AI To Easy (In the late game)!!!

[Kyle_Gates]

Ok, first off, I am not here to brag or anything. I am a solid Civ player. I am not amazing by any means. My issue is, the AI is just way to easy so far and I am curious if there is a way to improve to AI competitiveness in the late game specifically.

I generally play with just me as the only human or, myself and 1 or 2 human players. We then add 8-10 AI players and so far the highest we have set everyone to is Emperor. Standard Game Speed, Huge Map, regular starts, NO victory conditions.

The AI is generally WELL ahead off all of the human players fairly quickly. The trouble is, as long as everyone bides their time, eventually we reach the late game where the entire tech tree has been discovered by all. Then, the AI is wiped out one by one as they just don’t have the military built up to stand against even one of the human players.

So, is there any way to make this more difficult in the late game? Next game we play we will up the AI to max. Does that make any appreciable difference? (FYI- Myself and the folks I play with generally have no interest in Victory Conditions beyond combat as the other conditions just feel......forced). Any ideas are welcome! Thx!

[ashvandam_uk]

I prefer the game having slightly easier AI because it gives you a chance to discover new things in the game that you havent done before, like build a new wonder of the world you havent built before, or try some of the culture victory that you might of not done before.

Its okay if they improve Deity level AI but prefer King or Emperior level AI to be left alone.

I think focusing on domination all the time is the wrong way to go, there are plenty of other types of games that focus on just war, the game play of AI i would personally to focus on Science/Culture/Faith which i think is at an okay stage.

[Jimib4158]

yea sadly you would need diety .....since the AI suxs

[Off-Suit Nines]

The AI is very, very bad. It starts with additional units(additional settlers even on Deity) which is what(coupled with the huge +% to all resource income) allows it to take off early game. However the AI, if it can even be called that, basically just flails around randomly selecting governments, policies, techs, districts, and units without any regard for making them fit together. China is slightly more likely to build wonders, and Gandhi is slightly more likely to nuke you but the AI never pays attention to its start or any advantages that it might be able to push.

So, no, turning it up to Deity won't make it any more satisfying. The AI of Deity and the AI of Settler are equally stupid. One just cheats more than the other.

[Jimib4158]

Originally posted by Fury Golem:

The AI is very, very bad. It starts with additional units(additional settlers even on Deity) which is what(coupled with the huge +% to all resource income) allows it to take off early game. However the AI, if it can even be called that, basically just flails around randomly selecting governments, policies, techs, districts, and units without any regard for making them fit together. China is slightly more likely to build wonders, and Gandhi is slightly more likely to nuke you but the AI never pays attention to its start or any advantages that it might be able to push.

So, no, turning it up to Deity won't make it any more satisfying. The AI of Deity and the AI of Settler are equally stupid. One just cheats more than the other.

yea sure cheated win....but only option at this point....i really even suggest immortal, AI is so lame he can only win with such huge advantageous.played some games similar to posters, always like he said....AI starts good but fizzles out

[Kyle_Gates]

Wow, a lot of venom directed toward the AI. i think there is room for improvement but considering what we had with a game like Civ 2 or 3, we are light-years beyond that level of AI. I suppose my solution (were it up to me) might be to have some AI "sliders" to customize the AI. Perhaps even on tougher difficulty levels, have the AI start out with few (or no) bonuses and gain more and more as the game progresses to make them properly difficult when the late game rolls around.

[Off-Suit Nines]

I never played 2 and I was very young when I played 3, so I remember very little of it. But Civ 4's AI was much less like playing against a mentally challenged baboon. Granted, that's because Civ 4 was a much less complicated game and so easier to program an AI for. However, the Civ games in general can often be generalized by the awfulness of their AI. While AI isn't the strongest feature in many 4X games, Civ stands out among the most basic and senseless singleplayer experiences.

I love Civ VI for its multiplayer, which I think is the most engaging and competitive experience yet within the franchise, but even when it's cheating to an egregious level the AI is still a cakewalk.