardless of difficulty in Civ4, but there's still the handicaps and bonuses. Being able to choose (say) 4 Monarch AIs and 2 Emperor AIs as your opponents would lead to some interesting games.

[Hauptman]

REVITALIZING THIS THREAD BECAUSE...

oops sorry caps.

Anyways. My last 2 games, infact have shown me that yes, they try conquest victories.

The first game Gengis khan was going crazy (as he usually does) but unlike most earlier games, He didnt stop. He was amassing so much land and so many vassals i was actually scared he might win... I had to keep an eye on the victory screen just to see how close he was. Fortunatly vassal land doenst count for 100%, he easily had 60% under his control or vassalized...

The last game it was shaka. I was playing a "peaceful" AP game and shaka was my friend and muscle. Well for the early game i was controlling who he attacked by way of the AP or $$. Well about midgame he declared war on onother friend and when i tried to stop him the "make peace with..." was redded out. With the pop up reason givin as "No thanks, we'd rather win the game thank you very much."

I about fell out of my chair laughing because it was so unexpected, but obviosly his goal was domination/conquest...

Just thought I'd share.