AI is stupid

[philosophile]

I got a more realistic approach to the AI. Programming the AI has to be the hardest part of programming job done in Civ 3. This is a game with so many possibilities, and everything, that the AI needs to evaluate everything, and for this, programmers must have taught it to do so.

Currently, the humankind hasn't actually developed THE AI. THE AI would think much like humans do, and construction of THE AI could only come after we actually discovered and understood how the human brain works. Currently, however, construction of THE AI is somewhat from the sci-fi area, and whatever we program is limited somewhat.

I got a more realistic approach to the AI. Programming the AI has to be the hardest part of programming job done in Civ 3. This is a game with so many possibilities, and everything, that the AI needs to evaluate everything, and for this, programmers must have taught it to do so.

True... but at the very least they could have done something like they did in Alpha centauri... give the various factions a different AI or play style. That way there would be some variety in the game. But it seems pretty clear that the the AI is all the same for all the non player countries.

[Solver]

More play style, yes, could be. However, the AI of Civ 3 is far superior to any other in Civ games, including the stupid one in SMAC.

[Soren Johnson]

Originally posted by philosophile

True... but at the very least they could have done something like they did in Alpha centauri... give the various factions a different AI or play style. That way there would be some variety in the game. But it seems pretty clear that the the AI is all the same for all the non player countries.

this is a classic AI programming trade-off issue. Should we make 16 unique AI's and then have to debug/test each one? Or should we write one fantastic AI which will make the leaders all feel the same? Of course, Civ3 did something in the middle and so did SMAC. However, Civ3 was closer to the latter while SMAC was closer to the former. And I would posit that both succeeded in certain areas... the Civ3 AI is more effective; the SMAC AI is more varied. There is no "right" answer unless one has unlimited development time.

[Solver]

Very good point Soren (how much I like to see which thread do you read ). I must say I prefer the Civ 3 way over the SMAC way.

BTW now that I know you read this thread , would you please make one improvement to your AI that is really easy to implement - have it upgrade its units! Eh?

[Soren Johnson]

Originally posted by Solver
Very good point Soren (how much I like to see which thread do you read ). I must say I prefer the Civ 3 way over the SMAC way.

BTW now that I know you read this thread , would you please make one improvement to your AI that is really easy to implement - have it upgrade its units! Eh?

hmmm... I improved the unit upgrading of the AI quite a bit via the first couple patches, and I have not heard too many complaints since. Sometimes, of course, the AI just has no money. If other people are experiencing similar issues, I could take another look.

[ALPHA WOLF 64]

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis


hmmm... I improved the unit upgrading of the AI quite a bit via the first couple patches, and I have not heard too many complaints since. Sometimes, of course, the AI just has no money. If other people are experiencing similar issues, I could take another look.

i've seen the AI upgrade tons of units. try my best to keep all the AIs poor so they cant upgrade. Love getting my tanks killed by those spearmen.... maybe i should let those tank killin spearmen upgrade

[Jumping Choya]

I've had no problems with upgrading so far. I've seen spearmen upgraded to pikemen in a city I was about to lay seige to - I don't know if it knew that it should upgrade there first, but it was quite impressive. Also, my powerful neighbor, France, has been milling around my borders with a hundred or so infantry, which I suspect they upgraded to.

[Cyclotron]

It's just that some civs seem to have an unhealthy attraction for their UU. In one of my games, France is in the modern age, but still keeps musketeers alongside their mech inf. (although not any other ancient units). The Greeks liek to keep Hoplites as long as possible, and I've steamrolled a Greek nation in the industrial era that used both inf and hoplites... but he had money, beacuse when I negotiated peace (too much war weariness) I saw his treasury with about 2500 gold. Surely that can upgrade something...

[player1]

Soren, why not program AI to optimize tax sliders better?

Like puting tax to 90% from time to time and buy techs from other AIs, and to make some embassies, or upgrade units.

Or give some sort of restricton to NEVR drop gold reserve from some value by rushing or buying tech (so he could use it for other means, like Wall Street, spying or unit upgrade).

[player1]

There is also one strange way of AI which builds too much Mech. Inf., Infantry, Riflemen and too little Cavalry and Tanks.

Anyway Soren,
How does AI decides which unit too chose to build.
(This is IMPORTANT for MODmakers!)

Could you post a short version of algoritm here?

[Apolex]

I have had several games where the AI could have crushed me at some point if it had only learned to use the Artillery unit. I know it's annoying having 30 AI ships bombard your shores for 10 minutes every turn, and having the AI learn to use artillery would probably produce a similar annoyance. But it would drastically improve its war making ability if it would only build and use artillery in an expanded manner.

I see the AI walk through my territory endlessly with a settler and a rifleman in search of that one empty square. The AI should be able to pair it's artillery with a couple of defensive units and start making trouble. Right now it's a yawn to beat militarily on any game level (except emperor, and that's not from its skill but because it cheats and makes endless hoards).

-Apolex

[Mikhail]

Yea, it definately is. Also, if their army is larger than yours (never mind the fact that their 'larger army' is made up of spearman and swordsman, while yours is entirely riflemen and artillery), they attack en masse to your weakest city. Making it easy to have some men defend the area, while sending a few armies to take over half their territory, that they neglected to defend.

[Solver]

Umm, maybe I haven't seen it upgrading enough. Mostly, I have attacked Spearmen by Longbowmen - the AI seemed a bit slow about getting Pikemen in, but really, the world's biggest nations are OK at upgrading.

BTW Soren, I have yesterday experienced a very strange AI glitch with my first 1.21 game, I'll try to tell later.

[Fidel]

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis


hmmm... I improved the unit upgrading of the AI quite a bit via the first couple patches, and I have not heard too many complaints since. Sometimes, of course, the AI just has no money. If other people are experiencing similar issues, I could take another look.

ai now upgrades very well and throws massive modern armies at me. actually, it upgrades as soon as possible.

as for the empty city exploit - well it IS actually rather easy to decimate infantry-only army with a lot of arty and well-developed railroad network, even without an exploit.

[ChaotikVisions]

Empty city exploit?

I haven't noticed this, in my last war with the Japanese I had empty citys and they didn't rush for them, they hit my border citys.