AI cheating

Jaholt · October 26, 2002, 12:30

Here is one thing that infuriates me:

The situation: An enemy has a fleet of ships approaching my coast. Some of my coastal cities are defended better than others. What happens? The fleet arives at the coast, doesn't land it's troops and moves on. Why? the city was well defended. The fleet arrives at the next city, does it land? depends again on the defenders. If this city is well defended, off goes the fleet again until it finds a less well-defended city. This is cheating!!
The point is that the enemy Civ shouldn't know if my cities are well defended or not. I don't have this knowledge when I do the attacking. And this happens before Espionage.
Anyone else find this?

WarpStorm · October 26, 2002, 12:31

Firaxis has said many times that the AI knows the entire map. This is a very well known AI cheat.

Trifna · October 26, 2002, 13:19

/me dreams of the day AI wont need to cheat to play not-so-idiotically. Makes it act silly and uncoherently

WarpStorm · October 26, 2002, 13:36

So do I, it's still a few years coming.

jdd2007 · October 26, 2002, 14:52

it may be cheating in game terms, but wouldnt a fleet notice a city filled with musketmen being harder to attack than one with a solitary musketdude?

Cidifer · October 26, 2002, 15:07

by that logic we should know this also then.

Jaybe · October 26, 2002, 15:14

So, instead of a "cheat" make it an "exploit".
When the ship approaches the city, EMPTY the coastal city farther down, perhaps reinforcing the "threatened" city. Do the shuffle.

Or just let them land, having reserves standing nearby (not in the city) to rub them out.

ChaotikVisions · October 26, 2002, 18:19

I personally like it. The AI needs the cheats to make it better. Even though this is the best AI out of all the Civilization games, its still no match for a human player. And besides, he could have theoretically just spied on you, and found troop locations. Execute a few of your ministers, get rid of them spys.

Cidifer · October 26, 2002, 20:02

he said it was prior to espionoge though.

miike · October 26, 2002, 20:04

After having numberous problems with this exact scenario. All, I can do is offer some suggestions to use this "cheat" to your advantage. First, in theory it is possible to know where your enemies units are. It is under the espionage menu. Basically, reveal troop locations.

If you are fighting with an enemy that is landing from the ocean. Then have all of your coastal cities defended. But, have one city that is a few tiles away from the water, undefended. When the AI drops its troops off, they will go around your other cities and go directly for the undefended one. If you have railroad, then you can quickly move units to attack the AI units walking across your territory. Also, because it is your terrain, the computer AI is limited by how much it can move in a turn. So, you don't have to wipe them out right away. When I play, I will usually, leave one city purposely undefended. But this city is usually, located away from my border with the enemy. So, they have to go across some of my territory to get there. Meanwhile, my border or coastal cities are well defended. And, as the AI units move across my land, I can see them coming a mile away.

As far as computer cheating goes. I think that the cheat that bothers me the most, is that the computer knows where the resources are before they pop up. If you study closely where the AI places its cities, then you will see that early in the game, the computer will drop cities in some of the oddest places, sometimes in the middle of nowhere. That is because that is a future location for oil/rubber/uranium/ or whatever else, they may want. I think that this particular cheat is the worst one of all.

Jaybe · October 26, 2002, 20:34

Quote:

Originally posted by miike
... I think that the cheat that bothers me the most, is that the computer knows where the resources are before they pop up.

By the same token, they will still plant cities in "worthless" locations where there are NO resources.

HazieDaVampire · October 26, 2002, 20:40

this knollage also has a slite problem when linked to AI tactics, sombody mentioned once that you can empty a city of units miles behind the front line and the ai will march men towards that citys forgetting about the rest, when its a turn away from the city, you can fill it back up! and empty a city of units miles away from the front line and the enemy group. Now you can chip away at this attacking force and the AI will stupidly carry on!

Keeper of Hell · October 26, 2002, 21:08

I would think that you'd be glad that the AI acts in this fashion rather than getting angry about it. You can obviously use this to your advantage- the AI's scatterbrained tactics combined with its knowledge of all your units causes it to do the stupidest things, especially when RRs come along. AI troops will march on (or in this case, sail toward) a badly-defended city. You, using the advantage of your roads or RRs, quickly shift defenders to this city, thus causing it to be a poor target for the AI. So, the hapless invaders set off for another badly-defended city, you shift your troops there, they change directions, and the cycle repeats. I've always wondered whether this of knowledge of troop positions doesn't actually hinder the AI more than it helps, considering how badly the computer puts the information to use.

vmxa1 · October 26, 2002, 23:00

I do not mind them knowing about resources in advance as I am not in competition for that location any most of the time. If it close enough to me to have been mine, I will be getting very soon. What do I care I the civ knows about rubber and they are so far I away I do not even have the area exposed?

Cidifer · October 27, 2002, 08:47

Quote:

I would think that you'd be glad that the AI acts in this fashion rather than getting angry about it. You can obviously use this to your advantage- the AI's scatterbrained tactics combined with its knowledge of all your units causes it to do the stupidest things, especially when RRs come along. AI troops will march on (or in this case, sail toward) a badly-defended city. You, using the advantage of your roads or RRs, quickly shift defenders to this city, thus causing it to be a poor target for the AI. So, the hapless invaders set off for another badly-defended city, you shift your troops there, they change directions, and the cycle repeats. I've always wondered whether this of knowledge of troop positions doesn't actually hinder the AI more than it helps, considering how badly the computer puts the information to use.

You know your the 4th person to say that, I think we all get it by now.

Jaholt · October 27, 2002, 11:33

Yes, you can lead enemy troops into a trap with an undefended city; and yes, you can shuffle troops from city to city to thwart a landing, but this is strategy you have to develop to counteract cheating. For me this is poor gameplay.
I wasn't aware that potential resources were grabbed by AI Civs.
Another problem: when I capture workers on enemy territory I have to move them manually to my own territory. This can be tricky. When an enemy grabs my workers, they instantly disappear! presumably teleported back to the enemy territory.
Does anyone know a solution to this? (apart from keeping all workers defended).

vmxa1 · October 27, 2002, 13:13

I don't think the workers are ported back to an AI city, they are just disbanded. Something you can do and should if you can't get them back safely. I think the patch before 129f changed the AI to stop trying to capture and ferry workers back if it was a losing proposition.

mrmitchell · October 27, 2002, 14:26

Well, the AI needs these cheats to provide a worthwhile challenging game against you. The only thing you can do to get non-cheating good competitors is to get PtW when it comes out.

I'll give the AI to CivVI to have these tricks and cheats, then I'll start expecting them to actually be intelligent like their name suggests.

sun_tzu_159 · October 27, 2002, 18:39

AI is desperately hindered by the two cheats it uses above. Once you know about them you can use them to your advantage.

First is to leave a city undefended in the middle of your land. The AI has to cross alot of your territory to get there.

Secondly with the resources thing it will place an early city in such a stupid location that it is worthless for 90% of the game. When it is useful it will get attacked.

AI would do better without these cheats/exploits as it would just wade into battle against a city which you can't set it up to attack - you would then have a headache to get your defenders to the right place. The AI should build its cities in the best places for the time, not the future.

Regards
Sun_Tzu

You can have your workers find resources in the early part of the game. It only works in the early game when there are very few roads. When you start researching ironworking watch and a worker may build a road to nowhere. The end of this road will be iron-ore. Can work also for saltpeter if your roads are still very little developed.

Regards
Sun_Tzu

miike · October 28, 2002, 05:55

I really wish that CIV3 would be patched, and have the AI place a greater importance on cutting off resources or luxuries. Or launching suprise attacks on cities that have wonders. It is pretty much a given, that when you invade a enemy civ, you pillage their resources, then pillage their luxuries. Then if you think that you may not wipe them out completely, and before you have to sign a peace treaty, you might as well take their cities that have wonders in them. I think that this way of "thinking" would make the AI a little more realisitc, and everyone that had current maps, would have a better idea of what cities or areas of the map would be prone to attack, and defend them accordingly.

Gunter · October 28, 2002, 06:35

OK, my god ...listen this:

I have just initiated middle ages:

There are no embassy in me with no one.I have no embassy in no one.

Persians land by sea,CHEATING A LOT ,avoid my first coastal well defended cities and attack my lonely city that have no defense ( usually I had 3/4 defending units per city ) .

I forgot to defend it after moving defending units to a close war with another civ.

WELL,HOW CAN PERSIANS KNOW THAT THAT SPECIFICALLY CITY WAS THE ONLY ONE ( AMONG CA. 20 CITIES ) THAT WAS NOT DEFENDED HAVING NO EMBASSIES AND HAVE NOT YET DISCOVERED SPY?

If you can explain me this I'll would be very happy,because from my point of view this is CHEATING,or at least is a big bug.

You surelly know better of me that some battles or some cities are not important but someotherelse are fundamental for the empire strenght.

Thanks

Gunter

Cidifer · October 28, 2002, 11:35

People have already said that this is AI cheating. Since most people are smarter then the computer they need to let the AI cheat sometimes to make them harder, otherwise they'd be a total push over. It's like in certain FPS the AI can see you even when your in shadows and can basically see 360 degree around themselves. Just makes them tougher to kill.

Gunter · October 28, 2002, 12:21

This consideration take me directly to latest events in my current game.

I see too many times spearmen winning easily vs my fortified elite pikemen behind walls.

When I try with chivalry vs pc's pikemen I need at least 5 units to win.

If AI cheats knowing map,city units etc...what should make me think that AI does the same during battles?

In any case I consider CIV3 a piece of pure gold,above all considering Firaxis support,but playing poker vs opponents full of aces it's not funny,IMHO.

I'm playing at monarch level,I don't want to think what the AI could do at higher level,maybe during ancient times it attacks with moderrn tank and stealth bomber?????

I have never tried Deity level,I'm quite afraid about what the AI could " produce ".

Moreover....another AI cheat in my current game.

When I start a war vs Americans,the Romas attack me suddenly. ( of course there is no reason,no alliances between them,no past my bad actions )

I make peace with all,and after couple of turns I attack americans again,and Romans without having contacts with americans attack me again after few turns.

I have no words...

Gunter

Gunter · October 28, 2002, 12:22

Swordsmen,not spearmen.

WarpStorm · October 28, 2002, 12:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Gunter
If AI cheats knowing map,city units etc...what should make me think that AI does the same during battles?

Because Soren said that it doesn't. He's perfectly willing to explain what cheats the AI does and he's said that it doesn't fudge the combat. Why should he lie about it? The biggest cheats are the incredible production bonuses at the higher difficulty levels, the fact the computer is playing a Regent game, and the trade advantage that the AIs give each other (plus the aforementioned knowledge of the map).

vmxa1 · October 28, 2002, 14:05

Wait a minute, if I can take their cities with wonders, why can't I take them? Those cities are th back bone of the civ. I was with you on the pillage part. Are you just talking about you have had enough or WW or some cities are too far away to reach? Because if you can take wonder cities, they do not have much left in the way of defence.

Arrian · October 28, 2002, 14:05

Quote:

I forgot to defend it after moving defending units to a close war with another civ.

Oops.

Quote:

When I start a war vs Americans,the Romas attack me suddenly. ( of course there is no reason,no alliances between them,no past my bad actions )

I make peace with all,and after couple of turns I attack americans again,and Romans without having contacts with americans attack me again after few turns.

In what way is this a cheat? Sounds like the Romans were beligerant SOBs... which kinda fits, you know. Speaking of having "no reason" to attack you, what reason was it that made you attack America?

Quote:

When I try with chivalry vs pc's pikemen I need at least 5 units to win.

It is a rather common misconception that the AI gets combat advantages. It does not (except vs. barbarians, since on the default AI level - Regent - there is a hefty barb combat bonus). You may have had some bad luck, you may have attacked a size 12 city across a river or on a hill, which would result in bad odds for your knights. Or you could just be remembering your defeats, as they are more memorable.

Swords attacking pikes behind walls should certainly lose more often than they win (walls = 50% bonus, fortification +25%, I believe. That makes the pikeman about a 5 defense, versus the attacking 3). It's not outside my realm of belief, though. It ain't exactly the famous "spearman defeats tank" episode, which I've had happen (I laughed and then killed the spearman with my next Tank).

As Warpstorm said, Soren Johnson has repeatedly explained that the AI does not have combat advantages, and I see no reason why he'd lie.

-Arrian

sabrewolf · October 28, 2002, 18:47

it's not AI-cheating it's AI-compensation for lack of strategical thinking possibility.

it's the same as in chess (deep blue vs. kasparov and deep fritz vs. kramik)... the programs had all strategical analysis' and moves stored... and a way faster processing unit that the human. but the computer still computes serial, the brain has parallel processing.

if computers in 20 years have neuronal nets as central processing units, we humans will need cheating *lol* ... and diety will only be playable as a god

vmxa1 · October 28, 2002, 20:26

That is the most common bogus statement I see on sites, that the AI cheats and has combat bonuses. Having an advantage is not the same as cheating (refer to them knowing about resources).

Gunter · October 29, 2002, 07:31

Yes, I agree strange defeat are remembered better than strange wins,but the fact of romans was so :

---Conquering weak americans cities would gave me a good vantage in terms of expansion.Well, Romans did not tollerate my expansion politic,so without having contacts with no one they attacked me suddenly.

After peace with all,( I couldn't manage to substain 2 wars at the same time ) I attacked americans again.

Well, Romans always without having treaties and contacts with no one stopped again my expansionist politics.

This story has been repeated a thrid time,always with Romans fully isolated from the whole globe.

Then I was forced to make peace with them all,in order to avoid to loose.

How can romans could start attack just after I attacked Americans having Romans no contacts with americans and having me done no bad actions against them?

Well,after several turns below my 2 cities ( initially taken from americans and then conquered from Romans ) appeared coal.

This is a preventive war not only to obtain resources not yet appeared but also to stop my expansionist war,without knowing I was moving to americans,or..yes they knew it very well without contacts with americans,strange don't you?

This at least IMHO

Gunter