AI cheats and strategies to counter them - Page 6

Encomium · March 1, 2002, 01:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Zachriel

Many players, including myself, are able to manage culture. It may be your playing style. There are a variety of strategies to counter flipping, which have been posted in other threads.

And none of them are Historical, and neither is CF. Many of them don't even make logical sense. CF occurs despite huge garrisons (even after 1.17) and it never takes into account overall score and power - just proximity to the enemy capital, even if it is the only city left in the enemy civ's kingdom and the human has two dozen cities.

I will not risk a large garrison in a conquered town. I will post a few offensive units right outside it to raze it if it flips. But then, something even dumber happens! Even when at war, the goofy AI insists on sending settler/pikeman teams to the raze site. I destroyed three of them in a row before I got bored and quit.

The entire concept of CF is inherently flawed, in both realism and playbility, as currently executed in the game.

Arrian · March 1, 2002, 11:47

Well, Encomium, I think you've made your opinion on the matter quite clear.

I happen to disagree with you. I think 1.17 did what was needed. I have yet to have a city flip since applying the patch. True, I am not a warmonger, so I spend a lot of time building improvements and wonders that give me culture (which is usually close to double the nearest AI competitor). That makes holding cities pretty easy. I've held enemy capitols with wonders in them w/o an issue. So either you are unlucky, or you are doing something fundamentally different than I am.

As to the "it's not historical" comment, this is Civ. Civ has never really been "historical." Civ is psuedohistorical... its a game which treads a fine line between what feels "realistic" and what must be unrealistic in order to add more fun (wonders of the world giving special bonuses, building the Pyramids for 50 turns and then changing to the Great Library, great leaders rushbuilding things in 1 "turn," etc.). For you, city flipping crosses the line between what you can and cannot accept as realistic enough not to break your suspension of disbelief. For me, it's fine. It represents resistance in a different way than Civ II did, and it is definitely abstracted. I don't necessarily like the idea of a large army going *poof* when a city flips, but I have figured out how to deal with it - or rather to prevent it.

Besides, the AI's liberal use of the whip and draft causes such unhappiness that I often raze 'n rebuild anyway. Why do you care about the AI settler teams? Have you ever considered that, in certain circumstances, it might be a good idea to have one or two on hand yourself? I have stolen luxuries from right under the AI's nose while major AI vs. AI war was raging all around.

-Arrian

dexters · June 5, 2002, 17:12

I think the hard-core Civ2 players who can't get over the game are the ones who have trouble accepting Civ3.

It's a paradox really. On one hand, Firaxis can rehases Civ2 with no improvements to game mechanics, and instead add token civs, new units improve the AI. But I bet the same people will write 10 page dissertations on why Civ2 is still the better game.

Playing games is an emotional business. But I find hardcore fans have a problem of letting nostalgia cloud their judgements.

vmxa1 · June 6, 2002, 01:47

They might write to reports, but they would not make sense. I was a huge civ2 fan and raked it as the #2 all time game, but I would only play Civ3 now, when I want a civ game. In truth civ2 was very easy to beat and had a very repetitive game play. You could hold cities with one unit. steal towns for cash, if they have the wrong gov. It was great and still is, but civ3 is better.

Sibersmith · July 10, 2002, 23:18

I've found that the ai at regent level is ungodly aware of my progress with wonders. I mean i can start building after getting my 3rd city going...with the sole intent of building a wonder that would secure my place in the game. No matter how hard i work at completing the wonder, some ai somewhere will complete THE wonder that i needed ...and i'm anywhere from 1-5 turns away.

vmxa1 · July 11, 2002, 03:08

It has been awhile since I played a civ game, but after the last patch at deity, I saw it seemed to get the wonder the day before me quite often. Once you got going good, that did not happen. Those early ones are sure bets to be grabbed just beofre you can get them. I will probably get back once the addon comes out.

Marquis de Sodaq · July 11, 2002, 09:54

Well, we at least have the workaround of building a phony palace, then switching production the turn before enough shields have accumulated to build the wonder you want. If you get robbed anyway, switch back to palace for the next wonder.

AuraSeer · October 31, 2002, 16:44

Quote:

Originally posted by solo
Penalties for repeated reloading can not be ruled out as a possibility. The handful of reloads throughout my game did not produce anything so unusual, but it could be that the game maintains a counter of the frequency or number of reloads, and if a certain threshold is reached, some nasty tricks are released. By the way, what was your setting for barbarians in that game? A lower setting than raging hordes gives a lot of credence to what you suggest.

Last night, I had a bariarian uprising show up near my capital city, when barbarians were set to the second-lowest level. (Roaming?) That's the only time I've ever seen it happen.

At the time, I was just messing around with various strategies, so I was on Warlord difficulty and had done lots of reloading.

It's not proof, of course, but it's an interesting coincidence.

vmxa1 · October 31, 2002, 17:38

Watch out as now PW has a new lower option(NO barbs), roaming is third.

punkbass2000 · October 31, 2002, 23:23

I think vanilla civ3 already had that option.

vmxa1 · November 1, 2002, 00:48

from civ3 manual:
villages/roaming/restless/raging/random
from ptw manual:
Barbarians
You now have the optionto play the game without the interference of those pesky barbarians.
from my interface
No barbarians
all the one from civ3 std.

punkbass2000 · November 1, 2002, 01:11

I don't have PTW, but I clearly do have the option of 'No Barbarians'. I think it came in a patch.

kring · November 1, 2002, 02:08

It did come in a patch. If you choose it, you also WON'T get Goody Huts.

vmxa1 · November 1, 2002, 03:10

Cool, I guess I never looked at anymore, just leave it at roaming. when I saw it on PTW, it stuck as I had not noticed it on the std game.

ducki · November 1, 2002, 19:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Encomium

Oh yes, this just happened. The instant I discovered Literature a few other civs began either demanding it or offering me insane extortionate deals for it (Territory Map for Literature). Not only should they not know I have it, but they shouldn't insult me with these ridiculous deals.

That crazy AI.

I'm going back to 1.16.

By this logic, we players should not be able to see what tech, money, and workers that an AI civ has to offer.

We shouldn't be able to know the exact production status of a wonder in any town where we don't have an operative.

Pre-embassy and pre-espionage, we shouldn't have a lot of the info we have.

And to flip it around, many is the time my "prebuild" went a little too fast (heh) so I had to go to war to get literature in time to steal away the Library.

I think, though, once embassies are established, much of the unknowable knowledge is completely justified, even if the AI were real AI that could "think".

News travels fast, especially with world-shaking discoveries, and when a turn is anything from 1 year to 100 years, having an AI demand something "on the same turn" is valid, mostly because the same turn actually means the same century/decade/year, not the same instant.

At least, that's how I feel, and opinions vary, as seen by this thread. But, if you are upset because the AI knows things it shouldn't, then are you also upset because you know things you shouldn't?

vmxa1 · November 1, 2002, 21:23

Seems fair to me. Either it stays as is and we can do to the trade advisor and see what they know that we don;t and they can know what we know or we go to a scheme were you must spy to get it or some overt act. I just accept that the embassy get the data, as it could in RL.

punkbass2000 · November 1, 2002, 22:22

Yeah, it would be a real pain in the ass not knowing what techs and sh*t the AI has/doesn't have.