The key to AI greatness - Page 3

Theseus · July 30, 2002, 13:03

Chieftess:

Wow, totally different experiences on which AI civs emerge as killers.

alexman:

Check out my post on player1's mod thread in Files. I like the further changes you made above.

Theseus · July 30, 2002, 13:24

Arrian, we're cross-posting all over the place.

alexman, I agree with Arrian's point.

alexman · July 30, 2002, 13:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian

Perhaps the scientific civs ought to have "happiness" instead of "culture."

We could change that, but I'm not positive that's the best strat. (I did quite well with the scientific Germans in MTII without building temples until after I had marketplaces). As it is, the only scientific civ with culture and not happiness is Greece. I did that because, believe it or not, I tried to change as little as possible.

Quote:

I'd say add wealth and drop culture from Egypt.

Again, culture is there because I tried to change as little as possible. But I agree that Egypt, even though they might not build as many libraries, would probably be better off with wealth instead of culture.

DeepO · July 30, 2002, 13:35

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman [list=1][*]Maximum of four build-often items per civ.[/list=1]

Indeed, all of the civs have a maximum of 4 items, but there is none that has less... could it be an idea to have a few of them with only a few choices, to make them more focused? E.g. put the zulus on offence and production only, which will ensure that they stay a super-aggresive civ?

DeepO

DeepO · July 30, 2002, 13:36

Oh, and I know that it violates your other rules, but sometimes making exceptions can make it more enjoyable...

DeepO

Arrian · July 30, 2002, 13:51

Alexman,

Good point about Germany, and the libraries before temples thing. I see your point.

Egypt is pretty strong anyway, but I have a general sense that they fade in the later game due to lack of cashola. That's my reason for wealth over culture.

-Arrian

Theseus · July 30, 2002, 14:10

alexman and everyone,

I checked in with player1, and he gave his blessing to use his mod as a starting point, as well as for us to muck around with it.

I suggest alexman be keeper of the flame (I am afraid to touch a BIC).

Please take a look at player1's thread in Files, which is actually called "MOD: Patch Suggestion MOD."

The first post has been edited to reflect all changes to date.

It seems pretty good to me; if anything, I would reduce the number of changes from stock Civ3.

Soooo, alexman, if you would, please integrate the suggested build preferences into his mod, and initiate the "AU Mod."

alexman · July 30, 2002, 14:26

I'm on it!

Look for the AU102 thread later today...

DeepO, perhaps we will investigate a more focused AI in another game. But for now, lets stick with the preferences listed above (Arrian, I made your change to Egypt).

player1 · July 30, 2002, 14:50

No problem for me!

Currently I have no plans for next rule changes in my MOD, but when time comes I'll inform all of you, so that AU mod (based on my MOD) gets updates too.

player1 · July 30, 2002, 14:52

Readme for those who wanna get famaliar with MOD:

Theseus · July 30, 2002, 15:16

Thanks player1!

alexman · July 30, 2002, 22:44

Player 1's mod with modified AI build priorities is not used in AU102, but it might be used in future games.

Here's the bic file for anyone that wants to try some (hopefully) killer AI games in the meantime.

=DrJambo= · August 6, 2002, 18:04

Soren, likewise, i'd like to reiterate an extreme interest to know which improvements fall into which categories in the build often lists?

Can you provide this for us modders?

Thanks if you can.

Pyrodrew · November 7, 2002, 12:14

Overall I agree with most of the AU Mod changes in the lastest update. I'm impressed.

I've read about half the posts in the recent AU Mod Thread, but didn't find too much on this...

Quote:

In modifying the table, I followed these rules:
Maximum of four build-often items per civ.
Production a build-often for everyone
Each civ needs at least one marketplace category (trade, wealth, or happiness)
Take advantage of civ traits: Scientific->Science, Religious->Happiness, Militaristic->Offense (or Defense) and trade (cheap harbors etc), Expansionist->Growth or Explore.
Don't change anything unless it violates one of the above rules.

Edit:
India: wealth instead of growth
Rome: culture instead of growth
China: culture instead of growth

India & Rome are Commercial Civs. To "take advantage of civ traits" wouldn't Growth include Commercial?
Commercial - Cities with large populations produce extra commerce. Levels of corruption are lower.

I agree with removing Growth from China. But aren't you taking some of the Commercial power from Rome & India by removing their Growth trait? Or has everyone found Growth to be inferior to Wealth & Culture, even for Commercial Civs, from testing (I didn't read all AU posts/threads)?

alexman · November 7, 2002, 12:55

You have a good point, in theory. But it practice there are two problems with assigning growth to Commercial civs:

1) The AI emphasizes growth too much, even without that preference selected. It irrigates too much and ends up with large, unproductive cities, full of entertainers, because happiness infrastructure can't keep up with the population growth.

2) The extra bonus from the center tile doesn't really make that much of a difference. The real advantage of the Commercial trait is reduced corruption.

Pyrodrew · November 7, 2002, 14:13

I had a feeling there was something wrong with Growth.

Is there a reason non-commercial Civs still have Growth checked (Egypt & America had Culture removed, but not the Growth?)?

alexman · November 7, 2002, 15:57

I just started a somewhat related thread to this one in the Civ3 General Forum.

Pyrodrew, the reason is that we wanted to change as little as possible. For the civs that still have growth changed, there we judged that there were no other better options to be checked instead. However, you're right, we might want to reconsider that.

One_Brow · November 7, 2002, 17:47

I'm just checking...

I thought checking the "Growth" option would mean an increased tendency to produce buildings that directly impact the growth of a city (Aqueduct, Hospital, perhaps Granary and harbor). It does not seem likely to affect worker choices.

Also, can you chnage in the editor which buildins correspond to which flags? That might help encourage certain key buildings.

alexman · November 7, 2002, 17:55

Quote:

Originally posted by One_Brow
I thought checking the "Growth" option would mean an increased tendency to produce buildings that directly impact the growth of a city (Aqueduct, Hospital, perhaps Granary and harbor). It does not seem likely to affect worker choices.

You are correct.

Quote:

Also, can you chnage in the editor which buildins correspond to which flags? That might help encourage certain key buildings.

You can, but only indirectly. All buildings that produce culture, for example, belong to the culture list. In addition, the buildings that produce happiness belong to the happiness category, and so on.

Pyrodrew · November 7, 2002, 18:19

Quote:

I thought checking the "Growth" option would mean an increased tendency to produce buildings that directly impact the growth of a city (Aqueduct, Hospital, perhaps Granary and harbor).

That's the problem. The AI builds those buildings when it doesn't need them. See alexman's post in the General Forum regarding Food Addiction & the granary.
As for aqueduct & hospitals we always have the wife to tell us to build a new aqueduct & hospital. The AI has this wife too, except it probably listens to it more than we do, much like a governor.
Harbors will still likely be built "often" for trade (commercial) & military reasons for Civs.
Removing the "Growth" often option would not prevent the AI to build those buildings, just better prioritizes it.