game settings for ai to play well

from GalCiv2 Forums
This game seems like it could be really great, and it seems like the developers are doing their best. But thus far I've been totally mystified by all the reviews I read saying how spectacular the ai was. My last game was campaign, and the ai had plasma weapons (I know because I stole them when I conquered a planet) but built only defenders with no weapons or armor at all. I'm guessing that was a bug though. Before that I played regular at crippling (I think, that or painful) with no tech trading and 8 civs on small galaxy. Small because I don't want to play a really, really long game to realize somewhere through that I was going to win easily. I thought going in I would probably win with some adversity. But I just sat around building influence starbases and minding my own business, built some ships but didn't focus on those too much. I was in the middle in the tech race. I was never attacked, even when I built influence starbases right next to opponents planets, though I did get a little warning from them. I only got in one war, when I attacked the drath who had been almost conquered by one of the other factions, except they inexplicably had signed a peace treaty when the drath had nothing left but their almost undefended best planet. So I just went in and took it. Eventually I realized I could just win with diplomacy really easily, so I did that. I mainly just hit the next turn button and told constructors and freighters where to go.

I've read that having fewer ai's, larger galaxies, no tech trading, and higher difficulty level are all things I'll want. As for the diplomacy I guess I could use a custom race or something and/or turn off diplomatic victory. In the above game it wouldn't have mattered because I could just ally with everyone and build influence bases until I won. Any suggestions to improve the ai or assurances that the ai actually is pretty good would be appreciated.
7,560 views 11 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
The ai is ok, but could be better. The campaign seems to have really strange AI and is either v difficult or v simple, depending on the version, a bit of luck and what day it is. The difficulty setting don't really work on the campaign at all.

What version are you running? The later versions have much better AI.

For a typical (winable) game try crippling, medium sized galaxy, everything abundent with no tech trading, 4-5 opponents (include the drengin, yor and torians as these seem to me to have the best AI).

IMHO the AI struggles, whatever the difficulty, with any scenarios which needs strategic thinking (i.e. more than one or two moves ahead) e.g. gigantic, one opponent, everything rare.

Also some AI's seem particularly weak (e.g. Drath - ironically one of the strongest player races).


Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Try a gigantic galaxy, abundant stars, common planets, uncommon anomalies, 5 AI players with 3 opposed to the alignment you intend to play, one neutral, and one sympathetic. Make sure the CPU Intensive algorithms are enabled and manually check the intelligence of each AI player.
Object Desktop - Get all of our enhancement utilities in one suite
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

The campaign AI is somewhat crippled in order to make sure it's not too frustrating for new players.

Play the stand alone games at tough or higher.

Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
1) Make sure you are running v1.2 or higher.
2) Make sure you have the "allow more CPU cycles to the AI's" activated
3) Having too many AI opponents on smaller galaxies can actually give *you* an advantage because of all the AI infighting.
4) Don't judge the game based on the AI in the campaign, the scenarios there seem to be easier despite the level you play on.
5) In EVERY game of this type, there is a point where you *know* that the game is won and all that is left is the mopping up. This has nothing to do with the AI, since it can occur in online games against human opponents as well. You can't escape it.
6) Unlike other games that claim to utilize 'artificial intelligence' but in reality are relying on scripts, bonuses and other 'cheats' to make the game harder at different levels, this game actually uses algorithms to have the computer players "play" the game with the same restrictions as you do. It isn't until the higher difficulty levels that the AI players are given some econ bonuses so that they are able to provide a challenge.

Cheers,
Reaver
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I think the hardest settings are:
- Medium or large galaxy. If you go bigger, the AIs are too far away to be a threat in the early game, and you can just build and research without a military. Also, the AI is somewhat inefficient at colonizing very large numbers of planets.
- Abundant stars/planets/habitables. Make sure all civs have more than a few planets, and are near enough to threaten each other.
- Tech trading off. Way too easy to exploit.
- Rare anomolies. Less free money.
- Blind Exploration.
- Disable minors. They're easy to exploit and conquer.
- Scattered star distribution. Helps distibute planets evenly among opponents.
- Version 1.3beta improved the AI, especially planetary development.
- CPU intensive algorithms on.
- Slow or very slow tech speed. This makes it harder to out-tech the AI in specific areas, or adapt to enemy ships.
- Number of opponents isn't too important. As long as there are more than two, adding more makes the game longer, but not really any harder.
- Difficulty at Masochistic or higher. If you're experienced with this genre of game, anything lower will be pretty easy. The AI is good, but it's no competition for a thinking person with a good understanding of the game's rules and a willingness to use them to your advantage.
Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
...Also turn off everything but the Military conquest victory. Alliance victories are what spoiled GCI for me as it was Way too easy to win the game in 20 minutes or so.
...Humans Can and Do 'cheat' using the rules in a way no computer AI could. If you want to play the game fairly this is the best AI I have ever seen. It is the only computer game where I have ever suffered defeat/stalemate. If I wanted to, it is still absurdly easy to ramp up your diplomacy ratings and do the same old boring alliance victory trick in GCII but to what purpose?
Reply #8 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

- Medium or large galaxy. If you go bigger, the AIs are too far away to be a threat in the early game, and you can just build and research without a military. Also, the AI is somewhat inefficient at colonizing very large numbers of planets.

Depending on the number of AI and the planet distribution, this isn't always a bad thing. Your left to your own devices in the early game, but quite often so is the AI. This creates times when you think your doing well only to find the AI is doing even better. A few times I've emerged from isolation only to find several huge fleets of Drengin battleships waiting for me (and I've yet to pass medium hulls....) or a coalition of opposing alignment races just looking for a new conquest.

Not sure about the AI inefficiency. I think it's down to the race - I notice the Arceans and the Torians tend to spread like the plague if given the opportunity, while the Yor and the Korx in particular never seem to grow beyond four or so planets.
Reply #9 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
This game seems like it could be really great, and it seems like the developers are doing their best. But thus far I've been totally mystified by all the reviews I read saying how spectacular the ai was.


I agree 100%. I also don't understand why the reviewers are raving. Games like Civilization 4 or even the ancient StarCraft - most RTS games, in fact - have much better AI.
Reply #10 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I agree 100%. I also don't understand why the reviewers are raving. Games like Civilization 4 or even the ancient StarCraft - most RTS games, in fact - have much better AI.


I don't think much better is fair at all. They have different AIs, and different game mechanisms to allow the AIs to be more competative. Well SC isn't even a rational comparator to GC or Civ since its RTS...

GC2 AIs are good at some things, and horrible at others. Personally I blame that on some design decisions creating unnecessary complications for the AIs which are just more difficult to deal with.

If SD ever went away from the open movement system I think you'd see the AIs able to overrun the player quite easilly on the cheating difficulties. Its the open movement system which allows the player to 'abuse' the AIs relative inability to coordinate its ships, especially transports.
Reply #11 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
If SD ever went away from the open movement system I think you'd see the AIs able to overrun the player quite easilly on the cheating difficulties. Its the open movement system which allows the player to 'abuse' the AIs relative inability to coordinate its ships, especially transports.


I couldn't agree more. Being a long time player of CIV III, I was shocked at how easy this game is. But I also think it is do to how open the map is. Also, the way the human can just build transports with insane movement points and blitz the AI planets, thereby avoiding any real military conflict makes this game so easy.

I have found that to make a chalenge, I just play (suicidal) as pure good and absolutely never attack first. Otherwise, I gain critical mass too quick in the game.

I have never played with tech trading off, although I am probably going to do that next game. I am always way ahead in tech due to my ability to make a deal. The only techs that are hard to get are weapon techs. However, get an ally and they give them to you for peanuts.

I would like to think that if CIV III had such a complex AI then that game would have really been hard.