Why, oh why does the poor AI... - Page 2

Pyrodrew · November 13, 2002, 06:02

Quote:

Why does the AI build a Coal Plant when a Hydro Plant can be built instead? And then why does it build a Hydro Plant as soon as it’s done with the Coal Plant?!

The only differences between the Coal Plant & Hydro Plant are pollution & shield cost. Therefore, with production equal, I would wager the AI priorities 1st on shield cost...
Coal Plant 160shields
Hydro Plant 240shields
And then evaluates the 2 plants on pollution (and probably production). If the potential plant has lower pollution then it gets built...
Coal Plant 2pollution
Hydro Plant 0 pollution

I would have thought pollution would be considered 1st, but then if someone made a 'Super Plant' costing 2400shields & -2 pollution the AI would build that 1st instead... but why worry about that if it throws off the original game? From Beta Testing they probably found Coal Plants available when Hydro Plants were not & therefore never saw this problem.

The AI probably does not build Nuclear Plants due their explosion risk... the AI has enough things to worry about.

Quote:

Why does the AI build regular units in newly founded cities of a large empire when veteran defenders can easily be brought from elsewhere?

From what I've seen, getting the settler out asap takes top priority. The settler may settle on the other side of the world or end up being killed before reaching its destination, so the empire does not care about the settler's location or safety (except to provide an escort). Once the new city is founded the city may be on the other side of the world where it would take too long for the empire to send defenders. Other defense units probably have their own preset missions (guard London, escort next Settler, etc.) that they are not willing to change & other cities have their own goals (build bank, build next Settler, etc.) that could care less about that new city which might be built in ice & tundra.

Quote:

Why doesn't the AI switch production in its cities unless it's for a Wonder that has already been built? It should check and possibly reassign production when it learns a new technology, if not every turn. Extra bonus: could the AI be made to use pre-builds like us humans?

That would certainly make the AI more competitive, including for building wonders.

Arrian · November 13, 2002, 11:13

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
BUT, there is a small problem with the illusion that Civ3 SI

presents to us right now. The AI bonuses give the human a good (often too good) challenge early-on in the game, but are not hardly enough in the late game. Our goal here is to make the AI behave more like the human at the city-level so that it can use its bonuses more effectively in the latter part of the game.

That's it, in a nutshell. Well said, Alexman. Though I think Zachriel's point is important to remember, I do think that the AI can be poked and prodded into making smarter choices that will help make it more competitive, particularly in the mid-to-late game, and perhaps even lessen the need for the huge bonuses it gets on the upper levels.

-Arrian

Nor Me · November 13, 2002, 11:53

Culture appears to be one of the most important factors here.
If you had computers, the research lab would come immeadiately after the cathedral.

I gave factories 3 culture and it built one 1st-3rd.

alexman · November 13, 2002, 13:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Nor Me
I gave factories 3 culture and it built one 1st-3rd.

That's good to know. Definitely a reason not to flag culture as a build-often, but somehow I have a realism problem with giving factories a cultural value, not to mention it unbalancing the cultural victory condition. A better solution IMO would be to increase the maintenance of factories so that humans build them later as well.

alexman · November 13, 2002, 16:19

I just noticed something interesting in PtW. Spain has Wealth flagged as build-never. That means it never builds banks and wealth

. (It does build marketplaces because of trade marked as build-often).

I can't believe this is intentional. Either this is a silly bug, or have I messed up my own civ3X.bix file. Can anyone comfirm that Spain has Wealth flagged as build-never?

jshelr · November 13, 2002, 16:32

"If the AU Mod can pass the equivalent of a Turing Test with the bunch of us, that's good enough for me."

LoL

Random Passerby · November 13, 2002, 16:54

An interesting human handicap I play with more often than not: no factories EVER. Makes the game a lot more even, but the sad part is, on Monarch I can still match (sometimes beat!) comparably sized empires for total production (although they smack me silly on wonder/spaceship races if I don't use prebuilds and/or get to the key techs first). Even if I'm not cramming cities together very closely, for that matter.

Catt · November 13, 2002, 17:23

Alexman - great thread and work

You and Theseus come out with 2 great threads while the rest of us are trying to get our arms around PTW.

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
I just noticed something interesting in PtW. Spain has Wealth flagged as build-never. That means it never builds banks and wealth

. (It does build marketplaces because of trade marked as build-often).

I can't believe this is intentional. Either this is a silly bug, or have I messed up my own civ3X.bix file. Can anyone comfirm that Spain has Wealth flagged as build-never?

Believe it or not, in the default .bix, Spain has wealth checked as build-never. (Does this really mean no banks, ever? and therefore no stock markets, no wall street

)

Catt

Killerdaffy · November 13, 2002, 17:48

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
A better solution IMO would be to increase the maintenance of factories so that humans build them later as well.

Unless you yank up the maintenance to 10 gold or higher it is not going to make a difference for any city with a decent production. There has to be another solution.

And regarding those bank-less Spanish: That, apart from hurting the AI, clashes head-on with reality: The country is one over the most overbanked in the world.

alexman · November 13, 2002, 18:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Killerdaffy

Unless you yank up the maintenance to 10 gold or higher it is not going to make a difference for any city with a decent production.

Actually, assuming one shield and one commerce are of equal value, a 4 or 5 gold maintenance of factories would make them a bad deal for cities with under 8 or 10 blue (uncorrupted) shields. Right now the crossover is 6 blue shields.

Also, keep in mind that in order for a building to become a priority, it not only has to be worth building, it has to be a better deal than other buildings. For example, a marketplace is worth building if the city has an income of 2 uncorrupted gold.

Catt · November 13, 2002, 18:23

Well, I have spent what very little free time I have had recently playing PTW, and haven't really spent any constructive time to explore the editor or take a look at new civ development habits. But the idea that the Spanish have a "never build wealth" flag checked that precludes banks (and stock exchanges and wall street) startled me until I realized that I had a saved game with a well-developed competitive Spain and that I could investigate Madrid and have a peek for myself.

See the shot below. Spain is approximately mid / mid-late industrial age. They are a very good-sized empire, well-developed, etc. currently at war (hence the communism). Madrid itself has built either 2 or 3 wonders (including Shakespeare's, which explains the lack of entertainers in a 27-pop city). What Madrid has not built is a bank. Nor a stock exchange. Note that with 70% of its income going to the treasury, a size 27 city is contributing a whopping 37 gold in taxes.

That's a shame.

Also, on a different topic, why, oh why is Madrid producing a 90-shield guerilla (6.6.1) instead of a 90-shield infantry (6.10.1) with an abundance of rubber available?

Catt

alexman · November 13, 2002, 18:31

Thanks for that screenshot Catt!!

As for the guerrila, that's amazing! Both units have identical stats (including offense and defense flags for the AI) except for attack strength. My guess is that the AI is building a unit for defense, so it doesn't look at the attack strength.

Catt · November 13, 2002, 18:44

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
As for the guerrila, that's amazing! Both units have identical stats (including offense and defense flags for the AI) except for attack strength. My guess is that the AI is building a unit for defense, so it doesn't look at the attack strength.

I think you got your attack and defense backwards -- both units have a 6 attack, 1 movement, and cost 90 shields. But the infantry has a 10 defense versus a 6 defense of the guerilla. If both units have offense and defense flags checked, one would expect that infantry would always be selected over guerilla (equal attack & movement, higher defense), with the only exception being when a civ does not have access to rubber.

Bizarre.

Catt

alexman · November 13, 2002, 18:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Catt

I think you got your attack and defense backwards

of course...

Until it's fixed by Soren in the next patch

, this is another reason to keep the 8-10-1 infantry boost in the PTW version of the AU mod. The guerilla would become 7-6-1 or something.

player1 · November 14, 2002, 06:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Catt
Believe it or not, in the default .bix, Spain has wealth checked as build-never. (Does this really mean no banks, ever? and therefore no stock markets, no wall street

)

Catt

I mailed to Speed Bump about this:

>>>>>>>>>>
Barry,

While I was MODing, I've seen that Spain civ has Build Never strategy
selected for Wealth.

Do you know is this intentional or BUG?

Thanks,
Andrej Damjanovic (aka player1)
Free MOD developer
>>>>>>>>>>

And here is the reply:

>>>>>>>>>>
That is intentional. I'm not sure why, but I know it is listed that way in
the design document.

Barry Caudill
QA Manager
Firaxis Games
>>>>>>>>>>

player1 · November 14, 2002, 06:36

Quote:

Until it's fixed by Soren in the next patch , this is another reason to keep the 8-10-1 infantry boost in the PTW version of the AU mod. The guerilla would become 7-6-1 or something.

You mean like in PtW version of Patch suggestion MOD?
(7-6-1/cost 80)

Nor Me · November 14, 2002, 09:14

Giving facrories the abilities of barracks also seems to work and would have less of an impact. Even if you already have barracks in a city, the governor still suggests building a factory next.

If the guerrilla is considered to be as good an offensive unit as the infantry, why does the AI build Mech. Infantry over tanks. I've tested identical units with difierent tech requirements and it builds them 50-50.
Maybe it doesn't like using the rubber?

Robber Baron · November 14, 2002, 19:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Nor Me
Maybe it doesn't like using the rubber?

Well, to be fair, I don't think anybody likes using the rubber. :P (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

alexman · November 14, 2002, 19:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Nor Me
Giving facrories the abilities of barracks also seems to work and would have less of an impact. Even if you already have barracks in a city, the governor still suggests building a factory next.

Another good idea, but then barracks become obsolete with factories. Who wants to pay that extra maintenance if you have a factory that does the same thing?

Quote:

Originally posted by Nor Me
If the guerrilla is considered to be as good an offensive unit as the infantry, why does the AI build Mech. Infantry over tanks.

The AI builds Mech. Infantry for defense. It builds tanks for offense, since they have a better attack factor and are cheaper. You see some AI offensive Mech. Infantry in the field, but they are all from upgrading Infantry created for attack, and keeping the offense flag.

player1 · November 15, 2002, 05:46

On the other hand, if you deselect Offesnse AI flag from Mech. Inf. all upgarded Infatries will become Defensive Mech. Infantry.

Which would lead to higher amount of AI tanks.
Since we would think that he needs more Offense units.

alexman · November 15, 2002, 17:55

After a few more tests with PTW, I have not yet found a case where the AI does not build a unit that comes later in the list of units that it can build for that purpose.

Examples for an offensive unit:
(With both units in the build queue)

Always builds Chariots instead of Swordsmen
Always builds Horsemen instead of Swordsmen
and of course... always builds Guerillas instead of Infantry

I even added a new unit, exact copy of the Warrior but without an upgrade, to the end of the list and called it DummyWarrior. The AI always build this crappy unit even though it can build Med. Infantry...

[Edit: I'm not so sure about this any more. It seems this happens only when you have offensive units as a build-often and defensive units as a build-never.]

Soren Johnson · November 16, 2002, 14:35

now _this_ is a great thread. thanks for all the work, everybody... even though a lot of these fixes are only really going to affect the AI's performance for mods. I can't promise that everything here will be fixed, but I will do my best.

player1 · November 16, 2002, 17:17

Thanks Soren!

player1 · November 16, 2002, 18:17

By the way is there any chance to make unit/building type priorities, more open for editing?

For example, you can say "when AI get Infantry, it NEVER builds Guerrila", or always build Marketplace before Library.

It's huge job for one person, and if it could be open for editing it could help a lot.

And it would make moding much more effecive.

I hate to think that by changing stats of one unit could ruin AI performance since MODers don't know inner build queue of AI (how and when would AI build particular unit).

Or at least some testing utility which would answer MODers question about which unit AI likes and which don't (partialy already done with debug mode).

Or calculated AI's value of unit (based on stats), and which units he would build alongside that one (since they are as good), and which unit would it ignore (since this unit is much better)?

ducki · November 16, 2002, 18:39

Quote:

Originally posted by player1
By the way is there any chance to make unit/building type priorities, more open for editing?

For example, you can say "when AI get Infantry, it NEVER builds Guerrila", or always build Marketplace before Library.

NEVER and ALWAYS are extremely radical decisions for specific units.
For example, if you tell the AI ALWAYS build MP before Lib - what if the AI has only 1 lux, or no lux, or is in a game for Cultural Victory? Seems like ALWAYS can often hamstring the AI when applied to specific units/improvements.

Of course, there may not be any other way with the current program structure, but I'd prefer to see the AI doing a cost-benefit analysis, so that IF and ONLY IF UnitA is more beneficial per shield used than UnitB, then build UnitA, otherwise, Default to UnitB.

From some of the reading here, though, Units and Buildings seem to be purely hierarchically arranged, such that A is always build before B if possible - instead of if preferable.

Then again, computers are woefully inept at "preferable" and other fuzzy logic decisions. We humans will lock an unoptimally placed town at 6 population in order to save tiles for the metropolis next door, while I don't think the AI has any idea what to do about this. I think the AI ALWAYS tries to have metropolises.

Anyway, point is, "always" and "never" are very tough to balance when dealing with "AI" when put into specific terms. Which is probably why units and building have flags like Offense, Defense, Culture, Wealth, etc.

What the AI needs is a better sense of "better", IMO.

Quote:

I hate to think that by changing stats of one unit could ruin AI performance since MODers don't know inner build queue of AI (how and when would AI build particular unit).

I agree here, but changing a unit stats is probably less dangerous than telling the AI to "never" or "always" build it.

And I definitely agree with more transparency about "unit value" to the AI. More docs from Firaxis, like you suggested.

Chemical Ollie · November 16, 2002, 18:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Zachriel
The "AI" is actually an "SI," that is, Simulated Intelligence...

This is one of the compromises that makes Civ possible on a "primitive" 20th century computing machine...

So true! Think of chess - a game with much simpler rules than CIV3. You need a NASA-grade super computer (Deep Blue) to build an AI that can beat a good human player.

I always lose against the AI in chess...

On the other hand, I occasionally beat the Emperor level AI in CIV3...

Perhaps because I like CIV better...

cgannon64 · November 16, 2002, 19:00

Quote:

Originally posted by player1
And here is the reply:

>>>>>>>>>>
That is intentional. I'm not sure why, but I know it is listed that way in
the design document.

Barry Caudill
QA Manager
Firaxis Games
>>>>>>>>>>

That is insane. Do they want to cripple Spain permanently? Unless they fix that, I doubt I'll EVER see Spain win a game.

CG

alexman · November 18, 2002, 01:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis
now _this_ is a great thread. thanks for all the work, everybody... even though a lot of these fixes are only really going to affect the AI's performance for mods. I can't promise that everything here will be fixed, but I will do my best.

Soren! I was hoping you would read this thread!

Thanks for letting us know you did!

Weird things happen when you have offensive units as a build-often and defensive units as a build-never. The AI never builds any units. If you have everything else flagged as build-never as well, the AI always builds the last unit in the editor list in this case. (Provided it has the necessary tech and resources). This is not a big deal at all, it just confused me like hell when I was testing...

Konquest02 · November 20, 2002, 14:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Zachriel
The "AI" is actually an "SI," that is, Simulated Intelligence...

This is one of the compromises that makes Civ possible on a "primitive" 20th century computing machine...

I admit the AI has some bugs, but I could be worse.

The following screenshot is from Transport Tycoon Deluxe, set on hardest level. The goal is to build a successful transport company. The AI often can't get a single line running efficiently. And yes! it's a Sid Meyer game!

--Kon--

Theseus · November 21, 2002, 20:31

I'm glad all of this is getting dealt with...

On a side note, let me just say that I have been so expressive to my fiance about my appreciation for Firaxis' ongoing involvement, that I actually overheard her (an interior designer) on the phone with her sister (an actress), explaining that *some* companies ("you know, that Civilization game he's always talking about") really try to pay attention to their customers, and it makes a difference!!

Soren, you is da man, and anything that helps development that keeps bubbling up outta 'poly and CFC is because you guys continue to listen. Thanks.

(But you should STILL put alexman on that per diem!)