Interesting move by the AI

[dexters]

I'm playing American Civ in a Regent game and is sharing the continent with the Zulus, after having wiped out the Germans. The Zulus had declared war on me a few turns after the Germans went under. The Zulus had numerical superiority and I played defensively. Then came peace. But after a tenuous peace, they declared war on me again. As you can guess, I'm not too thrilled with them. When I finally declared war and my Civ went to war with the Zulus for the third time, I immediately moved in 4 stacks into Zulu territory. The Northern army consisted of about 8 or 9 units and 5 catapults. The souther stack had about 10 units. The central stack, had about 6 units and 1 catapult. There is a fourth stack attacking an isolated city, but it's not part of the main assault.

Perhaps it is poor planning on my part, but the relatively stronger Northern and Southern armies were designated for taking the Zulu's northern and southern cities making an arc accross Zulu territory and meeting up with the central army as it makes a drive towards what Intel says is the Zulu's only source of iron. The combined army would then make an arcing move and covervge on the Zulu capital with the plan being to encircle and take the Zulu capital Zimbabwe

As the title of this post would point out, it did not go as planned. When war broke out, The American central army attacked through the forests and made a mad dash for the iron deposits with orders to destroy the roads and cut off supply, and hold it long enough for the southern army to take the neccessary towns so as to put the resource out of Zulu control permanently.

Moving unopposed, I decided to split the central army into two companies. One consisted of 3 pikeman and 1 catapult moved towards Zimbabwe to begin the seige, while the remaining 2 pikeman and 1 swordsman continued on to secure the iron resource one tile away.

And then, all hell broke loose. In what I consider a brilliant tactical maneuver, the AI ignored my massive northern and Souther armies and went straight for my weak central army, attacking both contingents at once.
They sent waves after waves of swordsman and archers. Despite its defensive advantage and superior training, my Pikemen succumed to the assault. The catapult was captured. The company sent to destroy roads to the iron deposits barely made it before being decimated. I have not seen the AI defend its strategic resource with such zeal, and cool calculation. Granted most of you will agree that I likely blundered by splitting my central army into two weak contingents. But the AI is supposed to attack the closest enemy force. What I witnessed was the AI ignoring my two large armies attacking their largest cities, and instead massing troops against me with the sole purpose of denying me a more important strategic objective. --their only resource of Iron It's a move that is not without its flaws as my northern and southern armies were able to attack relatively unopposed. But the move seems strangely human, flaws and all, rather than the random attacks I am accustomed to in Civ2.

As you can see from the screen cap, the southern army and my Knights saved the day. It was able to capture the key city with the iron deposits in its grid and after a cultural expansion, I secured the resource for my Civilization. The plan to take the capital stalled, but I had enough time to sweep in with my knights and destroy the roads and mines around the capital, ensuring the Zulus will spend considerable time getting up to speed when peace comes.

[Apolex]

It wasn't a brilliant tactical move. It just wanted your catapult.

[dexters]

I had catapults attached to the Northern army as well. All 5 of them and I had them spread out 2 to a tile defended by a knight while I encircled the city north of their capital. So the northern army, for a times was spread into several stacks. I did the same when I surrounded their capital city -- mostly for efficiency so that I could destroy their improvements faster instead of moving one large stack one tile at a time. In both cases, the AI didn't attack any of my stacks in force.

In fact, the capital and the norther city I did take had enough defenders to rush one of my stacks, kill the one or two knights defending the stack and take 2 catapults. If the AI was only interested in the captapult, it would have been good pickings. They didn't act in both cases.

[dunk]

I've noticed the AI usually goes after the weakest group of units first. It will avoid large stacks.

Usually of course.

[Apolex]

An interesting move on the AI's part, you're right. However I tend to believe that it blundered into a move which you ascribe as being well planned. After many games I have yet to experience the AI doing anything remotely more strategic than basic tactics (i.e. send a spearman to get my iron, or attack the weak city, unit, etc.). Sometimes the AI does something and I'm like, "Hey, that's what I would have done." But it only blunders into such luck about 5% of the time.

[dexters]

Agreed. I'm by no means saying the AI tactics was brilliant as a whole. Note that the subjectline of my title says that the "move" was interesting. Singular not plural

[Apolex]

Looks like an interesting game. I see that you play the "my continent" style like me! I play the game through the middle ages as if the other civs are infesting "my continent". Once I secure it I dig in, bunker down, and try to become a superpower. Looks like you're well on your way in that game.

Later,
-Apolex

[edited to fix spelling error]

[Pythagoras]

I dotn think its that amazing, the AI always goes to your least defended city and avoids your big armies. The three pronged attack was interesting though.

[Coracle]

"Brilliant" is not a term I'd associate with this AI.

It is very predictable at war:

It goes for the weakest stack.

It goes for undefended workers, bombardment, or resources.

It sends a naval unit or two sneaking behind my lines on a pathetic and futile raid.

It can't use bombardment offensively - so why it wants mine I don't know!

It can be easily drawn into killing zones by proper placement of fortified units on hills and fortresses. I have smashed countless invading AI forces on grassland or plains as I attacked them as they approached my hills or towns.

It does mass large stacks better than Civ 2, but I expected after over five years a Civ 3 AI alot better.

[Inverse Icarus]

if you think you have a shot at losing a city, send workers near the enemy position, on different squares.

they'll usually take them rather than attack, buying you 2 turns (they attack and move back). it's stupid really.

the fact that they picked out the smaller stack isn't "brilliant", but it's decent code.

[dexters]

I have to disagree abit with Coracle. I tend to dislike moving unweildy and overly large super-stacks. When I invade foreign continents, I tend to spread my invading forces over several stacks on 2 or 3 tiles by the shore usually in a straight line to protect my supply lines --dying units going back to ships to return home and heal, workers, and cannons (moving to and fro)-- from being picked off by the AI.

And from what I've seen, the AI doesn't always attack the weakest stack. It might, and I have some evidence that suggest it may be part of the equation, but from experience, the AI does have the ability to asses its environment and go the most threatening stack, even if it is not the weakest.

In my current game, I landed some troops in a war with Japan. They were spread over 2 hill tiles and 1 mountain tile. I had attacks coming from behind me against the units on the mountain tile and attacks coming from the city adjacent to stack on a hill.

[Radiation Zero]

1.) How did you take that screenshot?

2.) how'd you add the arrows?

[Panag]

hi ,

would it be possible to post a SAV(e) , thanks in advance , ..

have a nice day

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Radiation Zero
1.) How did you take that screenshot?

2.) how'd you add the arrows?

printscreen copies the screen to the clipboard.

he probably used photoshop or something to add the arrows/shadows.

[dexters]

Sorry Panag, I've played through the game for hours now and I'm no longer in the spot described.

You can probably conduct an experiment by playing a 2 player game in a cramped island and drop a resource in the middle of a landmass and see how the AI reacts to you securing it.

[Panag]

Originally posted by dexters
Sorry Panag, I've played through the game for hours now and I'm no longer in the spot described.

You can probably conduct an experiment by playing a 2 player game in a cramped island and drop a resource in the middle of a landmass and see how the AI reacts to you securing it.

hi ,

what you have seen happens a lot when you set the AI default level at deity .

have a nice day