What is up with all the cheating by the computer

[Unconquered]

I typically play Monarch/Emporer level games and I've noticed that typically I've owned about 50% of the land by the Industrial Ages and the other 7 civs have the other 50%... but it never fails, some little country the size of Isreal with 3 cities is 7 techs ahead of me in the game. I thought maybe it was the level I was playing so I decided to play chieftain and see if I can get a 7 or 8 tech lead on everyone... No, can't do it. I am convinced that there is something going on (dare I call it cheating)... I miss the old civ2 days where I crushed the opposition with my armor while they were chuckin' spears (only because I earned it). For those who are going to ask, yes I research, yes I have all the improvements, no I don't start on an island, etc... no responses are really necessary, I just wanted to vent. Now back to civilization... what's that, I feel another anurism coming on... (BTW we need a face that shows someones head expolding, because that is how I feel)

[WarpStorm]

The computer plays fair up through Regent (actually Regent gets a minor cheat in that the computer can do an AI-AI trade at a loss). In fact, you get major advantages at cheiftain and warlord.

You didn't say that you trade tech. If you don't trade you will fall behind. Even at the lower difficulties.

[Unconquered]

I don't like to trade, I am an Isolationalist... also I miss the days of conquering cities and torturing there scientists for techs

[Catt]

As warpstorm said, it's not cheating. Three or four technologically backwards civs can catch up to the leader if they are willing to trade techs. This is true whether the 3 or 4 civs are AIs or a mix of AI and human. Instead of rushing to judgment on "AI cheating," examine your own gameplay choices to see if you could do something to change the circumstances.

Catt

[Unconquered]

I could...

a) Trade more
b) Conquer more
c) Steal more

I still think the AI is too liberal in its trading practices. Most countries would not give away the Techs that make them superior (unless your the US selling secrets to China... China did lose an embassy over it to a rouge cruise missile though.)

[Catt]

How about trading a less critical tech for significant amounts of gold (lump sum and per turn) which can cripple the scientific research budgets of those behind you? Particularly effective towards the end of ages, when new era tech values jump significantly.

Don't try to compare Civ 3 gameplay to real life -- they are entirely different.

Catt

[Unconquered]

Acording to the original post I am the one that is behind on Emperor level, on Monarch I can do ok with trading (at least keep even) but any higher than that and it seems like the A.I. will not trade with me at all, even if my reputation is good. Anyone else experience this? Plus, it is tactically unwise in gameplay or real life to trade away your edge... I really don't blame them for not wanting to trade if it was with everyone and not just me. That is why on the harder levels I am typically I isolationalist of circumstance, not choice.

[vmxa1]

Hey I am glad to see some fellow non traders. I will do it, but I prefer to not talk to the AI (I know that is bad).
Anyway the research cost factor is a function of the world size and the level of the game for the AI. Humanplayer it is always 10 for the level.
Human 10 all levels cost factor
Ai 20 chief
" 12 warlord
" 10 regent
" 9 monarch
" 8 emp
" 6 deity

Map size
tiny 160
small 200
std 240
large 320
huge 400
The higher the base cost the more science needed.
The number of active players (more players the more it takes)
The number of players that already know it (more the less it cost).
The bigger the map the more the science needed.

[Unconquered]

Not talking has got me into more wars than being aggressive. I always hang up on them with the "Not a chance button" and it seem to upset them. By the modern era it is Fortress America vs the World!

[Catt]

Originally posted by Unconquered
Acording to the original post I am the one that is behind on Emperor level, on Monarch I can do ok with trading (at least keep even) but any higher than that and it seems like the A.I. will not trade with me at all, even if my reputation is good. Anyone else experience this? Plus, it is tactically unwise in gameplay or real life to trade away your edge... I really don't blame them for not wanting to trade if it was with everyone and not just me. That is why on the harder levels I am typically I isolationalist of circumstance, not choice.

Okay. It is customary to be behind the AI (even smaller, inferior AI civs) on Emperor and Deity. But in most cases, players tend to catch up by the Industrial Age (to which your address your first post). If you are not substantially caught up by the Industrial Age (and barring a pretty bad start), I would look to your early game choiches and how they have dictated your late game circumstances. Since 1.29f it has become much harder to trade techs from behind, though not impossible. But I think the importance of trading skills increases as you move up the difficulty levels. It is easier to get by as an isolationist at lower levels -- if you are being forced to be an isolationist by "circumstance," you need to focus on how to change the cruel fate of circumstance.

But it is not always unwise to trade away an "edge." A game edge comes in many forms, only one of which is a tech edge. Trade (i.e. gold or gold enablers) and diplomacy might also frequently be a game edge. If you judge your power in a game based on technology advancement, I think you are misapplying game concepts.

Catt

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Unconquered
Not talking has got me into more wars than being aggressive. I always hang up on them with the "Not a chance button" and it seem to upset them. By the modern era it is Fortress America vs the World!

I like it.. I have been to know to play games like that at times. Cap anything that moves.

[Tattila the Hun]

Does it matter, if I say "Not a chance" or whether I'm trying to figure out another deal by a counter-proposal, and then terminating the negotiations?

[TheStinger]

I don't understand why people have a problem with AI"chaeting" the AI can't beat a decent human player without a bit.

look at chess a much simpler game, supercomputers only sometimes beat humans

[bongo]

Not a problem at all but I really like to see a list over AI-'cheats'

I know that there are both science and production bonuses. It will also know the locations of your units and future resources...

What else? Could anyone kindly point me in the right direction for an 'AI-cheat FAQ' ?

[Gunter]

My opinion:

AI cheats a lot but it is of course stupid like a traffic light.

So, you have to brake its cheating, and attack strongly its stupidity.

It would be better if AI didn't cheat,I know sometimes it's frustrating.

Gunter