Without cheats, will the AI be able to press the offensive?

[Crouchback]

I have absolutely no hope of the AI managing complex combined attacks later on in the game, which has nothing to do with the changes in cheating but everything to do with the stupidity of silicon. That is why I'm glad to see the position of defenders strengthened, to help the AI stop me.

But, what about the earlier game when all the AI has to combine is catapults/cannons and PBI? That stage of AI warmongering might improve dramatically under the new system.

David

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by joer
So...I think a big question is whether or not the AI will have complete game information again, and if it's capable of drawing advantage out of it.

In a fog of war game this is certainly one of the best advantages to be had... unless the AI is so stupid you can lure it into attacking by emptying a city hundreds of miles from the border, then restock it a couple of turns later after you've massacred his invasion force.

Even without too sophisticated tactics a la chop'n-drop, fast surprise attacks with combined forces against selected cities would mean BIG trouble for me. I am not sure if I can afford to defend every city with several of the latest defenders.

It seems like really fast attacks will be impossible until at least the flight era. That is going to give me a hard enough time on the offensive so I don't hold out much hope for the AI

[albiedamned]

Originally posted by Crouchback
I have absolutely no hope of the AI managing complex combined attacks later on in the game, which has nothing to do with the changes in cheating but everything to do with the stupidity of silicon. That is why I'm glad to see the position of defenders strengthened, to help the AI stop me.

But, what about the earlier game when all the AI has to combine is catapults/cannons and PBI? That stage of AI warmongering might improve dramatically under the new system.

David

Pardon my ignorance, but what is PBI?

My opinion on this whole debate is that we should not raise our expectations too high regarding the AI's ability to coordinate an attack. There's never been a game that had an AI that could strategize like a human. Nothing against the coders at Firaxis, but if they had achieved such a breakthrough I'm sure they would be bragging about it.

Having said that, I agree that defenders in general will have an easier time in Civ3 due to some of the changes (attackers can't use road networks, bombardment units can be captured etc.). I believe Firaxis realized how easy it was for human players to outsmart and demolish the AI. Since they realized it would be nearly impossible to give the AI the same strategic ability to attack, the next best option would be to enhance the defenders to make attacking harder for the human player.

So the AI probably still won't be able to attack us effectively, but we'll have a harder time attacking it. The overall effect is a game where war is just not as attractive an option. As a builder, I'm all in favor of that! The original Civ's were never intended to be war games, but many played them as such because it was so easy to beat the AI at war. Now I think the game will be much more about true civilization building, and not just civilization conquering.

[old dog]

I don't expect the AI to be able to strategize like an experienced human. However, it is possible for the AI to have a "bank" of plausible strategies, and it is possible for the AI to vary amongst these strategies so as not to be too predictable.

Most of the worst problems arise from a)no strategy at all, just sending individual units forth to attack the nearest city, and b)having a single, predictable strategy which can be fully exploited by the experienced player.

One would hope that, if the strategy worked for the AI a few turns back, the odds of that same strategy being repeated would rise. If the strategy failed, the odds of repeating would drop.

The claim that city governors "learn" from your actions gives me hope that the AI military strategy will rise to at least this level. Add in the "tilted playing field" of an AI advantage (at higher levels) in production and tech development, and you have yourself a very competitive game.

[korn469]

i want to point out that one of the major complaints with CtP:2 was the fact that the AI didn't pose a threat, if the AI cannot attack effectively, then unless like Steve Clark suggestion firaxis makes the AI better able to win in non-military ways the game will lack any challenge

even if you can't crack the AI's defenses it won't matter because every victory will be a spaceship victory

i know the AI can't be a military genius, but i expect that with superior forces that it should be a threat

if i could open up the AI and find out which military leader they based it on it had better not be Sargent Schultz from Hogan's Heroes!

however his famous quote does apply to the AI
I know nothing, nothing.