Planetary build oddities

from GalCiv2 Forums
I noticed this is my most recent game with 2A. The difficulty was set to *Challenging* so not sure if that has anything to do with it or not. Anyway I came across a couple of different planets where the Arcean AI started to build a super project or galactic achievement on a planet that had nothing but a starport. One planet I took over by influence had a hyperion shrinker on it that was going to take over 300 turns to complete. Another had the economic capital on it with still 150 turns to go. Now maybe it was planning on buying the project outright in a few turns or this is simply the way it is coded. But it is definitely not something I'd ever do.

Which makes me wonder about something else. Does the AI take into account how likely a planet is to be conquered by influence before it starts to build? Both of the examples I gave above were within my sphere of influence from the start. They were special environment planets that the Arceans had the tech to colonize. So it is not as if I pushed my influence boundary out far enough to engulf the system. Again something I certainly wouldn't do
7,453 views 15 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I was actually just about to write a new post on this problem. The AI loves its starports. When people surrender to me, it is often the only completed structure on the planet, and they will build them on PQ 2 and 3 worlds, where they are utterly useless.
I have also noticed that the AI does a very poor job of prioritizing its builds. It will build factories last, when they don't help. It also misuses bonus tiles to a certain extent. I'm not sure how interrelated this all is. I was playing on tough, where I'd expect the AI to do better.
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I place hyperion buildings on small planets (although I do build a factory first). It is not a big issue with the time to build as it is not something you have to worry about being beaten to. No sense wasting a tile on those on your "wonder planet". Granted, I would not place one on a planet that was in danger of flipping.

I have read that the AI will buy things if it has the BC to do so.
Siege of Centauri
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Isn't only the drengin based AIs that have the updated planetary development AI?
Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
^^^ That is a possibility Starstriker so I'm not really too concerned at this stage.

I've seen the AI not use planetary bonus tiles but to be honest I think some of that is on purpose. I know I've seen posts from Brad about the fact that the build AI is *good* not *perfect*.

Yeah I agree with you Zippyriver in that I don't waste tiles on my premier production worlds with things that aren't one of a kind. So again that can certainly be understood here as well. Its the fact that the planets started in my sphere of influence that really makes me puzzle about the decision.

Again it is tough to judge because I know the AI does not follow particular build patterns but rather uses a set of evaluation rules to determine what it needs most. I'm wondering if in that set of rules the starport is valued a little too high. I can only go by how I play but it would seem to me that any planet meant for ship production should at least have one factory and if possible access to a set of asteroid fields. If it is not going to produce ships there is no point in wasting the tile and the maint. cost on the starport.
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I have noticed that the AI does not tend to respond to an influence threat as effectively as it did in Galciv1.

In all the planets that have turned themselves over to me so far, not one has had an influence structure built or under constructiuon(unlike Galciv1).

However, The AI does tend to respond well with influence starbases (not that they position them very well tho).
Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I have also heard that the AI will destroy buildings on a planet just before an influence takeover, so that could also be why only a starport is present.


One thing I find strange, though. In one of my recent games, the only farm on the planet was upgrading to a Shrinker. There were still a few open tiles left to build on, so I don't understand why a farm should be converting to a Shrinker.

Not that I minded getting another Shrinker.
Reply #7 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
One thing I find strange, though. In one of my recent games, the only farm on the planet was upgrading to a Shrinker. There were still a few open tiles left to build on, so I don't understand why a farm should be converting to a Shrinker.



I think it speeds production to build over somthing?
Reply #8 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
But building over a farm would seem to be shooting yourself in the foot.

During the build time the population would be growing. If it has gone over 5B when the Shrinker is completed, all that extra population would simply cease to exist. The taxes from them would be gone.

You could be right as to motive, but it still seems rather dumb to me.
Reply #9 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
True. There are better buildings to build over, like research, economy, and influence buildings.
Reply #10 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
True. There are better buildings to build over, like research, economy, and influence buildings.



I wouldn't think the AI has a very efficient priority system in place. Otherwise i would say that it must purposfully wish to limit population growth on that planet.
Reply #11 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I wouldn't think the AI has a very efficient priority system in place. Otherwise i would say that it must purposfully wish to limit population growth on that planet.


Then why build the farm in the first place?
Reply #12 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Then why build the farm in the first place?



Answer; see first half of my sentance

I wouldn't think the AI has a very efficient priority system in place.


Reply #13 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Mine must have been a rhetorical question.
Reply #14 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Mine must have been a rhetorical question.



Is that a 'rhetorical' cop out?? hehehe
Reply #15 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
It is only in retrospect that hindsight is 20/20.