Pondering....

[child of Thor]

Apples and Pears, Chalk and cheese?

EDIT: or maybe Pony and Trap

[Tamerlin]

Re: Re: There is a life after Civ3

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Would you care to bring up some examples of these blatant cheats? For a person with your experience, this can not be hard.

I'am not considering myself as an experienced player. I suppose, hoping I'am wrong, you are trying to make a fool of me here, if this is really the case I'am really disappointed by the tone of this reply. Once again, I hope I'am wrong on this issue.

There have been some very good threads about suspected cheats, made by some excellent brains, not parrots. They found 2 real cheats:

- The AI knows the location of all troups in the discovered part of the map.
- The AI knows the location of future resources; even though it doesn't know what it is, it knows that there is something.

Am I wrong or is the tone becoming bitter and agressive ?
More and more disappointed...

Whatever the case you have partly answered yourself, the second cheat (the AI knows where the resources are and use the information) is difficult to accept when this AI doesn't have the technology to detect a resource. I don't care wether the AI can identify the said resource or not.

- The first cheat is also particularly unfair, I would be more satisfied if the AI used another mean to see where your troops are, like spies or other units.

- I'am certainly wrong but I have the feeling the resources are not evenly distributed and are more prone to appear near the starting location of the AI Civs, especially those needed at the beginning of the game when you can earn the biggest advantage.

The other "reported" cheats are perhaps not more real than the later one and are certainly coming from the imagination of the players. Actually, once again, I don't care at all. What I can see is that the AI is able to produce hundreds of military units and tens of settlers while keeping up the pace in the technological race, at least one of the AI civ. I suppose the AI is receiving some bonuses. What I don't like is that, because of this cheats or bonuses, the first part of the game (from the beginning to more or less 0 AD) is almost dictated by the behavior of the AI. You have to spew settlers and military units in order to build as many cities as you can and defend them. If you like to click everywhere as in a RTS game, great ! This is not my cup of tea.

Actually, I'am the kind of player called an "Empire Builder" (I'am not labelling myself like this as a parrot, I have read this in a magazine and I have no proudness in this ), I prefer to build a few cities (twelve to fifteen maximum) and manage them as well as I can. I'am also trying to avoid wars though this is not always possible (and this is fortunate for the interest of the game). These are certainly the main reasons behind the fact I have never played Civ2 at a higher difficulty level than King.
I have the feeling the AI has been designed to use all the tricks many players have learned to use in Civ2. Unfortunately, I have never used those tricks because I'am just playing Civ like games to have fun with a challenging level of difficulty that suits the way I like to play (with few cities).
If I want to beat the Civ3 AI it seems to me I have to use all the tricks the players have designed to beat the Civ2 AI at the higher levels, a way of playing I'am not interested in.

In fact, I think Civ3 is a very good game that does not suit me and my tastes.

Yes... the AI in CtP2 is indeed... invisible.

I'am talking about modded CtP2.

About CtP2 and Civ3, I will never say one is better than the other (I'am not interested in this debate), I would rather say I prefer this one to the other as I'am only expressing a taste or an opinion based on my tastes.

Whatever your opinion on Civ3 or CtP2, I expect more respect from the people I'am in contact with in Apolyton threads.

Of course, if I have misunderstood what you have said in your reply or if I have misinterpreted the tone of your answer, I apologize in advance and will remove my subscription to this thread.

[Immortal Wombat]

- I'am certainly wrong but I have the feeling the resources are not evenly distributed and are more prone to appear near the starting location of the AI Civs, especially those needed at the beginning of the game when you can earn the biggest advantage.

That would be the apparent result of the AI being able to 'see' the resources before they are there, and focusing development towards them.

[Locutus]

Re: Re: Re: There is a life after Civ3

Originally posted by Tamerlin
the first part of the game (from the beginning to more or less 0 AD) is almost dictated by the behavior of the AI.

Although I admit that my first-hand experience with Civ3 is extremely limited, this is something that I can confirm and it's something I *really* don't like. The whole idea of Civilization is that there are many different ways to win the game and everyone can choose his own way. Some like to be an aggressive expansionist, some prefer being a diplomatic builder. In the highest levels of CtP2 you're also forced to adapt to the AI, but when you play one or two levels lower (or maybe when you're *really* good), you can also choose a very different path, one of building only a handfull of cities and relying on diplomacy, science and/or unconventional warfare to win the game. This is IMHO a *the* major problem with Civ3's AI.

I don't know how much the AI knows about strategic resources but that's a crucial part of the game. If the AI plays by a different set of rules here, that would indeed be a major fun-killer as well.

Of course, I already dislike Civ3 anyway for much more fundamental reasons (which I've mentioned more than often enough by now, so I won't bore anyone by repeating them) so it doesn't matter to me, but I can certainly understand and agree with Tamerlin's viewpoint that the Civ3's AI blatantly cheating.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by Immortal Wombat

That would be the apparent result of the AI being able to 'see' the resources before they are there, and focusing development towards them.

This is exactly what I was thinking when I was writing the sentence you are quoting in your post, though I still had a little doubt at this moment.

I hope I have offended no one with my reply, it seems I have been a bit touchy ?

By the way, what about the Civ3 game you started after you "came to own civ3" ?

[Tamerlin]

Thanks Locutus, I was desperately in need of a support as I didn't knew if someone here has experienced the same feeling as me about the Civ3 AI and the limited strategy it forces you to adopt in the earlier part of the game.

[Immortal Wombat]

By the way, what about the Civ3 game you started after you "came to own civ3" ?

I played 'til 1700ish, then I've never gone back to it. I was losing terribly.

[centrifuge]

Originally posted by Tamerlin
Thanks Locutus, I was desperately in need of a support as I didn't knew if someone here has experienced the same feeling as me about the Civ3 AI and the limited strategy it forces you to adopt in the earlier part of the game.

I agree with this completely. Although I do like the Civ3 AI, and the diplomacy, the way that the game is natured forces a player to be a warmonger in the early stages of the game. ( I personally, love being a warmonger it's just that I don't want a strategy to be forced upon me.)

[Harovan]

Re: Re: Re: Re: There is a life after Civ3

Originally posted by Locutus
Although I admit that my first-hand experience with Civ3 is extremely limited, this is something that I can confirm and it's something I *really* don't like. The whole idea of Civilization is that there are many different ways to win the game and everyone can choose his own way. Some like to be an aggressive expansionist, some prefer being a diplomatic builder. In the highest levels of CtP2 you're also forced to adapt to the AI, but when you play one or two levels lower (or maybe when you're *really* good), you can also choose a very different path, one of building only a handfull of cities and relying on diplomacy, science and/or unconventional warfare to win the game. This is IMHO a *the* major problem with Civ3's AI.

People have won OCC games in Civ3 without a single shot during the entire game. Solo and other good players won it at Deity, I could win OCCs only on the middle levels, but I can assure you, it's possible and not very hard. So what are you talking about?

[Dinner]

I can enumerate a few of the more blatant & annoying cheats used by the AI in Civ3. The most obvious, which you've already mentioned, is how the AI knows were all of the resources are ahead of time. I remember the old "view all map" bug that could be used on save games with v1.16; I sat there and watched the AI make a bee line to all the resources on the map. From what I saw the AI didn't just know there was something there but knew it was iron/oil/what not. I've also stopped exploring out to see with ships because unless the island is visable from your landmass then the AI will get there first. It knows exactly where all the land is and doesn't have to waste time searching the vast empty ocean like a human does. If you don't believe me try trading maps with the AI several times during the game and you will see the AI will always find the land first then explore the empty ocean second.

The next most irritaiting cheat is how the AI gets two defending units in a flipped city while the human only gets one. I once tried to retake one of my cities which had flipped the same turn that the AI got a hold of it and I was able to sit and watch to make sure no enemy units went into the city. I sent my force to get my city but lost because the AI had one more rifleman then he should have had. At first I thought I was mistaken but then it happened again in a different game.

I also hate how the AI always knows exactly where each unit is on the map even units which are hidden in the fog of war. Try leaving a city in the center of your empire undefended and watch the AI make a bee line to that city while ignoring all the others along the way. How does he know that unless it is cheating? To experiment I reloaded the save and moved units into the city and took the units out of a second city. The AI avoided city #1 and headed straight for, the now undefended, city #2. I reloaded the save a second time and made sure both cities we're defended so the third time the AI went for the front line city (I guess we could call it #3) which is where I had been moving the units to in the beginning.

Each one of those experiments show the AI was using knowledge it shouldn't have had. That in and of itself isn't so bad but do they have to make it so obvious?

The other obvious cheats such as tech advancement rate, production bonuses, and how the AI prefers to trade amoungst itself can be edited so they aren't that bad. I just wish I wouldn't have to edit the AI and that someone would program an AI which will act like a human.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Oerdin
The next most irritaiting cheat is how the AI gets two defending units in a flipped city while the human only gets one. I once tried to retake one of my cities which had flipped the same turn that the AI got a hold of it and I was able to sit and watch to make sure no enemy units went into the city. I sent my force to get my city but lost because the AI had one more rifleman then he should have had. At first I thought I was mistaken but then it happened again in a different game.

No. It gets only one defender just like the human player. But if the city is connected to its homeland with a road or a railroad, it will instantly move a second defender in, because the standard city garrison for the AI is 2. If this is not possible, it will, depending from the government, poprush or draft a second. This ain't cheats, because the human can do the same, even though he usually won't.

I also hate how the AI always knows exactly where each unit is on the map even units which are hidden in the fog of war. Try leaving a city in the center of your empire undefended and watch the AI make a bee line to that city while ignoring all the others along the way.

You can use this to your own advantage, if you want. Just close the gap when the troops are close, and open another. But good players won't do this.

The other obvious cheats such as tech advancement rate, production bonuses, and how the AI prefers to trade amoungst itself can be edited so they aren't that bad.

Bonuses aren't cheats. If you call them so, you must call also any human player on Warlord and Chieftain a cheater, because in these levels the AI gets handicapped and the human gets the bonuses. Since hexagonian played his first game on Warlord, he must be by your logic a blatant cheater. Say this hex in his face!

I just wish I wouldn't have to edit the AI and that someone would program an AI which will act like a human.

Such AIs are hard to program, and even though they might be possible (are they?), they certainly cost more than $35 per share.

[child of Thor]

I just had a 'feeling' about Civ3, not very logical in the slightest - but that isn't the point. It was rushed out, so i didn't want to buy it out of principle, I'm not going to encourage shovelware publishers. That's really my beef with Civ3.
So the stories of people's experiences on the Civ3 forum, which were mostly negative from my point of view, came as no surprise.
And this is the crux - i actually don't need Civ3, i've got Ctp2 which does everything i want in this genre, and IMHO does it better than the rest and is changing all the time with new Mods and fan made files.
I won't even Warez Civ3 as i'm against software piracy which is part of the 'Civ3' problem - because of software piracy games publishers have had to adopt a much more cutthroat policy, so they have to shovel when push comes to shove. So our games get worse. So i buy less.And the cycle goes on.
If people love Civ3 then that is cool - i just know it ain't for me for all the reasons that Tamerlin and Locutus and others have mentioned.
Ctp2 isn't perfect, but i prefer it to Civ2 which was a classic, and at least there are some interesting things that people here are trying to do with it. I might be imagining it but it does seem that the regular guys here are all on the same wavelength when it comes to the kind of 'Civ' game we would all like to play.
CTP2 gives us that opportunity and given time it can be done.
So for anyone 'Pondering' about CTP2 and who maybe feels that Civ3 somehow missed a great opportunity then i'd say go get CTP2 - it's cheap, it ain't half bad and least we are a freindly lot and what you don't like you can try to change(or ask for help ).

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
No. It gets only one defender just like the human player. But if the city is connected to its homeland with a road or a railroad, it will instantly move a second defender in, because the standard city garrison for the AI is 2. If this is not possible, it will, depending from the government, poprush or draft a second. This ain't cheats, because the human can do the same, even though he usually won't.

It was the same turn so AI couldn't have pop rushed or bought the extra unit plus I could see every tile around the city so I know another unit didn't sneak in. AI got two units there is no other way to explain it. Like you I was sceptical but I've seen at least three different time now so I don't think the problem is me.

[qoute]You can use this to your own advantage, if you want. Just close the gap when the troops are close, and open another. But good players won't do this.[/quote]

I know I can over come the AI cheating because even with the cheats the AI can't think very well. The point is that the experiement proves the AI knows things it shouldn't.

Bonuses aren't cheats. If you call them so, you must call also any human player on Warlord and Chieftain a cheater, because in these levels the AI gets handicapped and the human gets the bonuses. Since hexagonian played his first game on Warlord, he must be by your logic a blatant cheater. Say this hex in his face!

Bonus are a cheat/handy-cap used to make the AI more competetive. I don't mind because this can be controled with the editor or by adjusting the difficulty. Any time the gets something the human can't then it is a cheat. Like I said before I don't mind the AI cheating just don't beat me over the head with it.

In conclusion the AI cheats
1)By knowing the type and location of all resources even the ones it shouldn't be able to see.

2)AI knows the geography of blacked out areas it, or anyone else, has never been to.

3)AI automatically knows what is in my cities at any given time. Even when there is no possible way for it to have that knowledge.

4)Ai gets extra units above and beyond what the human does. This cannot be changed or edited.

5)AI gets bonuses and reduced costs for techs and units. This can be modified or edited.

Does all of this mean Civ3 is a bad game? No, just that Civ3's AI cheats just like every other games AI...

[Harovan]

The 2-defenders cheat neither I nor anybody else in the Civ3-Strategy forum has ever seen, despite of continuous playing. If you can prove it, please post a savegame in the Civ3-Strategy forum.

Originally posted by Oerdin
Bonus are a cheat/handy-cap used to make the AI more competetive. I don't mind because this can be controled with the editor or by adjusting the difficulty.

Or to make the human competitive. So hexagonian is a cheater, because he got a bonus in his game. Just like every other player on Chieftain and Warlord level. Face the fact, hex.

In conclusion the AI cheats
1)By knowing the type and location of all resources even the ones it shouldn't be able to see.

2)AI knows the geography of blacked out areas it, or anyone else, has never been to.

3)AI automatically knows what is in my cities at any given time. Even when there is no possible way for it to have that knowledge.

4)Ai gets extra units above and beyond what the human does. This cannot be changed or edited.

5)AI gets bonuses and reduced costs for techs and units. This can be modified or edited.

1 - type of resource: proven "no", location: proven "yes". 50% true, 50% wrong.

2 - proven to be 100% wrong. The AI has no knowledge about the entire map. Why else would it send units exploring? To fool the human? Ever traded maps with the AI? You can even see where it made suicide galley tries.

3 - define "what". If can see if it is garrisoned. But it sees improvements only if it has an embassy, in which case you also can investigate its cities.

4 - What do you mean by this? On higher levels (Emperor and Deity) it gets a defined startup pack of units (see editor). During the game, it gets nothing extra.

5 - Again, on the lower levels the human gets the bonuses. Is this a cheat too?

[Tamerlin]

Sorry, I have mistakenly send the following post before I had finished to write it. As the server does not let me delete the incomplete text, I'am replacing it by this message.