Best AI I have ever seen hands down! - Page 3

Harovan · May 13, 2002, 17:33

I'm far from wanting to argue, but start a new game, build 4 cities around your capital, garrison all but your capital with 2 units, with your capital undefended, stay peaceful and wait till you get sneak attacked. The odds that the AI goes straight towards your capital, have been observed very high, even though the AI has no chance to see it

Ethelred · May 13, 2002, 17:56

Quote:

The odds that the AI goes straight towards your capital, have been observed very high, even though the AI has no chance to see it

But it DOES have a chance to see whats in cities. Cities can be investigated with an embassy. No spys are needed. I was talking about troops in the field. I have seen it time and again that the AI doesn't know that I have blocked their passage till they reach visual range.

You have seen this too. Why else would AI settlers keep trying to go to places you have allready filled. They frequently go try to go to spot on the map that I have a city in at that. So they don't even see all the cities.

Harovan · May 13, 2002, 18:22

I was talking about early sneak attacks, without having embassies yet. But even later. It often happens, that with a large empire I disband my "inner" garrisons, from about 8-10 tiles from the border on, to save money in my republic/democracy. I got attacked a couple of times by nations, with whom I had RoP agreements. They always bypassed my garrisoned cities, going straight to the undefended. The first 2 times I let them go, thinking amused 'lets see where they want to go'. I soon learned, that the AI never goes with troups (far from settler shuttles) on your territory without purpose. Either it's in a war with somebody else (which you should know and in which case you are safe), or it's planning to attack you. Now I'm blocking these intruders and cancel the RoP as soon as I can, if I see this behavior.

C'mon, exploring lots of cities thru embassies is so expensive, impossible that the AI can afford it all the time. Just try to send a sneak attack force around with horsemen, as I described. You'll see.

Btw: I'm ok with that behavior, and far from ranting about the game for this reason.

Arrian · May 14, 2002, 09:42

This is one thing that is well-documented. The AI does know where your units are and aren't. Leave a city undefended, and they will go straight for it. That might piss certain players off (*coughcoraclecough*), but the reality is that it is easily used to the human player's advantage. The AI will bypass defended cities to get at undefended or weakly defended ones. Ok, fine. Know it, use it. Big invasion stacks can be diverted and whittled down in this fashion, thus saving your bacon.

It isn't a big deal to me. I don't deliberately exploit it (though, if hard-pressed enough... I might), although I'm aware of it. I'm no longer surprised when the AI goes on a long flank march in order to get at a weak point. And by the time they get there... it's no longer weak.

The AI is, all things considered, fine by me. There are always ways to improve it (I think the "offensive unit" flag for riflemen/infantry has resulted in the AI building too much of those units and not nearly enough Cavalry).

-Arrian

Theseus · May 15, 2002, 20:35

It's been said before, but we have to acknowledge that as humans we have a very large edge, huge really, and that the current status of "AI" development (and c'mon, that's really not even what Civ3 has) is limited.

There are certain techniques / exploits that we, as players, need to avoid, in a willing state of denial, in order to play "fair" with the AI civs, and have enjoyable games.

Are there tweaks still needed? Certainly. Does Civ3 have the best AI developed thus far? Yes, AFAIK (Kudos, Soren!).

Hell, something just occurred to me... I am pretty sure that Cathy, Joan, Jerxes, the mean nasty man, and all the others, do NOT have a community website where they share tips on how to beat us crazy humans!!!!

Ethelred · May 15, 2002, 21:19

Quote:

I am pretty sure that Cathy, Joan, Jerxes, the mean nasty man, and all the others, do NOT have a community website where they share tips on how to beat us crazy humans!!!!

Their mentor does. Soren lurks even when he doesn't post. He has definitly modified their behaviour based on what he has seen in the various forums.

Theseus · May 15, 2002, 21:24

(LOL)

Hammurabi: Look, the whole point of my super-duper Archers is to generate GLs as early possible... and now you tell me I only get one per elite? What's up with that? Guess I'll play builder... where's Sir Ralph?

Cathy: How about that guy Coracle? I'm gonna open a can of Cossack whup-ass on him next time, no matter what it takes!!!

Gandhi: And what about that damn Aeson? My Indian people are supposed to grow like weeds... I need some schmuck from the States showing me ICS?

Joan: What's wrong with pink, fer Chrissake? Je suis tres desole mais EAT ME!

Mao: I swear to God (oops, slip of the tongue), I will eradicate corruption in China, even if I have to hire Alexnm to figure it out!

Bismarck: Vell, I ham a big, mean, und nasty man. I vill take my revenge upon those who haff insulted me. By ze way, vat ze heck does "Not You Eezer" mean?

Caesar: And what in Hades is an M&M?

Elizabeth: We have determined that We can rule the seas, for a very short time. We have also determined that this is useless... off with Firaxian heads!!! It has been recommended to Us that We start with Brian... Oh. Never mind.

Shaka: You know, that Shaka II guy is pretty smart (and what a name!)... glad I don;t have to face off with him! I know, I'll cut your Internet access with an Impi!!

Cleo: You know, it seems like post-1.21f, I get stuck in jungles way too much. Also, I can't make up my mind: builder, warmonger, builder, warmonger...

Alexander: You know, every time I make it throught the Ancient Age, here comes that bonehead Txurce kicking my butt with Knights. Give a guy a break.

Lincoln: So if all the Americans play America, how come I don;t hear about tremendous F-15 successes?

Japan: Arrian ROCKS! All your base are belong to us!

Xerxes: I don't care what you say, I agree about the Spearman / Tank thing, but one of my Immortals can take out an MI, no problem. Whiners, just deal with it.

Montezuma: I've had it with being an ancient civ... I-iZ g01ng 1337. Juzt d0nut j00 zend Iz t0 M1ngapulc0... 33t iz t00 muchz lik Acapulc0!!

Ethelred · May 15, 2002, 21:34

Quote:

Joan: What's wrong with pink, fer Chrissake? Je suis tres desole mais EAT ME!

I think you have discovered the true reason France is pink. Some virgin warrior.

Theseus · May 15, 2002, 21:39

(More LOL... the Firaxians join in...)

Soren: Footsloggers rule!!!

Dan: Do they wear sombreros?

Mike: I'll check on that...

Nick: But do they look good?

Rex & Jason: What should we about that in the 'pedia?

Jeff: Show me the money!!

Sid: But do they play golf?

Giovanni Wine · May 15, 2002, 23:13

Great one Theseus!!!

That was simply great

Saluti

alexman · May 15, 2002, 23:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Theseus
Mao: I swear to God (oops, slip of the tongue), I will eradicate corruption in China, even if I have to hire Alexnm to figure it out!

Um... Mao... you better get rid of your dyslexia before I hire rdopos, I mean Setheus, to kick your sorry behind using a warrior-cavalry-scout mixed army!!! buh-bye!

(Nice post, Theseus, LOL)

Theseus · May 15, 2002, 23:27

Haha

Isn't there an Alexnm too? Did I mix you guys up? Sorry!!

And, yes, "dopos" is a longstanding insult name...

Theseus · May 15, 2002, 23:37

Ethelred,

You are correct, of course... inspired me to write the second post, and maybe give Firaxians a chuckle.

Theseus · May 15, 2002, 23:41

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
1) a warrior-cavalry-scout mixed army!!! 2) buh-bye!

I guess I am a little predictable...

Harovan · May 16, 2002, 03:17

Thanks Theseus, for the big laugh in the morning... I knew I'll miss something when I went to bed last night.

Shaka II · May 16, 2002, 10:23

Hilarious.

You definitely made my morning too, although the thought of Impis on my internet connection is somewhat disturbing.

AIL · May 16, 2002, 16:52

I don't know how it is in the 1.21 patch but in the last there was something really stupid with the AI:
The Persians controlled the Game from the beginning to the Industrial Age but then and in the Modern Age they were overtaken by my #3 Civ... I heared many people achieving things like that but few investigated it like me...
Here's the reason: They are really bad in industrializating their cities! I saved money to do some Investigate Cities in the Year 2100+ and voila: it turned out that only one of 5 cities with 25+ population that I investigated had Factories or better while all my core cities had Factories, Robotic Plants and Nuclear Plants! I outdid their much bigger empire in production with a few cities!

Arrian · May 16, 2002, 17:07

Can't wait to see how much better I can do with leader generation now that I know about the 1 leader per elite unit thing.

-Arrian
patron saint of Japan, or something like that.

Theseus · May 16, 2002, 17:22

I was talking about a golf trip to Ireland today, and it inspired me:

Elizabeth: Ahem. Sir Sid, you should be aware that at one point My Scottish peoples did have the tech lead in golf.

Montezuma: G0lf iz 3317!!

Caesar: You, my fellow rulers, are kiss-asses.

TheEvilCheater · May 19, 2002, 03:47

I think the AI cant get much better without sucking every resource from your computer. Also the computer isnt stupid. I was the second nation there were 3 super nations America Number 1 Me and NUmber 2 and English as number 3. Well America was pulling ahead. Everyone was with a mpp with someone. Well i knew i wasnt going to win if i didnt kill someone. Well i decided to go after the english. I start off taking 2 cities. Well im thinking well im a sure win. Then America declares war on English after they have moved most of their troops to my front. So all i did was help America win the game and crush me later

but it was fun.

notyoueither · May 19, 2002, 04:17

I just reviewed this thread. Good job Theseus.

Bismarck: It means 'I am for you.'

Coracle · May 19, 2002, 04:56

Quote:

Originally posted by TheEvilCheater
I think the AI cant get much better without sucking every resource from your computer. Also the computer isnt stupid. I was the second nation there were 3 super nations America Number 1 Me and NUmber 2 and English as number 3. Well America was pulling ahead. Everyone was with a mpp with someone. Well i knew i wasnt going to win if i didnt kill someone. Well i decided to go after the english. I start off taking 2 cities. Well im thinking well im a sure win. Then America declares war on English after they have moved most of their troops to my front. So all i did was help America win the game and crush me later

but it was fun.

If the AI is so good (and it isn't) it not only wouldn't have to cheat so much, it wouldn't do stupid things such as I'll list below, or at least it would LEARN not to keep repeating them.

Sending settler/foot soldier combos wandering right into enemy territory heading for an open tile (when a city gets razed) where they prompty get destroyed. I saw that happen three times in a dozen turns. When a fourth combo started wandering into my territory I got so bored I quit the game. (BTW, an AI cheat is freebie settlers to do all this nonsense).

AI military units can always be predicted to go after resources, undefended workers, or undefended bombardment units. They can thus be easily maneuvered into killing zones and successfully counterattacked. Fortresses also can help do this.

Where will AI units attack? The easiest most direct route. Therefore, I can expect to see them march across open fields where they also can be successfully counterattacked. The AI DOES NOT LEARN. Three times the Romans marched legions across plains to be destroyed by waves of mounted warriors. If they attacked against the other city just as close to them surrounded by hills I could not have successfully attacked units with a '3' in hills.

The AI evaluates enemy military strength based on total units, not quality or modernity. I therefore keep weak units in the towns and cities - but mass the best most modern units to be ready to counterattack in those killing zones. Sure enough, the AI attacks, and gets creamed.

The AI loves to drop off crappy little forces by sea during war. They are a waste and easily dealt with.

The AI is bad at using cannon/artillery, which is vital once you get riflemen on line.

And a lot of other stuff.

THE POINT: However good or bad the AI is, it does stupid things that are the result of sloppy programming and which should have been removed at least two patches ago.

Ethelred · May 19, 2002, 06:04

Coracle are you even remotely aware that NO ONE has made and AI for ANY game that has the ability to learn?

Ocasionaly an AI will adapt its methods to fit the game. The AI in Civ III happens to be one of the those games. The only game that has ever even planned on having a AI that learns was Battle Cruiser 3000. Whether Derek Smart ever got it to do that when he was patching it is hard to tell since few ever played the final version of the game.

Theseus · May 19, 2002, 11:44

Coracle,

Do you just not get it? Civ3 does NOT have an AI!!!

To my knowledge, the only in-game modifier to the static set of "AI" rules is relatively early in a respective game, where, based upon the degree of war in the world, the aggression factor is adjusted.

Otherwise there are no learning algorithms... and certainly none game to game.

Perhaps you have the same problem...

AIL · May 19, 2002, 14:22

I wanted to know if the AI still does that horrible mistake of not Industrializing... They still don't! The only explanation I can think of is that Soren wanted to lower AI-caused pollution since the player had no influence on it.

Please, please fix that Soren!

Mark_Everson · May 21, 2002, 22:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Ethelred
Coracle are you even remotely aware that NO ONE has made and AI for ANY game that has the ability to learn?

Hey Ethelred:

I don't know if your blanket assertion is true, but the kind of learning Coracle spoke of wouldn't even be difficult to do. All you need is a counter that keeps track of
1. Total troop strength AI had at start of campaign
2. Total " " for human
3. Troop strength committed to offensive
4. Level of success (cities taken and Held minus troop losses using some metric)
5. Strength-weighted map of paths the offensive armies took.

If a plan is a two-time loser, require significantly more (maybe 2x) and a different path before another attack is launched. One can get fancier of course... It isn't really learning in an advanced AI sense, but it does what Coracle requested, and is not that tough to do IMO.

-Mark

planetfall · May 22, 2002, 10:34

If you want an interesting game, try this:

1. play Germany
2. play vs at least 7 other civs
3. play with continents
4. any difficulty level
5. decrease AI tech trading
6. increase initial civ spacing

What I have noticed:
1. decreased AI tech trading keeps everyone about equal in techs. Your UU is late so must work to keep strong military.
2. Increased initial civ spacing makes it harder to knock off several other civs in ancient era
3. AI really, really hates Panzers. As soon as you are about 4-5 techs from Panzers, expe ct an active alliance based preemptive campaign against you. Civs that were friendly are now suddenly furiously hostile.
4. If this game isn't challenging enough, restart so you only have 1-2 luxuries inside your empire. Suddenly marketplaces lose most of value.
5. Now with 1.21 expect multifront AI strikes and campaigns with similar level military. {it was so much simplier pre 1.21 with single front attacks}. Artillery help now, but are not enough without much backup support.

Be interesting if others have the same experience playing Germany, or if only in my games do the AI's hate panzers. If it is only me, there must be some place they are storing history of military success with X|Y unit, and then adjusting future games by players history with that unit. Huh, wouldn't that make an even more challenging AI without requiring cheating. AI behavior based on last 5 games of player Z success/failure ratios?

Gen.Dragolen · May 22, 2002, 11:17

Coracle does seem to miss the point on alot of this: the computer doesn't have to cheat. It knows all of the rules and uses them well.

The computer civ's (CC)actions are based on a somewhat sofficsticated decision matrixx that the programmers developed to make it imitate successful play in other games, during play testing and our postings here. Others have made the same mistake in logic and even I have been guilty of it at times too: you can't call it cheating if the CC has a better starting location and can use Pop Rush, goes REXing because it can, and probes for your weak points. Soren and his team have done remarkable job in making what amounts to a chess match that it still fun to loose at and keeps you coming back for more abuse.

If anything, Soren needs to add some more detail to the combat model, like supply lines and Zones of Control for the more modern units, etc... just to make life more challenging.

And if you can't handle what's being done to you by the CC's, don't get mad, get even: read up on strategy books, like Machiavelli's "The Prince" and Sun Tzu's "The Art of War". Pray that Soren never gets the CC's able to operate like a human player who has read and has applied the prinicples and concepts in those books to his game play.

And since Soren has been reading this thread, please add some more resources like copper and salt to the resources for the ancient age, and similar historical items to the other ages. I am forever running low on cash from the constant upgrades to all my units, and some more trade goods might help. Otherwise I'll just have to stick to the old ways: "Nice city. I'll take it." Not much subtle strategy to a massed artillery bombardment before the troops go in and mop up...

Coracle · May 22, 2002, 21:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Gen.Dragolen
Coracle does seem to miss the point on alot of this: the computer doesn't have to cheat. It knows all of the rules and uses them well.

So you are saying what? The AI DOESN'T cheat?? Of course it does, and it HAS to because the AI is so predictable and disappointing.

Ethelred · May 22, 2002, 22:09

Well Coracle we are STILL waiting for you to give some evidence. Till then most of us think you are full of it. The AI has a couple of known advantages and some bonuses IF you play on higher levels, that easily seen in the editor. That is in no way the same as the rampant cheating you are claiming happens.

EVIDENCE Coracle. Show some.