Augusten Augusten

The Number One AI Deficiency

▼

The Number One AI Deficiency

from Stardock Forums
What do you think the number one AI deficiency is?

I think it's the fact WEAKER AI CIVS DON'T COOPERATE AGAINST STRONGER AI CIVS.

Weak AI civs don't seem to take the initiative to find allies against stronger civs, whether the stronger civ is the human player or AI.

Sometimes the Torian and Altarians ally in the late game, but they still don't cooperate that I can see other then declare war at almost the same time. Even if I am aligned good, the Torian and Altarians don't come to me and say "Hey, the Dregin have taken over half the galaxy, let's ally and declare war on them."

AI civs will whine to me about how so and so civ is getting too strong, but they don't offer to aid in taking them down.

In 90% of games one civ starts out strong (usually the Drengin) and the other civs can't compete against it (unless I dump a few dozen ships and all my tech on them constantly).

On the other hand, I can see that if AI civs did this, it could possibly make the game too easy for the human player. Alliance victory might be too easy if AI's sought at alliances. But in this respect the AI definetly does not play like a human player would because a weak AI civ is doomed unless I choose to seek alliance with them.
1,595 views 33 replies
Reply #26 from Stardock Forums Top
Hmmm. Some of you guys are a little stuck, I think. You always play the same way, and because the AI respond the same way, you think they are boring. I've been trying very different play styles (based on ideas from these boards), and I have moved from "no one would ever dare to threaten me" in some games (based, BTW, sometimes on military, sometimes on culture, sometimes on trade and sometimes on my economy!) through to being a food source. Let me assure you the AI change quite a lot.

BTW, I would have agreed with the observation that AI doesn't seem to deal with our cultural approaches as well as it might until I moved up to playing Genius-level-AI - they certainly are responding quite differently to my "cultural" approach.

~SDC~
Reply #27 from Stardock Forums Top
Phaedyme said:
> Augesten: In my experience, if you have to spend
> more than a year in an arm's race with another civ,
> it's just better to break them or utterly wipe them
> out so they'll never ever be a threat again.

I do not like military action. It's not my play style. And I don't need it to win. End.
Elemental: Reforged
Reply #28 from Stardock Forums Top
I'm not surprised that the drengins were friendly to you and then backstabbed. My experience with them is that once they are stronger than you they won't think twice about taking you out.

Reply #29 from Stardock Forums Top
I've had the AI use starbases for cultural and military purposes and do so very effectively.

I just wish there was a way for the human player to object to such things in the diplomacy screen the way the AI players can.
Reply #30 from Stardock Forums Top
magus,
agreed, we should be able to demand they put a stop to starbase construction that we object to.
Reply #31 from Stardock Forums Top
Augusten,

If you find yourself in an arms race with another civ to keep them from demanding tribute, the only economically viable course is to break them militarily so they'll never be a threat again, or wipe them out completely. Otherwise, your economy will be drained from maintenance costs and the constant need to keep building the best available ships to maintain superiority.

As you increase difficulty, you'll see why it's sometimes necessary to wipe out a strong rival.

~SDC~
Reply #32 from Stardock Forums Top
Correction: SMAC, just like its ancestors Civ1 and Civ2, has several triggers in it for all AIs to ally against you. Among those triggers, is Human is very strong. Both Sid and Brian admit that, as they like military conquest games. "The tech angle is only there so you can get bigger units before the AI can, and therefore beat on it, as you know that they are going to backstab you in the future, so no reason for you to wait on it." That's a misquote from Brian.

GalCiv seems like a game aimed at peaceful, building wins. It's much harder to win by war in it. That's been what I've seen, but then I'm still figuring the game out. The AI doesn't coordinate, no. And it seems to have some trouble with starbases (although I've seen it "cheese" out a sector with lots of SB with plenty of production enhancements).

There is a basic problem with having the AI team up against the human... that takes away the fun. I don't bother ever allying with the AI in Civ or SMAC. No reason, as they will just break their word to me later. At some silly hardcoded trigger point. So I just roll them up and win every game by conquest. That's the path the game was designed around. Everything else was just a fob to shut up the customers.

GalCiv plays nice. Its nice to have an AI that doesn't backstab me, just so there is always a military challenge around to keep me on the path of conquest. I like that difference, and the fact that the choice of game play is truly mine.
Reply #33 from Stardock Forums Top
The backstabbing AI model is the thing I hate most about most 4x games.

~SDC~