CARRIERS: How Does One Make AI Use Them?

[Gatekeeper]

Pyrodrew:

I have tried that trick as well. Suffice to say, it ended in failure. Thanks for the suggestion, though. After all, it's the thought that counts!

CYBERAmazon

***

Zyxpsilon:

I'm not sure that a PC .sav file would be compatible with a Macintosh. In any case, I have enough faith to believe that the AI did use a carrier in your case. Thanks for the offer, though.

CYBERAmazon

[zyxpsilon]

quote: Originally posted by CYBERAmazon on 12-06-2000 03:06 AM More and more, I'm thinking it's a slot error and/or something you have to specifically trigger via an event file.

Not at all...
wan't to have the *.sav?
It was so rare, i had to keep it as a jewel of Ai's impredictable behavior!

[zyxpsilon]

quote: Originally posted by Pyrodrew on 12-08-2000 09:29 AM Changing this to a #4 "Sea Transport" unit, might solve the problem.

And they won't loadup planes... which is what a Carrier is made for.
Once more;
Ai's must have the productivity strength to build more than ONE Bomber and a remote objective that must be reached via Ocean distances.

[Pyrodrew]

Here's an idea I don't have time to try...

Currently the Carrier is listed as a #2 "Sea Superiority" unit in the rules.txt. Changing this to a #4 "Sea Transport" unit, might solve the problem.

[Lews Therìn]

The trick I've heard about is to move the carrier into a different unit slot, and put a unit you don't want the computer to use in the carrier slot -- swap battleships and carriers, for example.

------------------
Thus spake the Dragon

yeah that's why I asked. the fantastic worlds has the scenario editor which is handy for changing unit graphics. I would have never changed them if it weren't for that.

[Gatekeeper]

Zyxpsilon:

You're more fortunate than me, then. I've *never* seen the AI use carriers in a standard game. More and more, I'm thinking it's a slot error and/or something you have to specifically trigger via an event file.

CYBERAmazon

***

Dissident Aggressor:

I have the Macintosh version — both standard and multi-player (albeit I only use the former as the latter's aggressive AI is too overboard).

I've lowered the cost of the carrier, gave it AEGIS ability and raised its attack power to 6. None of it matters; the AI simply will not build it. As for switching slots, I haven't done that because I fear the slots are specifically linked to icons in the .gifs file. IOW, if I put the carrier into the destroyer slot, will I end up seeing the destroyer icon being used as a carrier? And vice-versa?

Besides, I'm a bit "iffy" about switching slots in the first place. Why? The one time I changed a cosmic principle number, it made it so the game wouldn't even start (gee ... never realized a "6" to a "7" could frighten the binary out of a computer like that). Hence, I've stuck mainly to changing attributes to Wonders and units while making use of the three "extra" units and adding in more technology buffers.

In retrospect, I think the whole issue is slot-related. Perhaps some day I'll be bothered enough to actually mess around with changing slots on established units.

CYBERAmazon

what version do you have. also check out the east wind/rain scenario in conflicts of civilization. The ai decimates me with the pearl harbor attack. Although they use fighters too much in suicidal attacks (another ai problem). the only problem is after pearl harbor they hardly use them. I think it is more than just attack/defense.

and by slots try putting the carrier into the destoyer slot (the ai builds lots of destroyers). and move destroyer into carrier slot. real easy to do if you have FW edition.

[zyxpsilon]

Rarely have i seen Ai's use Carriers... although i can tell you how it happened in a few games where i witnessed it.

Agressive/militaristic tribes were more incline.
Their oceanic distances were close enough from "my borders" and a key path to their expansion plans had them keep targeting ONE of my cities in particular.
Also, they had the "strange" habit to be accompanied by a strong naval unit.
Their planes inventory (mostly bombers) is also a requisite to wanting them to loadup an attack strike.

[Gatekeeper]

Legman:

Yes, I was trying to increase my chances of a useful reply or two a bit by posting my query in two forums. So far it seems like the general consensus is it's impossible to get the AI to use the carrier.

BTW, I did follow the link to MWHC's thread. It was intriguing, but MWHC never specified how he wove his super carrier into the the rules.txt file. I mean, did he simply edit the existing carrier slot into the super carrier? Did he use the extra sea unit slot (with its graphic) and edit that to conformity? Or did he simply find something on the Internet, downloaded it and then appended it to the rules.text file?

Frankly, I'm beginning to think that the AI won't use the carrier because of the slot itself. I just gave the darn thing an attack power of 12, defense power of 12 and left the cost at 160 shields ... yet the AI still refuses to build it! Builds everything else under the sun (including the customized units I created with the "extra" land, sea and air slots [3 total] in the rules.txt) but the carrier. It has to be a bug or something with the slot per se, I'm thinking. Maybe I should change it so carrier doesn't become available with advanced flight ... maybe with flight or plastics or something. **sigh** I still don't think it would work, though.

Perhaps my only hope is to edit my Stingray "stealth" transport (4 holds included and 8 movement points) into a super carrier. An odd-looking super carrier, yes, as the transport looks bio-engineered thing with sails. Anyway ...

CYBERAmazon

I posted a useful link (IMO of course) in the similar thread to this one in the CivII Strategy forum. Check it out.

Guess it's now been demonstrated why it's impractical to have identical threads running...

[Gatekeeper]

Dissident Aggressor:

As of this writing, I've bumped up the carrier's attack to 4a whilst increasing the defense to 14d. I've left the cost, firepower and hitpoints alone, though. I've created an "experimental" Civilization II game and am running through it with no human player ... but the AI hasn't bothered with the carrier option yet.

**sigh**

CYBERAmazon

***

Scouse Gits:

Thanks the the leads, but I haven't uncovered anything pertaining to carriers yet. Found just about something on every other aspect of the game, though.

Would you remember which forum Narck and/or Sten Sture posted their thoughts on carriers in? That might help a bit. Thanks!

CYBERAmazon

[Scouse Gits]

IIRC either Narck or Sten posted loooong ago about their personal mods to make carriers work - the gist of the posting was that you needed to improve the cost/effectiveness for the AI to build them so reduce the cost and up the attack - you might just find the post in the archives - it was as I recall shortly after we had joined so that gives you a starting date...


------------------
____________
Scouse Git[1]

"CARTAGO DELENDA EST" - Cato the Censor
"The Great Library must be built!"
"A short cut has to be challenging,
were it not so it would be 'the way'." - Paul Craven

I feel your pain.

A high attack rating for a carrrier isn't realistic though. but if it helps maybe up it to 6. As for the ai putting planes on them. Not a chance. The only time I seem an airstrike with them is in the east wind, rain (title might be messed up) scenario in conflicts. They do successfully launch a pearl harbor attack. And the results can be impressive. But after that in the scenario most of the carriers are empty, and the ai just moves fighter from city to city.

I definately recommend upping the hitpoints and defense of carriers. I feel a carrier force can protect itself very well (assuming the unit is not one lone carrier). I put their d to 11 (just below battleships) and I think I up their hp to 4. But actually the ai seemed to use them less when I did this.

but don't count on the ai actually building them (maybe if you lower it to 20 cost ). Just assign them several at the start of the scenario. If you do lower the cost, it'd be best to make it nation specific so the human player cannot cheaply pump out carriers. I'd have to do some testing to try this out though.

[Gatekeeper]

Everyone:

Just what the subject line implies. If it's one thing that could really make the game more challenging versus the AI, it would be if the latter used carriers!

Can you imagine the extra strategy one would have to employ if the AI made use of loaded carriers as it does transports and submarines? I mean, the possibility of a massive air strike from the Russians in Europe would be very real, even if you were playing a New World power. It would be the same if the AI actually brought fully-loaded attack subs over. (Granted, some Apolytoners think the AI is too flagrant with cruise missiles already )

Back to AI carriers, though. What would be some method that would induce the AI to build and load them naturally? Right now they cost 160 shields. Would lowering the cost work (it did with cruise missiles ... the AI now uses them against a variety of land units, instead of just certain ships)? I've taken a preliminary step by increasing the defense factor to 10d, instead of the usual 9d. Would upping the attack factor a bit help (right now it's naturally a 1a, but I think putting it to 3a or 4a ... or even higher ... would be nice ... after all, carriers have some formidable attack/defense systems nowadays)?

Please help me! You can sign me ...

... desperately seeking a mean AI w/o having to use Civ II MPE .

CYBERAmazon