FIRAXIS: Please instill the AI with a sense of pity.

[Blake]

The CTP2 AI was horrible. A much better comparison is the SMAC AI, which is capable of playing both ways very well. (Even if it's tatics kinda suck and it needs 'help' to build properly... but the principles are good)

Btw, the AI on diety shouldn't give gifts at all, with the emporer AI only doing so rarely. That'd content those who want a real challenge. (And remembering the gifting only helps you come from behind, an AI would never give you a gift if your actual at a reasonable power level)

[Willem]

Originally posted by Mr. President
Is there any way to make the computer player more pacifist? You used to be able to do that in Alpha Centauri (I set all the factions to -1 aggression to create favorable worlds for builders like me).

Yes. Go into the Civilizations area in the editor and you will see a slider that adjusts the aggression level of each civ.

[dunk]

I sometimes give techs away.

The problem is that almost every civ is "Annoyed" with you right from the outset. I've rarely had a first encounter with a polite or even cautious AI. So, they'll never give you squat.

[Ribannah]

Well, that really doesn't matter. Even gracious allies will attack you as soon as they feel the desire to expand into your territory, and annoyed rivals still deal with you and may be peaceful for the entire game.

[Arrian]

I think it's possible to edit the game such that the AI has a more "peaceful builder" approach to things. First is the agressiveness rating. Second, somewhere (not sure where exactly, as I'm just exploring the editor) I hear there is a "build preferences" thingy that you can use to tell the AI to build certain things. Tell them to build all city improvements. That should result in less AI units, but better development. Also, you can put the AI to AI trading factor to 100. Right now, I think it's more on any level other than chieftain. This way the trade deals will be the same for everyone.

Finally, you can set the AI's "level." Chieftain - Diety. This only effects happiness and barbarian bonus factors. It defaults to Regent. If you wish to play on Monarch, you can bump the AI up to Monarch so it has the same happiness issues you do, but still gets it's 10% production/research bonuses.

Just some thoughts...

-Arrian
(once a builder, now a warmonger)

[Willem]

Originally posted by Arrian
First is the agressiveness rating. Second, somewhere (not sure where exactly, as I'm just exploring the editor) I hear there is a "build preferences" thingy that you can use to tell the AI to build certain things.

You'll find both on the "Civilizations" screen, along with all kinds of other things. Another thing you can do is set the preferred government for all civs to Democracy. They'll eventually settle into that form, and the war weariness will force them into a more peaceful mode.

[Lord Merciless]

Originally posted by opaque

True, but the fact that the AI was never agressive in CTP2 and that you were encouraged to play peacefully and nicely was one of the most complained about things with the game I thought. Then it was considered a dumb, not unagressive AI, and playing peacefully was somewhat boring.

This is not what I mean. I mean that the game scoring system only looks at your population number, your territory size, and the date of your victory. It doesn't take consideration of the techs you researched, improvements you built, cultures you generated, and Wonders you created. These are own things that builders achieve, but warmongers get high population numbers and huge territories quite easily.

To get good scores, you have to be a warmonger.

[Thrawn05]

I find the AI giving me free techs every now and then, not often enough to help me get up in the high tech ranks, but enough not to be out of the game.

I wouldn't mind an extra boost in this.

[phunny_pharmer]

How about attaching a slider for this tech-giving. On chieftain, it would happen more often; on deity, it would not happen at all.

Or it could give you the tech for pikes when it has tanks...and teach the AI sarcasm as well

[Spiffor]

To me, AI gifts are perfectly reasonable, just like human gifts are reasonable in Civ3 (key to diplo victory).
Geostrategically, gifts are extremely useful to let a stamp state survive between two powers, and I often give loads of money and worker's help to the one between my peaceful Civ and a major threat (Chinese or Germans).
I'd be glad if the AI could also do such a thing. But I don't hold my breath : making the AI give gifts and bother about Balance of Power would mean very important changes in the code, and Soren now works mostly on other projects.

(however, I'm against the AI being "humanitarian" : in Civ3, all Civs strive for their power above all)

[Carver]

Originally posted by Thrawn05
I find the AI giving me free techs every now and then, not often enough to help me get up in the high tech ranks, but enough not to be out of the game.

I wouldn't mind an extra boost in this.

Well the AI has never given me a tech free. Sure, I can buy music theory for 10 gold after Bach's is built (which I usually do just to make them happy) but free, no. Did you have a hugely superior army when this happened?

[Velociryx]

I agree that structuring the AI in this way would make the game feel more....alive to me. Immersive. And that would be a very good thing.

It'd also be nice if things worked this way in reverse. I have been locked in a war with a rival civ that, even when threatened with utter extinction (they've got one city left, I have sixteen bada$$ units parked right outside the gates...no hope of survival), and they STILL wouldn't part with any of their techs.

Stubborn is one thing, but c'mon!! So...I killed them anyway.

The way the game is structured at present, there's no good incentive to leave any civ alive in the long term. I can't form protectorate states (similar to "pact brothers/sisters or vassals in smac), so I can't count on a little civ's loyalty. I might keep them alive but hobbled, and squeeze them for money by selling outdated resources to them, but that's hardly the same thing as forging a real, meaningful, lasting partnership with a neighboring Civ. There's just no incentive to do that in the game, and that's too bad, because the game would be stronger if that were the case. I think that the mechanism Blake proposes would be a step in the right direction.

-=Vel=-

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Blake
Oh I know you can extract tech from AI's with force and arm-twisting. I just think there should be a way without having to beat up your neighbours.

But there is a way, and it's fun.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Lord Merciless
Playing the psychotic bastard is the way to go in Civ3.

One way to go, but not the only one. However, it's the way taken by seemingly 95% of players, and I'm amazed at how little motivation there is around for tackling the challenge of beating Civ peacefully. (There's a whole other game in there waiting for people to discover it.) It's a piece of p*ss on Regent and quite achievable on Monarch. Even possible on Emperor by experienced and wily old peaceniks.

However, I agree with this thread that it would be great if the AI tried to make more friends and less enemies.

I also agree that there are many aspects of the game that do favour warmongery - from the GL concept to that infuriating and disgusting cheat of settling undiscovered resource spots. Pleeeeease Firaxis, stop that horrible cheat. Warmongers love it, it tells them which enemy cities to take, and builders get penalised by having to build AMCAP (as many cities as possible) hoping to net the resources when they emerge.

[edit: what I mean by 'penalised' is that the AI doesn't have to do this. On a four-city Island it only has to put down one city to bag the future-resource, the human builder has to plant four cities, and the warmonger none]

[KingJoshi]

The way the game is structured at present, there's no good incentive to leave any civ alive in the long term. I can't form protectorate states (similar to "pact brothers/sisters or vassals in smac), so I can't count on a little civ's loyalty. I might keep them alive but hobbled, and squeeze them for money by selling outdated resources to them, but that's hardly the same thing as forging a real, meaningful, lasting partnership with a neighboring Civ. There's just no incentive to do that in the game, and that's too bad, because the game would be stronger if that were the case. I think that the mechanism Blake proposes would be a step in the right direction.

-=Vel=-

That's one of my biggest problems in terms of diplomacy. I would love to form brotherhoods or some for of bond with the AI, not just some mutual protection pact. But even when I haven't done anything wrong and they are gracious with me, they can attack me on the next turn some times. It gives me no incentive to be nice to them. (especially cuz you can give them a lot of free stuff before going for the UN vote if you want to win through diplomacy). And sometimes they attack me when I'm much stronger.

Even if I was equally advanced on techs, if the AI was "possible" of being friends with, I might give them a free tech. In theory, they "could" give me one later and we could help each other surpass other civs. You'd still have the prisoner's dilemma, since if you initiated the kindness, you wouldn't know if the AI would return it, but the possibility doesn't even exist as of now. I guess they sort of do that with each other. But they should be able to form that with me. Would lowering the AI-Ai trade rate to lower than 100 do that? Would that make it too easy?