The AI-unit shuffle back-and-forth syndrome

Ralf · June 16, 2001, 03:17

In Civ-3, I dont want to see big hoards of erratically moving AI-units, shuffling back-and-forth Civ-2 style, all over again - just to simulate some kind of activity. Most AI-units should instead be fortified in cities & fortresses, except when launching or defending major invasions (or minor pillage-expeditions, by all means), uncovering land or building terrain-improvements.

Its better that invisible passive AI-only terrain "tread-sensors" automatically comes with every second square in every direction, for pure foreign-unit awareness purposes. AI-units should not have to tiresomely shuffle back-and-forth all over the map just to simulate this awareness.
Above AI-only terrain "tread-sensors" (not a buildable improvement - they are generically available all over the world-map, throughout the entire game) only activates if and then the map is uncovered, and then where is no fog-of-war present, of course.

Footie Mad · June 16, 2001, 05:43

I think/hope we will see large stacks of units moving with a goal cause the "swarming units" syndrome in civ2 was just a boring timewaster.

BeBro · June 16, 2001, 05:59

Perhaps they can also teach the AI how to attack effectively. In civ2 the AI simply builds a unit, attacks, loses it, then build the next. It would be nice if the AI attacks (the same city/area) in armies with more and more units, e.g. first attacks - one or two units, next - three or four...etc, etc. They should make more coordinated attacks IMO.

Ralf · June 16, 2001, 16:34

Quote:

Originally posted by BeBro
Perhaps they can also teach the AI how to attack effectively. In civ2 the AI simply builds a unit, attacks, loses it, then build the next.

A single middle age- & modern AI combat unit should almost never try to stroll over the HP enemy-border all by it self, just taking a potshot at first & best target.

Instead there should basically only be two different invasion-style AI-buildups. Either several separate AI-units roll over you borders more or less simultaneously for terrain-pillage punish-expeditions mostly. Or 1 or several AI-armies that is focused on city-conquering attempts, first and foremost. Just dont give us more single AI-unit potshot "invasions" any more - one after the other. Its such a waste of time.

Provost Harrison · June 16, 2001, 17:59

Well BeBro, they will probably take advantage of some of the developments they made in SMAC, where Ai attacks were not piecemeal but they did attack en masse. You didn't get the odd unit wandering in your direction, you would get an army...I would expect this would be the case with Civ3 as well, perhaps even refined...

But yeah, it would be nice to see them hold their units in defensive positions such as isthmuses, cities, colonies and important points such as roads rather than just wander around aimlessly.

BeBro · June 17, 2001, 05:35

Oh, I never had SMAC. But if the AI is better there they have no excuse for a stupid AI in Civ3

The "unit wandering around syndrome" in civ2 is sometimes really annoying, especially when they stacking 10 or 20 units instead of moving them towards the enemy. I´ll never forget the game (it was a scenario) where I destroyed a stack of 30 (!) units...

Ralf, your AI army idea sounds nice. The ultimate solution for me would be if they form real "battle groups" (don´t know the right expression), with the most vulnerable units in the centre, guarded by other more mobile units. Then you have to break trough the "escorts" before you can destroy the entire army.
But I think this is a bit too difficult to implement...

Rasputin · June 17, 2001, 06:00

i always couldnt understand why the AI when taking over a Human Player civ when they retired , would immediatly un fortify all defending units blocking strategic passages. hopefully civ 3 will rectify this

Rollo_CH · June 19, 2001, 02:08

Well the "erratically" moving AI-units in Civ2 and SMAC is the way of guarding borders by moving to secure the "ZOC's" for eventual passing units from other Civ's (preferably the HP)

Adm.Naismith · June 19, 2001, 05:19

Ralf and BeBro, me too hate units wandering (not because patrolling: what's the point of going up and down endless on a Railroad?).

It's a relevant part of AI turn lenght, without any need.
I'm afraid SMAC AI did quite often the same erratic moves, so I'm not really optimistic about this facet of the incoming CIV III.

Your idea about invisible sensor (automated sentry point) let me unsure to agree with it or not.
I mean, is part of the AI engine to elaborate the info, and part of the game model to feed enough info input, no matter how catched. I hope Firaxis is doing this part of game much stronger than the others I see: it'll be the most relevant game saver, since the fiasco I have read about very promising CTPII.