Has the AI had a lobotomy?

harlequin969

Join Date 04/2006

Has the AI had a lobotomy?

What do people think of the AI? Even at high difficulty levels I find it to be about as clever as my dog. I read reviews saying the AI was very good but its terrible. They hardly ever attack my transports even when right next to them, they have whole fleets that are useless because they give them crap engines and most of the planets I take off them haven't even got factories. Is my copy of the game especially stupid or is everyone finding the game way too easy?

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

Some people can't play on these insane difficulty levels and aren't man-gods with 500 fingers and the ability to think ahead 400 turns, we need our lower settings, you get the higher ones. And since most people think the game has INCREDIBLE AI, you must just be a genius.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Frogboy

Join Date 03/2001

+2423

I hate to say this but if you find the final 1.1 AI "pitiful" then I think we're just up the creek.

We're nearing the end of what can reasonably be done without massive cheating to give the AI lots of extra bonuses and such.

I tend to think that most people who are winning at the highest levels are probably making use of some exploit.

I can't beat the AI at higher levels than "Gifted" anymore with 1.1 unless I set the starting conditions in just the right way and make use of very specific strategies (i.e. massive surprise attacks, diplomacy manipulation, etc.).

At a certain point, there's only so much I'm going to be able to do as a developer to make the AI "smart" without wrecking it for the 90%+ of people who find the AI challenging and want it to be "fun". Not to mention, there's a budgetary issue.

I suspect the AI plays best at medium sized galaxies with a reasonable amount of planets with 4 or 5 opponents playing.

I think those who find it "easy" are also likely playing at say a gigantic galaxy with rare worlds where it's really hard for the AI to make the most of its native computing advantages.

But we're nearing the end of the line of what I'm going to be able to do. The AI will continue to improve but there's not going to be any sort of earth shattering changes beyond 1.1 in terms of AI.

Successfully updated karma reason!

The only thing the AI does that I have a real issue with is not use the bonus tiles when they make buildings. They always build a factory on the production tiles, thumbs up there. But quite often I see Planetary defenses on a research bonus, and an invention matrix on a regular square. Same thing with influence, approval, and farming tiles. The worst is when they build a manufacturing capital on a research tile, because you really don't want to bulldoze a unique building, but you really don't want to waste the research bonus.

Successfully updated karma reason!

The game certainly can't be said to be too easy. If you can beat it at the highest difficulty then make it harder. Play a 9 race game on a gigantic map and make the other 8 races a team all at war with you at the highest difficulty setting. If you can win that then you can say it's too easy.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I suspect the AI plays best at medium sized galaxies with a reasonable amount of planets with 4 or 5 opponents playing

This is true, in the games I've played it seems like the AI's (im using the plural) have a great early game and good mid-game but in long games especially using huge maps (since a good early game counts for less the bigger the map) I generally "can't lose" if the game has progressed that long.

In medium maps with 4 or more oppenents though I often find myself marginalized and eventually humiliated by AI opponents.

Successfully updated karma reason!

My biggest problem is planetary development. I take over AI worlds with few factories and as has been pointed out, it doesn't use bonus tiles very well. Why I understand there are limits to Ai, it seems giving it a better planetary build algorithm wouldn't be all that hard. I use the same basic pattern every game, differing only due to planet size. This has been my only disappointment AI wise.

Successfully updated karma reason!

The smaller the map, though, the scarcer the resources. I would suggest a medium or smaller map with lots of "smart" enemies, if you want a challenge without any inherent production cheats.

Successfully updated karma reason!

As people have posted, the most problem I have with the AI - they do not use bonus tiles.
Thats it.

Before complaining, please try tough or higher on a gigantic map with 9 opponents.
Try everything on abundant.
The AIs ability to mulitask really shows here, though past a certain point I can use it to my advantage.

Tough - AI at best without cheats, above tough - ai gets econ bonus only.

My second game on tough on 1.1 beta3a - the people who said abundant means abundant were not kidding.
One more tough game on new beta and up to next level of ai.

AI complaints should be left only after beating it at the highest difficulty... or at least tough.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'm still not convinced that the AI is any good at making good economic starbases to boost production and research, AND protecting them sufficently. It has problems with evaluating relative ship values - ie which side is going to win, and doesnt properly use mixed defences, or just undervalues defences. It doesnt seem to properly appriciate the value of being the attacker (and the importance of speed and sensors). It doesnt appear to coordinate its attack fleets with its transports with the goal of actually capturing planets, or clear areas of space from enemy fleets to protect its starbases and transports.
Also, the AI doesnt trade well - AI's are too willing to trade with the player, and dont trade with each other enough. Frequently the optimum strategy when playing with lots of opponents is to maximise the nuber of tech trades that one makes - if you have 8 opponents, a fair tech trade benefits you 8 times as much as it benefits your opponents.
Tech trading could easily be improved by adding some form of cost to it, that would stop the optimum strategy being maximising the amount of trading one is involved it.

It would be nice to see some of the different racial AI's to do some of these 'expoit' tactics; the terrans, for example, could try to trade any tech they have with everyone else. The Yor, maybe, could specialise in surprise attacks - treating someone as a friend until they have all the fleets ready (and fast enough) to take multiple enemy planets in one turn, then declaring.
The Drengin, with their like of small ships, might decide to cover all fronts with upgraded military starbases, stockpiling constructors to build new bases in expected or new warzones.
Other races might use such tactics occasionally, rather than be renound for them.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Frogboy

Join Date 03/2001

+2423

In 1.1, the AI is using bonus tiles about as well as it's going to use them.

In my experience (with 1.1), it does a pretty optimal job of using the bonus tiles. But there are times when you want to build somethign else on a special farm tile or on a special morale tile.

Moreover, the AI having a "perfect" (which is of course impossible because we all have different ideas on what the optimal use of a planet is) planet set up is not going to make the difference between the AI winning or losing in a typical game.

Another issue is that it's been very difficult to improve the strategies because almost no one ever says which player it is. EACH PLAYER has its own planet building algorithm (since there are definitely different philosophies on how to best use a planet). So some may be less "effective" than others. But users always talk about "The AI" as if it's a single monolothic thing.

But the bottom line is that anyone who finds the game "easy" is not going to ever find it hard based on tweaking planet production or whatever. The best answer for those players is to have higher difficulty levels where the AI "cheats" (i.e. gets more "stuff").

Successfully updated karma reason!

Frogboy

Join Date 03/2001

+2423

One other note: The people who want more of a challenge should also look to setting up the galaxy differently.

I can beat Civ IV at any level in a 1 on 1 game on a tiny map for instance. But that doesn't prove its AI is bad. Spread out the stars, try other map sizes. Try different planet levels and habitatation levels.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I suspect the AI plays best at medium sized galaxies with a reasonable amount of planets with 4 or 5 opponents playing.

Thanks. What a gem to let slip.

Edit: is this taken into account with metaverse scores?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Frogboy

Join Date 03/2001

+2423

Edit: is this taken into account with metaverse scores?

Yes, though not map size. The more planets there are, the better the AI does and the higher the metaverse score.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I play on Tough or Painful. The problem I have with the AI is that it sometimes does things that don't make sense, even in game terms. I've flown up to the Thalan capital after 2 1/2 years of game time to find an anomoly within a few spaces of it (the AI should have picked it up long ago) and no military whatsoever...I could have conquered their whole empire with one laser scout & some transports.
I am not complaining about the AI and I know it's getting better, but I would like to see it do some of these basic things as a matter of course. As it is now (as best I can tell) sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't.
I'm not interested in playing at suicidal, just want to see the AI continue to improve (as I'm sure it will).

Successfully updated karma reason!

A positive note on Combat performance of AI.

Well In one of my recent games I manipulated the Drath to go to war with the Yor and watched as the war unfolded.
(actually I manipulated all of them to go to war with the Yor but only the Drath had the military to do damage)

AI Difficulty is Bright for both AI's

It seemed like they used very sensible tactics.
The Drath Sent its attack fleets in first and not in a straight line. The fleets spread out across the boarders of Yor space.
They focused on a boarder system and brought it down. Transports moved in when the coast was clear. The Yor home system was guarded by military bases and while the drath lost a couple fleets on the yor homeworld they quickly switched to destroying the starbases. And currently the Yor home systems are open to invasion. (my game is in progress)

The Yor were out gunned but did what they could. They brought together forces to defend the boarder world and built up home system defense. They launched some good counter attacks but had no transports to retake the boarder world. They simply got beat down.

So far I am pleased with the progress of the game even on Bright. Note that I am trying to play the roll of the manipulator in this game and not get into a war. It’s kinda fun to watch my puppets, dance, har har.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Try using the warparty.

Kicks butt at first when you can use your baby dreadlords to invade planets and laugh your butt off. But very quickly it wears off as you really have to tech up for the plus 10 att/defense becomes a bonus. The soldiering bonus is the only real bonus. And when you have trouble clearing a planet of ships what good is the soldiering bonus

Successfully updated karma reason!

One of the dumbest things I see the AI do all the time is quixotically attacking heavily fortified starbases that they have no hope of even putting a dent in. In fact a simple strategy (exploit?) I use sometimes on smaller maps is to quickly build a fortified starbase right next to the enemy's homeworld, and then starting a war on them. The AI becomes obsessed with getting rid of that starbase, and neglects other stuff, like colonizing and defending other planets.

Successfully updated karma reason!