some opinions on the AI please.

[Unimatrix11]

Wow - i am deeply impressed, yet, in an egoistic sense, somewhat sad hearing this. But what is a big loss for Apolyton and civing in general is probably a huge gain for his faith and himself. Apart from the fact that he wrote an impressive AI, which millions worldwide enjoy playing against, i came to have an idea of his ´wisdom´ (sounds cheesy, but i lack a better word) in the rather long discussion about the ´hostoric review´ and wether civ is an historical simulation or not which turned into a debate about the banking system. Ever since then, i respected and admired him. This news just stregenthend my belief, that Blake is probably one of the smartest persons i ever had a conversation with and it shouldnnt have really surprised me, when i think about it, that he was ready to elevate his mentality to things most of us probably dont even have a grasp of.

Sorry if this sounds cheesy, but since this site was the only connection, it kinda feels like he died, and i felt the need to give a little speech, which i think he will probably never read. *sniff*

[Sir Og]

Re: some opinions on the AI please.

Originally posted by aVoided
heya,

.
.
.

One reason I question the AI. Many games I have played on warlord just experimenting and learning. I find the AI never attacks each other. or rarely does. When they do it only lasts a few turns.
.
.
.

As people already suggested get BTS and play agressive AI. You will be surprised.

For example in amy first BTS game (prince level) Montezuma had conquered and/or vassalized averybody on his continent and as soon as he got astronomy launched a sea invasion on me with 6 galeons. I quit because I did not expect thisand my army was on the other side of the continent and before BTS I was winning comfortably on monarch difficulty.

If I remember correctly the AI never attempted Diplomatic victory (or at least never managed to pull it off) pre BTS. Now I have seen the AI go for domination/comquest, diplo, cultural and space ship (this of course has been the only victory condition that the AI was remotely good at in any of the previous versions of civ)

Also try to be number one in soldiers (preferably by a large margin) when you play and then go around and ask the various AIs(especialy the weaker ones) for techs, resourses, etc. and see how it goes. I am sure that you will manage to get stuff from them. Of course if you push too much they will become annoyed with you.

[aVoided]

I can't get BTS because I'm playing the base copy of the game (with warlords) via gametap. I'm too cheap to buy a copy, since i bought Colonies and am enjoying it's style twice as much. As I said though.. the AI in colonies is just as stupid.. guess it comes with the engine hehe.

[jbp26]

Originally posted by aVoided
yeah well i cant count the number of fights ive lost with 90+ percent win odds.. oh well not really a concern just an annoyance

probably about 10% of them.

[aVoided]

good one you are probably right though.. just seems like you always remember those fluke fights with 95% to win and somehow they hold you back. Esspecialy frustrating when you bring an exact amount of troops and you dont plan for losses and it throws your whole plan off

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by aVoided
... when you bring an exact amount of troops and you dont plan for losses and it throws your whole plan off

A good plan for disaster, THAT is!

Just as in real warfare, nothing will go exactly as planned.
Well, it's a bad bet, anyway.

[joncnunn]

The rule of thumb for real life is want to have a local 3:1 advantage before attacking.

At a mere 2:1 advantage you try to use your forces to try to spread out your oppoents to attempt to get a local 3:1 in part of it.

[Thoth]

Originally posted by Jaybe
Thanks, Thoth. I hadn't seen that thread.

No problem. It's certainly not what I would have expected from your average AI programmer.

[Blaupanzer]

Originally posted by Thoth

No problem. It's certainly not what I would have expected from your average AI programmer.

From his participation here, Blake always seems very thoughtful, thinking things thru, trying to anticipate how a change in one set of code would affect others, undsoweiter. So he really wasn't an average programmer. Still, your implication feels right. Not a lot of coders, however sophisticated, want to search their own souls, as opposed to pushing the limits of the man-machine interface. If there is a Civ V, we will miss his insights.

Those trying Colonization: is the AI dumb in the old way? Is there a setting like aggressive AI to give them an oomph? How many civs are there? I would love to hear a generic summary of such. Or, do I need to go th that forum?

[snoopy369]

The good news: Blake was involved in the Col AI.
The bad news: The col AI is ... not very good, so far. Dale (and I, to a very much limited sense) is trying to fix it, but there is a lot to be fixed. The AI just doesn't fight you at all...

Go over to the Col forum, though

[Traianvs]

I have recently started playing BtS again. I momentarily played it a long while ago, but I somehow didn't go through with it. So now I do, and frankly it might not be such a good idea because damn it be addictive!

I grew a bit bored with Vanilla CiV4 and Warlords because the AI was quite predictable. I'm really surprised to see the improvements in BtS. In my experience the AI has finally stopped being a collective of 6 civs who work together to destroy the human player. It's easier to betray and manipulate the others civs, and to get free techs from them. Their stacks are better and bigger, pending attacks are no longer visible a mile away (well... not always I mean ), better random map options (I like medium and small, with interspersed but sizeable islands), more tweaking possible to your cities with corporations (I like how I can save my city from cultural takeover by installing a corporation executive with a strong culture bonus).

The game has a lot more replayability now.

[aVoided]

Colonies AI is terrible really. I've been playing it for a little while. Not that the AI really matters. You don't really go to war until you declare independance unless you annoy the natives. It's pretty much just build up a huge force then try kill the kings expeditionary force, which I may add is tough only because of his sheer numbers and all of his units (artilery) are generaly better than yours.

The other colonies generaly mean nothing unless they are close by and getting in your way, but for the most part you dont have time to fight them.

All in all for me it was really fun at first. I love the city and colonist managment and the way you build your army by arming them. Really though it gets old fast imo.

[Traianvs]

Originally posted by aVoided
Colonies AI is terrible really. I've been playing it for a little while. Not that the AI really matters. You don't really go to war until you declare independance unless you annoy the natives. It's pretty much just build up a huge force then try kill the kings expeditionary force, which I may add is tough only because of his sheer numbers and all of his units (artilery) are generaly better than yours.

The other colonies generaly mean nothing unless they are close by and getting in your way, but for the most part you dont have time to fight them.

All in all for me it was really fun at first. I love the city and colonist managment and the way you build your army by arming them. Really though it gets old fast imo.

Sounds much like the original colonization to me.