Why, oh why does the poor AI... - Page 7

Arrian · February 13, 2003, 11:40

The AI usually won't talk peace, no matter how horribly you're trashing them, for a number of turns (I think roughly 5, perhaps modified if you've fought them before). Doesn't matter if they start it.

Of course, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but neither does the Zulu attacking you in the first place.

-Arrian

Dominae · February 13, 2003, 11:44

The Zulu are "going down fighting". I see nothing wrong with that. The reason it seems so odd is that 1) the AI tactics are not as good as a human's, and 2) they're way behind technologically. So their attempt is quite feeble. But 'feeble' does not mean "not the right decision".

Dominae

joncnunn · February 13, 2003, 14:01

Of note, the Zulu resisted talking for 10 turns from when the war started.

During that turn, they did agree to hand over all their cash (not much), all GPT income they had (very pitiful) in exchange for peace with 3 cities remaining. (Before I had contacted them that turn, I had refounded 3 of their cities that I had previously destroyed and taken one last city)

Next turn the You Win! Domination Victory appeared.

Dominae · February 13, 2003, 16:11

So are you arguing that the AI is weak because it refuses peace when cornered, or weak beccause it eventually caves in? I would think that the combination of these two is the main problem, a neither taken alone (although "fighting it out" would make for a better game, IMO).

Dominae

Panag · February 13, 2003, 17:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
So are you arguing that the AI is weak because it refuses peace when cornered, or weak beccause it eventually caves in? I would think that the combination of these two is the main problem, a neither taken alone (although "fighting it out" would make for a better game, IMO).

Dominae

hi ,

its indeed a combination of some factors , the two above contribute mostly to it , ...... its rediculous to not go in negociations with one small city and two units left , ...... when facing an enemy with fifthy cities and units , ......

have a nice day

Dominae · February 13, 2003, 17:27

We've all been through this before in many other threads, but I believe it is ridiculous to enter negotiations when a civ is that weak, from a gameplay perspective. A civ this weak has no reason to go on living, so to speak. Thus anything that is done with it is exploitative ("Gimme all your techs!", "Train my troops every 20 turns!", etc.). A human player would never negotiate under such circumstances, but would just quit. And if simply quitting is not an option, you can bet he or she would go down fighting. Thus we've come full circle.

Really, the real problem is that the AI is willing to give in when it has nothing to gain except for continued survival, which is useless in and of itself in a game.

Dominae

Ozymandias · February 13, 2003, 18:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
Really, the real problem is that the AI is willing to give in when it has nothing to gain except for continued survival [...]

Yet -- not to disagree with your analysis from a gameplay POV -- this sounds so very, very human.

-Oz

Dominae · February 13, 2003, 18:26

That's true Oz, but there are many real-life human behaviours that should not be included in a game AI. I personally believe this one of them, simply because the human player throws it out the window when he or she knows it's just a game. Other behaviours of this type include 1) unwillingness to play 24/7, 2) tendency to make gameplay errors, 3) willingness to hold grudges from previous games.

Dominae

Ozymandias · February 14, 2003, 05:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
That's true Oz, but there are many real-life human behaviours that should not be included in a game AI. I personally believe this one of them, simply because the human player throws it out the window when he or she knows it's just a game. Other behaviours of this type include 1) unwillingness to play 24/7, 2) tendency to make gameplay errors, 3) willingness to hold grudges from previous games.

Dominae

As I mentioned, I wasn't disagreeing with you from the point of view of what AI behavior makes for the best game; I merely found something ironic in a human-like behavior in an AI being a detrement.

Nevertheless, I would also suggest that's it's not beyond the realm of possibility -- however unintended by the AI -- that such Churchillian tenacity might nevertheless have some profound effect on the game. Examples which come to mind -- the enemy just beyond them has a critical extra set of turns to prepare for war. Or some Byzantine labyrinth of treaties and opinions of trustworthiness (the enemy of the enemy of the friend of my least trusted ex-allie's third cousin once removed is my friend) might result in the otherwise-presumably-doomed Civ having a bit of critical and timely help sent its way. Again, agreed, not statistically very likely -- but most interesting when it does happen.

... Or would you always have the women in the next room, coming and going, talking of Michelangelo?*

Best,

Oz

* For those of you utterly perlexed by this or who REALLY think I should give up these post-4AM posts, it's a reference to Dominae's tag-line.

-O.

Dominae · February 14, 2003, 09:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Ozymandias
... Or would you always have the women in the next room, coming and going, talking of Michelangelo?*

Somehow I'm not suprised that someone who uses 'Ozymandias' as a screen-name is one of the first to comment on my tag-line...

Dominae

alexman · February 14, 2003, 10:22

Thanks to Soren, PTW fixed the irrigation of grassland tiles in despotism, but what about mining cattle on plains? It's the same problem , but with shields instead of food.

And look how badly the AI is hurting by still trying to build settlers way before their first city is large enough.

Ozymandias · February 14, 2003, 10:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae

Somehow I'm not suprised that someone who uses 'Ozymandias' as a screen-name is one of the first to comment on my tag-line...

Dominae

... Ah, if there were but a Smiley for one of those figures on the stair doffing their hats and bowing as the eminence gris passes!

... And, nope, I refer to neither "l'esprit d'escalier" -- time to turn and descend the stair! -- nor the three Turnings made while not hoping to turn again, but rather to a painting whose title and artist I've sadly forgotten, but whose image remains vivid.

... & I suppose this is as good a time as any to say Thanks for all your Civilized efforts

All The Best,

Oz

Panag · February 14, 2003, 11:34

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
Thanks to Soren, PTW fixed the irrigation of grassland tiles in despotism, but what about mining cattle on plains? It's the same problem , but with shields instead of food.

And look how badly the AI is hurting by still trying to build settlers way before their first city is large enough.

hi ,

, send an email to Soren or Firaxis

good point you found , definatly something for a patch , ....

have a nice day

Dominae · February 14, 2003, 13:25

Obviously (I think), the terraforming activities of the AI are independent of the current government (all decisions are made on the raw output of a tile). This makes it easier to code, especially since there is no need to "go back" and re-improve a tile later on.

Dominae

alexman · February 14, 2003, 13:33

Actually, that's no longer true with PTW.
The AI used to irrigate grassland in Despotism (see one of the first posts in this thread), but Soren fixed it and it longer happens, unless it's necessary to get irrigation elsewhere, or if the tile gets a food bonus.

Dominae · February 14, 2003, 13:38

I thought the AI simply irrigated fewer Grasslands in general. The Workers would then go back and change this if Food was lacking.

Dominae

alexman · February 14, 2003, 13:41

Nope, in PTW there is not a single AI grassland tile irrigated without a reason in Despotism. If only Soren had coded that in a more general manner to include shields...

Dominae · February 14, 2003, 13:47

So you're saying that the PTW AI never irrigates Grasslands before a higher government becomes available? So if you set up a test where the AI was lacking in Food to grow, and then gifted it Monarchy, it would only then begin build irrigation?

Dominae

alexman · February 14, 2003, 13:52

Not never.
It does irrigate in Despotism if either:
a) it needs to bring irrigation to another location that doesn't have fresh water access
or
b) it gets the bonus from irrigating (wheat, game, cattle, wine grassland tile)

And yes, the AI starts irrigating in the standard checkerboard pattern (mine/irrigation) when it gets Monarchy.

Dominae · February 14, 2003, 14:23

I just ran a test alexman, and you're quite right (as usual!). I did notice some odd things:

1. Immediately upon entering Monarchy, the AI goes back and re-does the tiles, regardless of how "useful" this is. In the screenshot below, the AI replaced most mines with irrigation, even when it was at size 12 already.

2. In the same scenario, the AI never built a Worker! It used the 2 it started with (Emperor level) to improve all the tiles, which took quite some time. I guess the AI obeys a limit on the number of Workers per city.

3. After I gifted Polytheism, Cleo's attitude went from Polite (10) to Gracious (17). Then when I gave Monarchy, it went down to 11. Huh? Does the AI know when the human player is "buttering it up", so to speak?

Dominae

joncnunn · February 14, 2003, 17:51

I'm arguing that's it's ridicous that there are X number of turns during a war in which they won't talk to you.

I would sugest instead that they always be willing to at least talk, even if all your gold, GPT, techs, and cities would be an insult.

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
So are you arguing that the AI is weak because it refuses peace when cornered, or weak beccause it eventually caves in? I would think that the combination of these two is the main problem, a neither taken alone (although "fighting it out" would make for a better game, IMO).

Dominae

Dominae · February 14, 2003, 17:54

If they're going to categorically refuse all your proposals, why talk?

Dominae

joncnunn · February 14, 2003, 18:14

The point of the talk was then to find out that it was the case.

Basicaly, the point is that if the AI is losing a war, there shouldn't be a delay in talking but it should use the peace evaulation formula even on the same turn.

The modifications so that most wars continue to last at least 5 turns, while the AI can get out early when losing & the human is willing to agrree would eb:

For wars whose root cause was that the AI wanted a specific city for luxaries / resources: Early in the war, AI should want the monatery value of that city in addition to what the formula yeilds as long as it's not in it's possesion and it's army is about the same size or stronger.

Wars in which the AI has lost a city, but whose army is stronger, should also want the monetary value of that city back if their army is about the same size or stronger.

For wars started when tribute refused, should result in 2X the value of that tribute being added to what it wants if their army is about the same size or stronger.

For everything else (war started simply because AI had a bigger army or you had a spy that was caught) the standard peace formula would be fine even prior to the first 5 turns.

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
If they're going to categorically refuse all your proposals, why talk?

Dominae

player1 · February 14, 2003, 18:19

The reson why ithat was added in the patch (it was not in original release), is that other way could be pretty much exploitive.

For example AI declares war.
In turn after, since you talk to him and since he's weaker he agrees to peace and gives you some tech and money.

Or even better.
You declare war, and in same turn talk to him and get peace treaty.

joncnunn · February 14, 2003, 18:22

Yes, the AI should also be trained not to mine tiles that can't benfit under it's form of government.

It also needs trained to irrigate plains/grassland only to alow the city to work more tiles producing shields and/or commerce, and factor in if a Hospital is currently under construction or not.

Within this section the irrigation rules should be to irrigate tiles that naturally produce a shield before those that don't, which result in more shields when under Mobilization and during the GA.

joncnunn · February 14, 2003, 18:30

1. The Peace Treaty value already caluclates based on precise differences.
I suspect that they'd only give you the tech the next turn in a war where they didn't lose anything if they would have been willing to give you the tech for tribute to begin with.

2. More tricky. But howabout, they also want more money to end a war that you started recently than one that they started.

Quote:

Originally posted by player1
The reson why ithat was added in the patch (it was not in original release), is that other way could be pretty much exploitive.

For example AI declares war.
In turn after, since you talk to him and since he's weaker he agrees to peace and gives you some tech and money.

Or even better.
You declare war, and in same turn talk to him and get peace treaty.

vmxa1 · February 14, 2003, 21:21

Valid complaints, but consider that not eeryone takes the time to learn how to beat the AI so easily.
If they make it too much better the casual players will be hard pressed to deal with it.
The war bit, I was never fond of, but maybe they could not make it handle all the permutation and it is easier to just make it ignore you for a period of time.

badams52 · February 24, 2003, 16:46

From my dry, hot game vanilla 1.29f civ, it was just me and Russia left. We hit the modern era and Russia researched (in this order):

Rocketry (free for Religious civ)
Computers
Space Flight
Ecology (received by trade with me)
Satellites
Synthetic Fibers (so far so good)
Stealth ????
Amphibous Warfare
Advanced Flight

Looks like Russia was getting techs for war, but they were on the other side of the world and were gracious with me and had an ROP with me and a MPP. While he was reasearching useless techs, I grabbed Fission, Nuclear Power, Lasers, rode down the "previously known by other civs" path to quickly research Synthetic Fibers, Satellites and finaly finished with Super Conductors and off I went.

Konquest02 · May 25, 2003, 09:32

I think there is something about the FP taht the AI doesn't get...

The screenshot below was discovered when founding an embassy in my current Carthage game. The Vikings are not an OCC...

Panag · May 25, 2003, 09:36

Quote:

Originally posted by joncnunn
Yes, the AI should also be trained not to mine tiles that can't benfit under it's form of government.

It also needs trained to irrigate plains/grassland only to alow the city to work more tiles producing shields and/or commerce, and factor in if a Hospital is currently under construction or not.

Within this section the irrigation rules should be to irrigate tiles that naturally produce a shield before those that don't, which result in more shields when under Mobilization and during the GA.

hi ,

, sometimes the AI plants forests on plains and tundra , but way to slow and way to late , ......

this should be looked into , ...

have a nice day