 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
CerberusIV
|
|
1) The AI "knows" the map once it has been revealed and what units are where. This is the only acknowledged cheat.
Either don't let the AI have your map or get used to it. You can use this to manipulate the AI into marching back and forth without getting to actually attack a city.
2) Look at the terrain and experience modifiers. An archer attacking a fortified spearman on grassland isn't 2 against 2. The spearman gets a bonus for being fortified and a 10% defence bonus on grassland. Defensive bonuses are higher in cities.
Use bombardment units to weaken defenders. Use fast units that can retreat and survive. Make sure you are using veteran units (build barracks) as they are significantly stronger than regulars. Sometimes you will just lose. Be prepared for it and have a plan 'B'.
3) I don't think you can slow the game down.
4) Any game is beatable I suppose, it depends how hard you are prepared to go at it. If you can cope with Regent/Monarch that is quite reasonable - that is the level I play at and enjoy.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sheik
|
|
quote:
1) Computer civs usually attack cities that are badly defended. If I load in the same game and move units about thereby weakening a different city while strengthing the one previously attacked, they attack the weakened city instead.
|
Right click on their unit stacks and you too can see how many they have on the tile.
quote:
2) Is there something in the game that gives computer players superhuman strength? I can easily lose 5/6 units of superior attacking strength and higher tech to theirs while they don't lose any. A bit akin to the archer shooting down my bomber!
|
A stroke of bad luck or improper unit placement on your part. Although sometimes it seems like the AI has a battle advantage (and maybe it does) remember that the grass is always greener on the other side.
quote:
3) Can I stop the game constantly dodging around to the next unit instead of fixing on the fight in hand? I don't like losing but I suppose that I might as well watch it!
|
Check prefrences and see if you have anything you could change. Otherwise I have no idea what you are talking about.
quote:
4) Somebody said they completed diety!!!! Didn't they have any opponents!!!
|
Many people beat Diety regularly and yes they play with oponents. What level are you playing?
BTW Regent is considered the fair level.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sheik
|
|
quote:
Shiek, that doesnt work in cities
|
They should add that in the next patch.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Mad Mariner
|
|
Im pretty new to the civ series having spent the last 200 yrs or so playing the command and conquer games, the thing that finally put me off these games was the AI cheating, it seems it was the only way the designers could actually make it give a human player a decent fight (even then it was rubbish), now getting to the point, i wanted to check this issue when i started to play civ lll so i started a game on deity as the scandanavians learnt a couple of techs then stuck a trainer on the game so i could get navigation to see how the AI was getting on, they were located pretty close to me and wow! they were huge!!! i had about 3 cities whilst they had all completely covered the HUGE landmasses they were sited on how is this possible? Would i be right in assuming this is another example of the AI cheating to be able to give u a half decent game? It would be a shame if this is the case coz the game seems pretty decent from what ive seen of it so far. Can anyone suggest any games that the AI is superb WITHOUT cheating that are worth a bash?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Mad Mariner
|
|
Nope aint tried regent yet but thanx to ure advice im now gonna give it a go, im not too bothered about the map cheat its more fun for the Ai to seize the resources then for little old me to go and bash em off the tiles, will regent be a challenge tho?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
Funny that in RTS games like C&C, the designers have to add weaknesses to the AI to make the game fun, since the AI is so good at doing thing in real-time. But in TBS games like Civ3, the designers need to add bonuses to the AI to make it competitive. Both types of AIs are equally dumb, it's just that one is allowed to use a computer's inherent advantage over humans, speed, while the other cannot.
No one is complaining about the RTS method, why complain about the TBS one? They're both tools to create a more fun, competitive game.
Dominae
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
quote: Originally posted by JanB
The human player has the advantage of lateral thinking but the AI has the advantage of never forgeting even the slightest detail. |
Good human players rarely forget details, and those things forgotten are irrelevant. Deity difficulty is supposed to challenge human players who are capable of "perfect play".
Dominae
|
|
|  |
 |
|
CerberusIV
|
|
JanB; You mentioned the screen shifts to the next unit so you don't see the outcome of a battle. Do you have unit animations turned off in the preferences screen? If the units are shooting, swordfighting or whatever there is usually time to see what is going on.
Just a thought.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Mad Mariner
|
|
Surely tho there must be people out there who are capable of programing the A.I well enough to give u a good game without allowing it to "cheat"? i can imagine how much time and effort goes into designing something like the civ series but it just smacks of laziness if the only way the A.I gets more difficult is by allowing beneficial multipliers and extra units at start up
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Mad Mariner
Surely tho there must be people out there who are capable of programing the A.I well enough to give u a good game without allowing it to "cheat"? |
Surely. But enter the term "cost/benefit analysis". If Firaxis can get away with a good game with the aid of only only one (very capable) AI programmer, that makes a lot of sense. The trick is to "cut corners" by letting the AI "cheat". Without this trick, no single person could code the Civ3 AI in the timeframe required by the publishers. It is an interesting exercise to wonder whether a four-person AI team would produce a more competitive "cheatless" AI than a one person is allowed to "cut corners".
Similarly with the 'Deep Blue' chess program (and variants). That program was designed to beat one person. That's an "AI cheat" if I've ever seen one. The task of building a general chess program that will beat anyone was simply not undertaken, since it was only necessary to beat one person (the current world champion) to win the competition. Within that framework, "cheats" are acceptable. Within the framework of creating a comeptitive Civ3 AI, "cheats" are just fine too.
Dominae
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26. Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|