An Insane Map Game and Why I Stopped Having Fun

Bottom line up front: The AI is just not ready for prime time in long games.

I have read the dedicated threads discussing issues with the AI, and read Frogboy’s and others’ defense of the current AI.  After playing deeper into an insane map game, I finally understand the criticisms.

Note: While I am certainly no stranger to GC 2 and 3, I am not a hardcore player who can quote XML.  The results below were very surprising to me.

Game settings:

Played as Macian (my own custom race, Terran tech tree).

 

Galaxy Type: Insane, Spiral

Galaxy options:

Game Settings:


Opponents:  26 AI plus all minors

No mods were used.


As of Turn 276

Here is the current galaxy map (which I can see thanks to a single huge hull loaded with nothing but sensors—which I also don’t think should be possible).  I tried to outline my territory to make it easier to see what I control.

BUT, the scores tell the real story.

 

I was really enjoying the game for about 200 turns.  I wasn’t the most powerful race and it was a struggle to keep expanding while holding off threats from other races.  Now, at turn 276, I’m bored.  I know I’m going to win.  The rest of the game (barring a mega event that I’m not willing to wait for) is just mopping up.  This is not fun.

Ship Design

I can’t lose.  Literally.  Look at the stats for just one of my medium ships compared to medium ships from three other powers.  This is representative of ALL of the AI ships currently in the game.  (Oh, I have huge hulls, too.  Not one AI even has large hulls yet.)

 

Notice that not only has the AI not kept pace technologically, but that the ships are not even designed to counter me—the largest threat in the game.  I have no beam weapons on any of my ships.  As a strategy in this game, I traded for beam weapon tech and then gave that tech to every AI in the game in exchange for other tech or money.  The result seems to be that the AI considers beam weapons (which the pirates also use) the primary threat.  I used exclusively missile weapons in this game.

Research

So why are my ships (and colonies) so kickass?  This one stat tells it all: Research.

 

So what is going on here?  For one, I have research worlds that take maximum advantage of adjacency bonuses.  Two, I colonized more worlds than any other player which allows me to have more research-specialized worlds.  Three, I trade for tech mercilessly, taking special advantage of the minor races.  That allows me to concentrate on research tech and raw production while getting other tech I need through diplomacy.

Lastly, I survey anomalies like crazy.  This last one is surprisingly important.  With the new costs of “breakthrough” techs such as large hulls, it can take 70+ turns to research.  However, with 6-8 survey ships constantly surveying anomalies, I am bound to get +25% research or “Unexpected Genius” every few turns.  I got large hulls in 6 turns by surveying anomalies.  I got huge hulls in 2 turns.  No AI has large hulls.  The AI is obviously not capable of following this “short cut” strategy.  I also completed the research, production, governing, terraforming, missile, and defense branches with this same strategy.

The Strategic Game

So what would a human player do?  Take a look again at the map and my score.  Ask the question: If all of the other major players in the game were human players, what would they do?  If it were me, I would build a coalition of other players to counter the growing threat.  I would coordinate research (you research large hulls and I’ll research more advanced weapons and then we’ll trade).  I would work to isolate the major threat diplomatically (in my current game I am financing my heavy spending on research through diplomacy trades).  I would seek to create alliances and mutual defense treaties and maybe engage in a coordinated military strike or few until the threatening player had been put in their place.  The AI seems incapable of doing any of this, of acting in a coordinated manner for their mutual benefit.

Frogboy and the AI team, I understand (somewhat) the difficulty of the task, having played 4X games since the original Civilization.  I appreciate a lot of the behavior I’ve seen in the tactical AI.  However, unless the AI can learn to play the strategic game against a human, this just isn’t fun mid- to late game.

  • The AI needs to challenge the human player in the colony rush.  At turn 276, I’m still sending out colony ships to take worlds that the AIs haven’t claimed within their own borders (extreme southern part of the map).
  • The AI needs to learn to work collectively with other AIs against any power (human or AI) that is becoming so powerful as to threaten the collective whole.  One other thing I noticed is that no other AIs were gobbling up smaller, weaker AIs to create larger empires that could challenge mine.
  • The AI needs to understand how to use the same tricks the human player can use, or the human player shouldn’t be allowed to do it.  Adjacency bonus is an obvious game mechanic for this one.  So is the anomaly exploit.  (I would remove the unexpected genius bonus and lower the +% research as a quick fix.)
  • Finally, at least some AIs need to be as ruthless as a human can be (or as loyal).  This means breaking non-aggression pacts and alliances, setting other powers to war against or embargo an ally or non-aggression-pact power, etc.  Backstabbing is a well-worn human trait.  Some AIs should learn it.  (Others should be as loyal as the U.K. to the U.S.)
I hope this helps.  I REALLY loved GC2 and I want to love GC3 even more.  There are many good things about this game.  However, for now, I'm going to play the campaign as a change of pace and design some more ships and hope the AI gets a little smarter.
43,308 views 10 replies
Reply #1 Top

There are/were ongoing mods that work to address some aspects of these problems (IAB/ILO), but the 1.3 opt-in governors followed by the immediate knowledge ~15 hours laterthat they were already going to change somwehow alongside the knowledge that the focus wheel was going away & being replaced has thrown such uncertainty in the mix that I'm not sure what kind of compatability//continuing work updates you might see

Reply #2 Top

People like to play however they like. I say...more power to you if you like the play style you've chosen above. However, since you have posted this, I'll make a suggestion. You could try to add some RP to your game. Try playing/thinking as a leader of some race that has far less info than we are able to access, and not do things like building a ship full of galaxy viewing sensors. It can be quite fun as well...

I try to set my own house rules instead of seeing in which way I can destroy the AI. Because humans will be able to do that through in-game loop holes for a long time to come. Instead - since I paid 50 bucks for this product, I try to use it in a way that is most enjoyable. 

Reply #3 Top

I remember this problem from GalCiv2. Apparently GalCiv in general has the problem that you can reach a point where your empire is so powerful that nothing challenging remains - and unfortunately this point can be reached long before you achieve the victory conditions which results in a tedious endgame of mopping up.

I remember in GalCiv2 not even bad mega events like the Jagged Knife could endanger my victory after reaching that "point of no return", because even with loosing half the planets, there was still enough power left to easily win everything back.

I agree that the AI probably needs to get better in judging and responding to the strategic development.

Reply #4 Top

When it becomes clear that I have become unstoppable I just declare the game won and move on, unless I happen to fancy a mop-up at that time. The computer doesn't mind :) and I have already seen the victory videos so why bother?

The only counter-argument that comes to my mind is the metaverse score but, personally, don't care about it so meh. Hard to see this a big issue myself although I do understand that others might feel differently.

If many think that an "official" victory recognition is important then perhaps SD ought to introduce a Dominance victory condition? For example, when your power, research, and military graphs are all above some threshold level and simultaneously 5x stronger compared to the 2nd place civs in those categories, you are declared a de-facto winner and all civs bow down in front of your might recognizing you as the First Among Equals. Would save you the mop-up and give you the victory video plus metaverse scores.

Reply #5 Top

Quoting Petri, reply 4

f many think that an "official" victory recognition is important then perhaps SD ought to introduce a Dominance victory condition?

I agree with you.  Civ V, I believe, had this as a possible victory condition.  It would help the game, though, if the AIs could understand the strategic stats and adjust their individual and collective strategies accordingly as the game progressed.

Reply #6 Top

Quoting Empress_Fujiko, reply 3

I remember this problem from GalCiv2.

True.  However, the AIs in GC2 were able to conduct effective military campaigns.  Over time, a few dominant powers would emerge.  I didn't see that in this game (except with a few minor races).  Some of the AIs were very weak and should have been conquered by the more powerful AIs.  Look at the Iridium score.  They dominated early game.  Once the colony rush was over, they just stopped.  I don't understand that.

Reply #7 Top

Quoting Hamilmac, reply 5

I agree with you.  Civ V, I believe, had this as a possible victory condition.  It would help the game, though, if the AIs could understand the strategic stats and adjust their individual and collective strategies accordingly as the game progressed.

Civ V had that whole capture capitals thing. Civ4 was the one with proper domination. (66% of the map and pop to win I think) I would love something like that instead of the conquest thing we have now in Galciv3.

Reply #8 Top

Quoting Kreissig, reply 2

People like to play however they like. I say...more power to you if you like the play style you've chosen above. However, since you have posted this, I'll make a suggestion. You could try to add some RP to your game.

You are correct.  I could.  But, I didn't set out to "Destroy the AI" in this game  I used roughly the same game settings I like from GC2 and Civ V.  I'm not that great a player and I was very surprised by the results just one step down from Godlike difficulty.  That's why I posted this, because I didn't expect it.

Reply #9 Top

I agree completely.  I posted a turn 66 screenshot, and it is not even close to fair.  The AI can not figure out how to play wide at all yet.  They should focus more on engine tech and colony ship manufacturing.