repettetive gameplay? stupid ai?

[Threepwood]

does anyone else think that the game becomes repetetive? every game i start feels the same.
perhaps its just me but the more i play civ 6, the more i figure out that the ai is beyond stupid, to the point where it actualy ruins the game, il give an example, im trying to take an ai city, they have an archer in the city, and that makes it dificult to conquer, so you just plant a single unit with low health 3 squares away, and the ai moves his archer out, and then you attack it, with a different unit once its baited out, cause they rarely retreat once you baited it out of the city, not even if you roll up 5 warriors to attack it, in stead it should tactical retreat to the the city where its actualy usefull.
the ai dont use half the features in the game, so what is the point of adding them in the first place? you are just giving the player more options to beat the ai, i havnt seen the ai use a single nuke yet, they dont get at all how the new heroes work, and just use them to walk around, the ai puts down districts random at best, and they allmost dont use planes at all in warfare. they have gone in a different direction by removing happiness and adding loyalty, its a good feature exept the ai dont get how it works at all, and that makes the ai loose cities constantly. the trade mechanics is a joke, the ai agrees to the most idiotic trades, and its sooo irritating they try to trade for the 1000 time 1 luxery recourse for 30 gold. the game itself and its mechanics are fine its just that the ai is incompetent. i play 2 games on huge map with max ai and then i leave the game for 6 months cause its gets repetetive.
is it that hard to code an ai that can use the games features better?

[FredDie]

Suislide lähetti viestin:

Deleted the game. It'll never be fixed.

Sadly probably true, last update broke the game and there are no hotfixes all week...

[Suislide]

FredDie lähetti viestin:

Suislide lähetti viestin:

Deleted the game. It'll never be fixed.

Sadly probably true, last update broke the game and there are no hotfixes all week...

I'll never buy another SId Meier game again. 5 at least had Vox Populi to help save it.

This is a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ train wreck. And the problem is, everyone gives it good reviews because the flaws are only seen after the first 10-20 hours of gameplay.

This game is like a 5/10 AT BEST

[Wesker++]

giulio244 lähetti viestin:

Mazey lähetti viestin:

Yes, it is incredibly difficult to code AI for a game this complicated.

NO IT IS NOT DIFFICULT, THEY HAVE ALREADY MADE AI PROGRAMS FOR CHESS AND ALSO FOR JAPANESE GO. AND MAJONG THEY CAN ALSO DO IT FOR CIV BELIEVE ME

Let's examine this. DeepMind, the company behind AlphaGo, required hundreds of PHD-level computer scientists. There are about 1000 people employed by Deepmind. Firaxis Games is a company of about 200 people, including programmers, designers, sound artists, accountants, project managers, designers, quality assurance testers etc, etc. You can't get the same product from a team that's one fifth the size of DeepMind.

Then there's the issue of the project budget. Firaxis Games is just a game studio. I would estimate their profits to be in the millions. Deepmind is owned by Alphabet, which is owned by Google, and they have BILLIONS to spend on projects. Firaxis does not have billions in funding to work on that level of AI. There's also the fact that Civ VI, even base Civ VI, has way more rules and potential moves than either Go or Chess.

Sorry, but machine learning AI for Civ VI just is not technically or fiscally realistic.

[Threepwood]

Fatbill lähetti viestin:

Gilius Thunderhead lähetti viestin:

The AI is awful and has no idea how to play the game, is it even possible to lose a game of Civ VI?

How much of this is due to 1UPT? I recall the AI in Civ 4 being at least somewhat capable

This.

Personally, I have given up on this turd circus and am waiting for Civ7.

Maybe that game will be actually good.

i have given up aswell, but the develepors should know so there might be a hope for future civ games.

Suislide lähetti viestin:

Deleted the game. It'll never be fixed.

i have and no it will never get fixed, im trying to comprehend how so many players can actualy sit and play this game without end and not come to the same conclution as we have.
how can it have 30.000 players playing is beyond me.

[demise4u]

Petrified Ham lähetti viestin:

giulio244 lähetti viestin:

NO IT IS NOT DIFFICULT, THEY HAVE ALREADY MADE AI PROGRAMS FOR CHESS AND ALSO FOR JAPANESE GO. AND MAJONG THEY CAN ALSO DO IT FOR CIV BELIEVE ME

Let's examine this. DeepMind, the company behind AlphaGo, required hundreds of PHD-level computer scientists. There are about 1000 people employed by Deepmind. Firaxis Games is a company of about 200 people, including programmers, designers, sound artists, accountants, project managers, designers, quality assurance testers etc, etc. You can't get the same product from a team that's one fifth the size of DeepMind.

Then there's the issue of the project budget. Firaxis Games is just a game studio. I would estimate their profits to be in the millions. Deepmind is owned by Alphabet, which is owned by Google, and they have BILLIONS to spend on projects. Firaxis does not have billions in funding to work on that level of AI. There's also the fact that Civ VI, even base Civ VI, has way more rules and potential moves than either Go or Chess.

Sorry, but machine learning AI for Civ VI just is not technically or fiscally realistic.

You're, well, just plain wrong. There's no need to build a ML system from scratch like DeepMInd did. My company will sell you ML-as-a-Service. Plug in a couple hundred recorded PVP games and the trained AI will be vastly superior to what is in the game now.

The purpose of AlphaGo is to beat the best masters of Go. The purpose of the AI in Civ6 is to be a fun challenge. There's an ocean of possibility between the crap we have now and an AI that a human can't beat, and it'd be nice to have a bridge even 30% of the way there.

[LockedandFiring]

To me? No. But then again I only 0lay with friends.

[Suislide]

LockedandFiring lähetti viestin:

To me? No. But then again I only 0lay with friends.

Don't have friends who play these types of games so I'm stuck

[Threepwood]

Petrified Ham lähetti viestin:

giulio244 lähetti viestin:

NO IT IS NOT DIFFICULT, THEY HAVE ALREADY MADE AI PROGRAMS FOR CHESS AND ALSO FOR JAPANESE GO. AND MAJONG THEY CAN ALSO DO IT FOR CIV BELIEVE ME

Let's examine this. DeepMind, the company behind AlphaGo, required hundreds of PHD-level computer scientists. There are about 1000 people employed by Deepmind. Firaxis Games is a company of about 200 people, including programmers, designers, sound artists, accountants, project managers, designers, quality assurance testers etc, etc. You can't get the same product from a team that's one fifth the size of DeepMind.

Then there's the issue of the project budget. Firaxis Games is just a game studio. I would estimate their profits to be in the millions. Deepmind is owned by Alphabet, which is owned by Google, and they have BILLIONS to spend on projects. Firaxis does not have billions in funding to work on that level of AI. There's also the fact that Civ VI, even base Civ VI, has way more rules and potential moves than either Go or Chess.

Sorry, but machine learning AI for Civ VI just is not technically or fiscally realistic.

warhammer total war have a far superior ai and there are tons of mechanics to controll so dont tell me its not possible to make a better ai, its just a fact that the ai in civ 5 is surperior to 6 so they made a mistake and made a too complex game that the ai cant comprehend, for christ sake the ai cant even use ships or planes its that obviouse how useless it is, if you make a complex game you have to make an ai that understands the mechanics otherwise its useless content

[PycassoClaudiu]

Yes, yes and yes. I agree with everything you said. Nothing boils my blood harder than an AI with 0 campuses and no science bonuses having more science/turn than me with 3 campuses with library as Korea the first 50 turns.
At first it's a complex and fun game until you notice a pattern. You have to exploit AI stupidity instead of coming up with a clever strategy to outsmart it. Losing on turn 12 to a Montezuma ain't fun.

[luca244]

demise4u lähetti viestin:

Petrified Ham lähetti viestin:

Let's examine this. DeepMind, the company behind AlphaGo, required hundreds of PHD-level computer scientists. There are about 1000 people employed by Deepmind. Firaxis Games is a company of about 200 people, including programmers, designers, sound artists, accountants, project managers, designers, quality assurance testers etc, etc. You can't get the same product from a team that's one fifth the size of DeepMind.

Then there's the issue of the project budget. Firaxis Games is just a game studio. I would estimate their profits to be in the millions. Deepmind is owned by Alphabet, which is owned by Google, and they have BILLIONS to spend on projects. Firaxis does not have billions in funding to work on that level of AI. There's also the fact that Civ VI, even base Civ VI, has way more rules and potential moves than either Go or Chess.

Sorry, but machine learning AI for Civ VI just is not technically or fiscally realistic.

You're, well, just plain wrong. There's no need to build a ML system from scratch like DeepMInd did. My company will sell you ML-as-a-Service. Plug in a couple hundred recorded PVP games and the trained AI will be vastly superior to what is in the game now.

The purpose of AlphaGo is to beat the best masters of Go. The purpose of the AI in Civ6 is to be a fun challenge. There's an ocean of possibility between the crap we have now and an AI that a human can't beat, and it'd be nice to have a bridge even 30% of the way there.

firaxis game a subsidiary of the 2k game that earns millions of dollars could put more money in research that from the first civ and not improved

[Threepwood]

i will go and write all this on 2k forum so please go and support it and give it your vote so the devs can see how many players are unhappy with the low effort of ai mecanics.

[Opodeldox]

There are two main issues with having an awesome AI in Civ games. The first one is, that it might be doable to create an AI that can beat you, but then you need to dynamically dump it down somehow so you have different difficulty options which does not work that well. You might integrate issues and fautls, but this introduces pattern that humans can and will exploit and this invalidates the AI. You might use ML to circumvent this, but then your AI is hard to beat and you dont have easier modes anymore.
The second issue is that an AI like this needs alot resources from the CPU and RAM, because it must run for many cities, many units and all their interactions now and possible results in the future. This would overwhelm many systems and in general you want to run games also on stuff like cheaper PCs and Consoles.

Many people who are that Chess and GO AI are possible forget these two points, the only goal of these AIs is to beat the best players, not to teach weaker players and these systems need an huge amout of resources and run on computers no private person owns - while these games have simple rules.

If you read about the historz of chess computers you will learn about "computer chess", these where popular and effective strategies agains chess computer that worked well and made them look very limited. The same thign will happen with any thinkable AI in Civ games and therefore it just makes more sense to have a fast, simple AI that is allowed to cheat.

[Threepwood]

Opodeldox lähetti viestin:

There are two main issues with having an awesome AI in Civ games. The first one is, that it might be doable to create an AI that can beat you, but then you need to dynamically dump it down somehow so you have different difficulty options which does not work that well. You might integrate issues and fautls, but this introduces pattern that humans can and will exploit and this invalidates the AI. You might use ML to circumvent this, but then your AI is hard to beat and you dont have easier modes anymore.
The second issue is that an AI like this needs alot resources from the CPU and RAM, because it must run for many cities, many units and all their interactions now and possible results in the future. This would overwhelm many systems and in general you want to run games also on stuff like cheaper PCs and Consoles.

Many people who are that Chess and GO AI are possible forget these two points, the only goal of these AIs is to beat the best players, not to teach weaker players and these systems need an huge amout of resources and run on computers no private person owns - while these games have simple rules.

If you read about the historz of chess computers you will learn about "computer chess", these where popular and effective strategies agains chess computer that worked well and made them look very limited. The same thign will happen with any thinkable AI in Civ games and therefore it just makes more sense to have a fast, simple AI that is allowed to cheat.

you are missing the point, i dont whant a unbeatable ai, i just whant an ai that actualy can use some of the game mechanics, cause of at this moment it does not get 90% of the mechanics in game. perhaps its dificult to get an ai that is freakishly good, but seriouly il use the same example again the ai NEVER USES PLANES OR SHIPS its that simple it doesent use simple game mechanics at all. and the civ game now completely evolves around building districts, and cant the ai do that well then its completely useless coded by the developers.

[luca244]

Threepwood lähetti viestin:

i will go and write all this on 2k forum so please go and support it and give it your vote so the devs can see how many players are unhappy with the low effort of ai mecanics.

Opodeldox lähetti viestin:

There are two main issues with having an awesome AI in Civ games. The first one is, that it might be doable to create an AI that can beat you, but then you need to dynamically dump it down somehow so you have different difficulty options which does not work that well. You might integrate issues and fautls, but this introduces pattern that humans can and will exploit and this invalidates the AI. You might use ML to circumvent this, but then your AI is hard to beat and you dont have easier modes anymore.
The second issue is that an AI like this needs alot resources from the CPU and RAM, because it must run for many cities, many units and all their interactions now and possible results in the future. This would overwhelm many systems and in general you want to run games also on stuff like cheaper PCs and Consoles.

Many people who are that Chess and GO AI are possible forget these two points, the only goal of these AIs is to beat the best players, not to teach weaker players and these systems need an huge amout of resources and run on computers no private person owns - while these games have simple rules.

If you read about the historz of chess computers you will learn about "computer chess", these where popular and effective strategies agains chess computer that worked well and made them look very limited. The same thign will happen with any thinkable AI in Civ games and therefore it just makes more sense to have a fast, simple AI that is allowed to cheat.

already made my username is parnasi6 respond to my
posts and to my polls thanks

[nobbler]

I dont even have to read any of this to know this thread is ridiculous. CIv is untouchable. Arguing about cemantics is a waste of time. If you don't like VI then stick to V. and whoever said Ai is easy to program, should try making a video game. and comparing it to chess ai is silly.
a. this game has way more variables than chess.
b. chess only has to program ai (thats it!). not miliions of other calculations like a video game