AI Needs Birth Control....

[Jaundice]

What's the deal with the AI being able to build so many settlers?
Don't get me wrong, I love a good challenge and I am impressed with the AI's ability to get things done, but....

I just ended a game on the Regent level, standard map, playing against 4 other civs. I was Persia, on a decent sized continent. I started exploring to the north, all the while thinking I was the only civ on the continent because I had yet to run into another. Then I met the Zulus. They had about 3 cities to my 6. It was only about 2000 BC. Anyway, I completely explored the continent and figured that I had things under control. I traded with the Zulus and everything was fine. Then, they began to move warriors down into my lands. I told them to get out or declare war, and they chose war. The next thing I know, I've got no less than 20 archers and Impi swooping down on my cities. Then over the next few turns, at least 5 new Zulu cities sprung up just outside of mine. They moved across the cotinent like jack rabbits on speed. I had all cities producing horsemen and archers...and even after inflicting heavy casualties on them, the archers and impi still came endlessly....and even more Zulu cities arose. This is IMPOSSIBLE. First of all, their cities were only size 3 or less. How could they produce SO MANY units and settlers from only 3 cities? There was no way I could keep up with unit production to defend myself, AND build settlers to found new cities. In addition, does anybody else find that units in the field are almost worthless against the AI? My Vetran Immortrals were consistently killed by Regular Zulu Archers. And the quality of my vetran horsmen isn't even worth mentioning. This is quite frustrating.

-JD

[SteveJH]

In all of my games on regent the AI has produced a lot as well, nothing I would say that is impossible though. All it could do is make you play harder anyway.

[mharmless]

First off, imortals loseing to archers is not supriseing. Immortals are 4 attack 1 defense as I recall, and archers are 2 attack 1 defense. If he attacks you, you will die.

Next up, his production rate. A size 3 city with access to a special resource like cows or wheat, and every other square makeing just 2 food, will grow in population every five turns. Of course, instead of growing you use forced labor to kick out an additional unit. Four turns to build an archer (modest 5 sheilds required for this), then on turn five you build as normal. Next round start it off with a speed build. Six rounds to make two archers from such a city.

Forced labor is your friend.

[Jaundice]

In reference to archers attacking me, it doesn't matter who attacks who. It always seems stacked in his favor. When I attack one of his archers with 3 of mine, and they all die....something seems wrong.

-JD

[Peterk]

Is he choosing terrain carefully? I've noticed that the AI does a good job of attacking from forest, hills mountains. In the early game, this gives him similar protection to city without walls.

With archers I would definitely keep up the pre-emptive attacks, don't let him camp outside your city (unless the archer is your last unit in the city)

[D4everman]

Is he choosing terrain carefully? I've noticed that the AI does a good job of attacking from forest, hills mountains. In the early game, this gives him similar protection to city without walls.


Thats a good point. I've had Elite Hoplites killed by simple regular barabrians simply because the AI picked a good defensive position. (Like a hill or forest.) I'm not saying the AI didn't shortchange you...maybe it did, I dunno....but it might be that you simply didn't expect the AI to be "crafty enough" to use forced labor, good flanking and general strategy.

D4

[Pyrodrew]

The manual says, "The terrain the defending unit occupies makes a difference in combat." So it does NOT matter if an attacker is standing on a mountain or not as to how effective the attacker will be. Unless the attacker is considered a "defending unit" when the defender strikes back. (?) But that sounds confusing.

Regardless, from the posts I've seen here of who wins & loses... the defenders usually have the advantage (especially now with firepower out). Even more so once Coastal Fortress starts working after the patch (hopefully).

Sidenote: If you start next to the Zulus in a game you're going to have a rough game (Zulu's Aggressiveness is 5 out of 5).

[Peterk]

I'm fairly certain that attacker gets terrain bonus too. Try an experiment attacking a unit in mountain or city i) from clear ii) from mountain and you'll see it right away (at least I noticed a strong pattern after many humiliating defeats). I don't know if the doc or the game is wrong (or if either is wrong, kind of makes sense the way it is)

If anyone can confirm or reject the theory please let me know.

[aaglo]

Originally posted by Jaundice
...Then over the next few turns, at least 5 new Zulu cities sprung up just outside of mine. They moved across the cotinent like jack rabbits on speed. I had all cities producing horsemen and archers...and even after inflicting heavy casualties on them, the archers and impi still came endlessly....and even more Zulu cities arose. This is IMPOSSIBLE...

Not necessarily impossible. What if:

The Zulu had several settlers already made. These could be just hanging around. I've seen similar cases several times in SMAC for instance. But I still don't get it: 6 colony pods (read: settlers) in a base, going nowhere, doing nothing

BTW does the settler require food support in civ3? The colony pod in SMAC doesn't.

[Auslander]

Originally posted by aaglo
BTW does the settler require food support in civ3? The colony pod in SMAC doesn't.

No food. Settler is treated like any other unit. So if you are over your unit maximum it will cost 1 gold per turn.

[Kc7mxo]

Firstly, immortals are 4 2 1.

And I tottally agree. I'm curious as to what firaxis is using as a seed for their random calculations, cause something is definetly wrong. I've watched as warriors attacking from atop a mountain defeat my archers, and my swordsmen lose to warriors in the most moronic of situations.

Something should be done. Where's the rules.txt when you need it?

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Jaundice
I had all cities producing horsemen and archers...and even after inflicting heavy casualties on them, the archers and impi still came endlessly....and even more Zulu cities arose. This is IMPOSSIBLE. First of all, their cities were only size 3 or less. How could they produce SO MANY units and settlers from only 3 cities? There was no way I could keep up with unit production to defend myself, AND build settlers to found new cities.

Don't forget he was having a golden age after one of his Impis won a combat. That means a ton of shields all dedicated to more military units. He may also have been rushing some units at the cost of population.

[Mahdimael]

Most random seed generation is based off the current clock time and is manipulated from there. It would be interesting to see how it works in civ3

[Elhombre]

While it is true at higher levels the computer expands within 4 bloody turns of the game beginning...I think what you experienced with the Zulu's was mostly legit. Computer expands fast.

[Blaupanzer]

In my games, I have not noticed a bias in favor of the AI in ground combat. Defenders yes, they seem to get a bonus, but the AI in general, no. They win more than I want them to, but not statistically out of bounds. Archer vs Immortal is essentially an even fight with your only advantage that you can lose more times (elite) than he can (regular). Flipping four heads before two tails is not that difficult to do. Same is true for your archers, although this gets stretched if it happens often. You get a two-thirds chance of winning each round. You have to win two before he does. Thus he has a 33% chance of winning and only has to come up good on this twice to kill your man. If the AI is standing on good terrain, your odds go down. Focus on the long-term, one set of battles, however frustrating, does not win wars or civilizations.

[AuraSeer]

The randomness of war is definitely screwed up.

In my current game, I've got an enemy galley bottled up in an enclosed section of the ocean. (The only exit from the area is one square wide, and I have it blocked.) This galley is unable to go anywhere, so it has been wandering in circles for several hundred years.

And it's immortal.

Every once in a while, I decide to get rid of the perpetually circling ship, so I send in the navy to kill it. But whenever I try that, I get my head handed to me.

I've attacked the thing with other galleys, frigates, ironclads, and worse. I've tried sending one unit at a time, and I've tried them by the six-pack. No matter what I try, this galley has never taken a single point of damage. It's even dodged bombardment, once eighty times in a row before I got bored and reloaded the game.

I can conceive of a small ship defeating one frigate, or even one ironclad. But to have it defeat six frigates, followed by six ironclads, without even needing repairs? It's not even funny anymore-- now it's just plain stupid.

[aeturneus]

hahaha! that sounds pretty funny, actually... those sort of idiosynchrasies are what I missed in civ 2... as long as they go my way sometime

the Immortal galley crew... hmm... are you sure you aren't dealing with a ghost ship?

Originally posted by AuraSeer
The randomness of war is definitely screwed up.

In my current game, I've got an enemy galley bottled up in an enclosed section of the ocean. (The only exit from the area is one square wide, and I have it blocked.) This galley is unable to go anywhere, so it has been wandering in circles for several hundred years.

And it's immortal.

Every once in a while, I decide to get rid of the perpetually circling ship, so I send in the navy to kill it. But whenever I try that, I get my head handed to me.

I've attacked the thing with other galleys, frigates, ironclads, and worse. I've tried sending one unit at a time, and I've tried them by the six-pack. No matter what I try, this galley has never taken a single point of damage. It's even dodged bombardment, once eighty times in a row before I got bored and reloaded the game.

I can conceive of a small ship defeating one frigate, or even one ironclad. But to have it defeat six frigates, followed by six ironclads, without even needing repairs? It's not even funny anymore-- now it's just plain stupid.

[fstkfstk]

Galleys are supernatural always. Even when not circling in ponds, they have a strong tendency to be unbeatable by anything but other galleys.

As to the infinite settler problem with computer playerr, the computer DOES stock up settlers in cities, as any conquer happy
players can attest too. Don't forget that the computer "cheats"
either for or against the player depending on difficulty (as was noted on apolyton several weeks ago...). THe settlers COULD be coming from nowhere.

[AuraSeer]

Originally posted by fstkfstk
Galleys are supernatural always. Even when not circling in ponds, they have a strong tendency to be unbeatable by anything but other galleys.

Holy cow.
I sent in a galley, and won. On top of that, mine was a Regular, and of course the immortal ship was Elite from having won all those battles.

And my ship didn't take any damage from the fight.

[Dark Hawk]

Originally posted by AuraSeer
The randomness of war is definitely screwed up.


And it's immortal.

Every once in a while, I decide to get rid of the perpetually circling ship, so I send in the navy to kill it. But whenever I try that, I get my head handed to me.

I've attacked the thing with other galleys, frigates, ironclads, and worse. I've tried sending one unit at a time, and I've tried them by the six-pack. No matter what I try, this galley has never taken a single point of damage. It's even dodged bombardment, once eighty times in a row before I got bored and reloaded the game.

Fair enough

But now you just said you sent in ONE galley and won the battle after saying that you sent multiple galleys up there. Something fishy's going on....