Why, oh why does the poor AI... - Page 4

Ozymandias · December 6, 2002, 18:58

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman

The AI builds Mech. Infantry for defense. It builds tanks for offense, since they have a better attack factor and are cheaper.

AH! Excellent. I've been wondering if the AI (or, instead of "SI", "VAI" -- "VERY Artificial Intelligence"

-- I write as an ex-programmer and mean no offense) does any sort of cost/benefit analysis in building units, or if it simply goes by upgrade path, flags, and a/d relative to the flags.

... At least, I presume that's what you meant?

Thanks,

Oz

Ozymandias · December 6, 2002, 19:08

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.

In modding, I've been experimenting with the SMAC notion of "Doctrines", and trying to see if the AI will "tilt" one way or another.

The essence of my little experiment is:

1. Try to figure out how all the levers, flags, bells and whistles actually work to influence the AI behavior (THANK YOU, CATT, FOR POINTING ME TO THIS THREAD!!)

2. Have the tech tree contain rather more MILITARY advances than can be reasonably built in the course of the game.

"Doctrines" which must be researched to build the corresponding units are -- so far --

The Hussite's artillery wagon "mobile fortresses"
Tercio
New Model Army (Cromwell)
Blitzkrieg
Strategic Bombing (long range bombers)
Carrier Warfare
Guerilla Warfare
Stealth

After all, none of these were / are inevitable advances in the allegedly real world ...

I'll post results as I get them -- In the meantime, any comments / ideas?

Thanks,

Oz

Thoth · December 6, 2002, 21:22

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.

Now you've gone and done it Axelman

By the time I've saved up enough to buy MOO3, PTW and paid rent, Soren will have the AI to the point where I'll have to go back to Cheiftien.

Go Soren, GO!

alexman · December 9, 2002, 20:42

Nineveh will be in need of an Aqueduct in 6 turns. Yet Hammurabi wants cash instead. Why?

Babylon doesn't even have Wealth as a build-often item.

I kept an eye on this city (it has the FP), and next turn it started building a Courthouse!

I suspect this happens because, just like when building Settlers, the AI doesn't look ahead at the estimated turns to completion and pop-growth. Since the food box is still not completely full, it thinks it doesn't need an Aqueduct.

Coracle · December 9, 2002, 22:45

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
. . . just like when building Settlers, the AI doesn't look ahead at the estimated turns to completion and pop-growth. Since the food box is still not completely full, it thinks it doesn't need an Aqueduct.

?!?! I never noticed that. Interesting.

Doesn't seem like it would take a genius AI to figure that out.

Comments, Soren?

Konquest02 · December 9, 2002, 22:56

Nice remark Alexman (as always

)!

You might also note that the Babs currently have 0 gold in bank. This might play a role in the AI's decision of what to put in his build queue.

--Kon--

player1 · December 9, 2002, 23:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Coracle
?!?! I never noticed that. Interesting.

Doesn't seem like it would take a genius AI to figure that out.

Can be easily seen with scenario Debug Mode.

Of course, you need PtW for that.

Dominae · December 9, 2002, 23:08

I'm beginning to think that the behaviour of the various advisors seriously reflects (if not mirrors) the AIs' own decisions:

1. You're only told to build Aqueducts when you're cities are ready to grow.

2. You're recommended Communism as your next tech.

3. You're told to build more military units because your military is smaller (without mention of unit quality).

4. Your automated Workers irrigate everything.

Dominae

Dominae · December 9, 2002, 23:16

player1, Coracle's "genius" remark was an attack on the AI (and therefore Soren), since it should be "easy" to code an AI to build Aqueducts at the appropriate time. The purpose of alexman's recent post was simply to point out this weakness, more as constructive criticism rather than trolling.

Dominae

player1 · December 10, 2002, 07:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
player1, Coracle's "genius" remark was an attack on the AI (and therefore Soren), since it should be "easy" to code an AI to build Aqueducts at the appropriate time. The purpose of alexman's recent post was simply to point out this weakness, more as constructive criticism rather than trolling.

I know.

joncnunn · December 10, 2002, 12:34

Some improvements for the AI with regard to Aquaducts would be:

1. If size 6, no fresh water, and no aquaduct and just finished building something -> Build worker

2. If city size 5, no fresh water but sufficent food, and there's a Temple, Market Place, and Catherdrial -> Build Aquaduct.

3. If city size 5, no fresh water but sufficent food, but some of the above happiness improving structures haven't been built -> Build cheapest of those happiness structures.

Konquest02 · December 10, 2002, 12:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae

3. You're told to build more military units because your military is smaller (without mention of unit quality).

Dominae

I thought this was addressed in previous Civ3 patches (1.21 or 1.29 in think).

Is this bug back in PTW?

--Kon--

Dominae · December 10, 2002, 13:28

I may very well have missed the change; I've grown accustomed to not listen to any of the Advisors, other than during trade negotiations.

Dominae

BRC · December 10, 2002, 13:35

Dom: I think Konquest is correct.

joncnunn · December 10, 2002, 13:35

That was fixed in 1.29f.

Of note, prior to this pach normal workers were considered military units by the AI in making determinations on who to attack as well.

Quote:

Originally posted by Konquest02

I thought this was addressed in previous Civ3 patches (1.21 or 1.29 in think).

Is this bug back in PTW?

--Kon--

Konquest02 · December 10, 2002, 14:26

Quote:

Originally posted by joncnunn
That was fixed in 1.29f.

Of note, prior to this pach normal workers were considered military units by the AI in making determinations on who to attack as well.

In fact, not only workers were a problem, but the advisor considered warriors as powerful as MA. It counted only the number of military units, not their relative strength.

--Kon--

alexman · December 10, 2002, 14:39

Guys, all this is no longer relevant.
But FYI (according to Soren) the AI evaluated workers and obsolete units fine before the patch too. It's just the human military advisor who used to over-simplify his evaluation.

Tiberius · December 16, 2002, 06:58

What is no longer relevant?

Anyway, the AI is indeed a greater challenge after 1.14f. Great job, guys!

I have myself a question (I didn't have the time to test this in PtW, so only from my 1.29f games):
Why, oh why doesn't the poor AI ask for a RoP agreement when being at war with another civ it has no borders with, he must cross a neutral civ's teritorry?

It happened to me not once, that 2 AI civs, one of them being east from me and the other one west (or north/south), were fighting each other and none of them asked me for a RoP agreement, when this would have been clearly a great advantage. Sometimes a was trying to help a weaker civ and I had to give them a bonus (luxury, money, whatever) to accept a RoP!.

roadcage · December 16, 2002, 11:50

Quote:

Why, oh why doesn't the poor AI ask for a RoP agreement when being at war with another civ it has no borders with, he must cross a neutral civ's teritorry?

It happened to me not once, that 2 AI civs, one of them being east from me and the other one west (or north/south), were fighting each other and none of them asked me for a RoP agreement, when this would have been clearly a great advantage. Sometimes a was trying to help a weaker civ and I had to give them a bonus (luxury, money, whatever) to accept a RoP!.

Are you sure that a RoP will 'help' the civs? I believe granting RoP's will simply speed up the resolution of the conflict and tend to disipate both AI's armies faster.

Yep, the AI is doing something right here.

Tiberius · December 16, 2002, 12:31

If you had a RoP across a neutral teritorry and your enemy not, wouldn't that be an advantage? You could quickly resupply your troops and/or quickly withdraw if your cities are in danger. Especially if the neutral civ had railroad. You could haress his troops, move home quickly to heal, ... should I continue?

Nor Me · December 17, 2002, 17:39

On a slightly unrelated note, is it deliberate that the Iron Works affects the trade value of Iron in the ancient age?

joncnunn · December 17, 2002, 18:41

If the designation of a wonder that requires a resource affects the trade value of the resource during that era, that explains why Iron Works is designated as an Ancient Era Wonder when it can't possibly be built until the Industrial Era.

Iron is always worth a lot of money because it's always the most valuable resource in the game.

Ancient Era: Swordmen + Swordmen Replacements!

Middle Ages: Knights + Knight Replacements!

Industrial & Modern Eras: Factories + Railroad!

Theseus · December 17, 2002, 20:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Nor Me
On a slightly unrelated note, is it deliberate that the Iron Works affects the trade value of Iron in the ancient age?

Not sure I understand the question...

Brizey · December 17, 2002, 23:24

Nor Me:

Are you implying that the AI knows where the coal is during the Ancient age, and therefore may add extra value to capturing a city or area with iron during the ancient age because it knows there is also coal in the region?

High_Lord · December 18, 2002, 03:45

Erm..could someone tell me what is meant by "pre-building"...is it building a wonder you dont want to switch over to one you do want when you get the tech, or are you talking about the prod. queue?...

I feel stupid for asking...although I have played Civ, CivII,CivIII(not PTW yet) I still am not up on many of the terms used in these forums (although I did see some nice glossary type threads that covered some things). Hope somebody replies to this (with a minimum of humiliating comments hopefully

)

High_Lord · December 18, 2002, 03:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Tiberius

Why, oh why doesn't the poor AI ask for a RoP agreement when being at war with another civ it has no borders with, he must cross a neutral civ's teritorry?

ok ok, i still have v1.07f

stop that booing!! anyway, the ai never asks for rop they always just zoom right into my territory to cross it...was this fixed in a patch to where they ask now, or is it always up to me to say "hey! you get your ass out of my friggin country!!

"

vmxa1 · December 18, 2002, 04:24

Yes pre builds are using any structure to hold shields until you get the tech for the wonder you want. This could be a wonder you are not so interested in or a palace or anything that will not be finished before the research is done.
RoP is not really handled much diffently at any patch or PTW. If it suits them they will just come across, less so if you are stronger, but they may still do it.
Many of aspects of the game have been improved, why not at least get 129f, it is free.

High_Lord · December 18, 2002, 05:03

thanks for clearin that up for me vmxa1...and yes I will get that 129f (I see now that I missed a few patches in between) , I havent been keeping up with everything since I got CivIII, just playing it a lot! Now since a few months im hooked on rummaging through these Apolyton forums , you guys have some killer ideas (my fav. is the strategy forum) I come here every night at work, it has increased my enjoyment of playing Civ ( or as I like to call it, Civi-tata)

vulture · December 18, 2002, 08:59

Quote:

Originally posted by vmxa1
Yes pre builds are using any structure to hold shields until you get the tech for the wonder you want. This could be a wonder you are not so interested in or a palace or anything that will not be finished before the research is done.

One word of warning for pre-builds: occasionally you wind up using something other than a great wonder as a prebuild for the GW you want. Normally one would use the palace, unless you want the GW in your capital. Be careful not to add any shields to this prebuild by cutting down forests or disbanding any units in that city. If you do so, you will discover that when the wonder becomes available, it is 'greyed out' for that city, and has to be built elsewhere.

The rationale behind this is that GW's can only be rushed by leaders - in the absence of a leader they have to be built from scratch. Lumberjacking or disbanding in a wonder-producing city has no effect - the shields you would normally get are lost. A city which has such 'illegal' shields - even if only one or two - cannot be switched to build a great wonder. This has occasionally screwed up a prebuild for me (and no doubt for others as well).

Mazarin · December 18, 2002, 10:13

"investing a leader in pre-builds": during a war you often receive leaders that you would like to "save" for wonders that will come later...OTOH, by saving a leader you will not receive any other leaders during that war. One possibilitiy to save these shields -if you're going to conquer some more cities and your palace does not cost 1.000 shields is: rush-build the palace in a corrupt city...conquer some enemy cities in the same turn...this way the cost of your palace will increase...so it will not be finished the next turn -and as you rush-built it in a corrupt city it will never be finished. The rushed palace can be switched to a wonder as soon as the tech becomes available