Rokkosovsky Rokkosovsky

AI cheats rather plentifully in this game.

▼

AI cheats rather plentifully in this game.

from Stardock Forums
Played quite a few 4x games and the Gal Civ AI is among the best cheaters of the lot.

The whole minor races setup is there as a cheat device. I've tried on various levels and almost always find that I'm still researching the science when the Kiwis announce they have Tri-Strontium. Or the Carcinogens or Alexs announce they have Afrodesiac. None of these races have any use for it....the AI just wants to keep it from you. And they were building this from your very first turn. This game should have a disable minor races button. And disable sharks. Just like MOO2 had a disable Antareans button. I don't care about the score.

Also, I've tried modifying my race. Is that cheating? No...you have only so many points and you can't go over. How you distribute them should be irrelevent to the AI. Right? But the minute you modify your race, the starting point on the maps that you get will be a horrendous ones. I was actually once placed in the last square in the corner, with three habitable class 15 planets, but nothing else within 10-12 sectors. Did I play that game? No, I'd rather open up my wrists. Its like playing Civ where it would set you up on a tiny island. Forget it, AI. Give me another map.

I'd like to suggest to the designers that they modify the cheatin' AI a bit. Especially on the lower levels. I, like many out here, have a real job and will never become an Avatar class player, or whatever you call it. Don't have the time. Life and work kind of interfere with it. I know that's sad, but that is how real life works. But I would like to sometimes come home and release the tension by kicking the universe's butt. As the Xbox commerical says, I'd like to play in your world.

Just in case someone says I'm bitter about losing, I'll say I've won every game I played to the end. Three of four, I think. But I dislike being cheated on general principle. It irritates me to no end. If the AI played poker like this at one of my parties...well, I think it would get the snot kicked out of it. My brother used to play football and has too short a temper and takes a very dim view of cheating.

Thanks. (Oh, and when you update this game, make one month mean one month! It is a turn based game where each turn is supposed to be one month. But one month is often two months. BS. If it won't be ready next turn, it should say two months, two turns. This is irritating, and you don't need to make the game irritating just to be cool. Be more like MOO2.)

Thnks again. A pretty cool game. Some real flaws, but still pretty cool.
1,983 views 46 replies
Reply #26 from Stardock Forums Top
Given the dev's comments on this board, I find it very unlikely that doing that to Stellar Cartography would be grounds for metaverse removal.

It should be, but that's a whole other matter. WHY they ever set up the metaverse to allow modified games in the first place is mind boggling to someone who's seen time and time again what happens when there's no server check to verify game integrity.
Reply #27 from Stardock Forums Top
#26

Well said, CM. I find it nearly incomprehensible that any company would welcome Modding its game, host those Mods on its own server, and then report any scores actually using said Mods as "anomalous".

Sorry to Brad and SD to be critical of their efforts (GalCiv is a wonderfully-developed product in comparison to many other games I've bought lately), but this one is a doozy.

Just my 2,318 turkish lira.

~SDC~
Groupy 2 - Organize multiple applications into grouped tabs on your Windows desktop
Reply #28 from Stardock Forums Top
Game data sent to metaverse contains order of researched techs. So, you'll have some problems with metaverse if you sent game with that changes.
End of quote


This is really a very minor alteration. I seriously doubt that it would flag anything. It might confuse the AI once automated updating is implimented, if it ever is, but that's a different issue entirely.

Well said, CM. I find it nearly incomprehensible that any company would welcome Modding its game, host those Mods on its own server, and then report any scores actually using said Mods as "anomalous".Sorry to Brad and SD to be critical of their efforts (GalCiv is a wonderfully-developed product in comparison to many other games I've bought lately), but this one is a doozy.
End of quote


It really does make sense. There are a number of ways to make really problematic changes that the AI won't even notice. Techs without a certain line in their definition aren't noticed by the AI, for one, even though they work fine otherwise, which will also allow you to make other things the computer can't use by making them dependant on those unnoticed techs.

~SDC~
Reply #29 from Stardock Forums Top
Bobo smarter than Bobo sounds. I am sick of cheating threads. The AI needs to "cheat" to beat peopele, The main thing is that its fun. :D

~SDC~
Reply #30 from Stardock Forums Top
Who said you can't use mods and submit scores? People do all the time.

But if you use a mod that fundamnetlaly changes the game play, then yea, it'll get picked up as anamolous. I.e. you create a wonder that gives 500% to all your planets quality, etc.

The mods we host here, as far as I'm awware of anyway, would not affect your metaverse submission.

~SDC~
Reply #31 from Stardock Forums Top
I really think we should be supporting our modding community and not let the Metaverse overshadow it.

I personally have downloading most of the events from the Library and have no problems with them. I have yet to take the plunge on modded techs and improvements though.
Reply #32 from Stardock Forums Top
Maybe its just me-I like the "idea" of mods but I like to play an unmodified game.
Reply #33 from Stardock Forums Top
What is so complex about mods? If the Galciv team accepts one into the library, is that not an implied endorsement of that mod for the Metaverse? If it is not a library mod, then, by default, it is not an acceptable mod for Metaverse purposes. Now, if they let in mods without enough testing, then that is their fault, but assuming that all the library ones pass muster, then there should not be a problem with them.

As for the purist argument (i.e. no mods whatsoever), the developers clearly intended mods as part of the Galciv experience, but in some sort of a controlled way for Metaverse submissions. The team obviously does not want to impair on the right of someone to blatantly mod a game totally out of balance as long as they stay off the Metaverse with it.

So, in my opinion, that turns the argument from mods vs. no mods into what protocols the Galciv people have for approving mods that can be used on the Metaverse. So that means guarding the gates, as in the library. And that means some serious testing of mods by some dedicated folks who then give their final recommendation of whether that mod should be in or out. Then it means tagging the Metaverse submission with unique ID numbers of the mods used in that game. So, without the people in charge giving away too much security related information, is such a standard implemented or can it be implemented? That is my question in the end, after all this rambling on.
Reply #34 from Stardock Forums Top
Back to original topic: If you reeeally want to play a computer game without any ai advantage, you basically have 3 options:

1) Chess
2) Games without an opponent, i.e. Simcity
3) Multiplayer

I really don´t see anything else that would satisfy you.
Reply #35 from Stardock Forums Top
Bobo say what needs saying. Wampyre read posts too but wampyre not nicey nice like Bobo. Him sometimes say allkinds things make others mad. Him not mean it so others get big mad, just a little mad . But wampyre smart too. When him read something him think needs sayback, him come get Bobo from cellar and ask Bobo to sayback. wampyre knows Bobo not say mean things. Only say what is. Much less people get mad at Bobo. Not allkinds argue with Bobo. Bobo is ape. Allkinds people not like otherkinds people knowing they argue with big monkey.
Bobo play now.
Reply #36 from Stardock Forums Top
The only problem with the cheating is this:

Allegedly the GalCiv AI does not cheat.

Now, either of the following two situations are acceptable:

(1) The AI cheats, and everybody knows and admits it and just plays anyway... like in every other game.
(2) The AI does not cheat, so it can be honestly said that it does not cheat.

What is frustrating is the actual situation - that the AI cheats even though everybody says it doesn't. I have mounted up so much evidence that I think I can say I have proven this point. Check out the thread "AI cheats on techt ree, gets free techs from nowhere (bug?)" if you want to see it.

-Drake

~SDC~
Reply #37 from Stardock Forums Top
A bug is a bug (if the AI got a tech it was not supposed to) and a cheat is a cheat. ( the AI knows somthing you don't know or has an advantage you don't have). Its unfair to the developer to confuse the two.

As far as cheats go, many are covered by the backstory (yellow stars, for example) I won't say the AI never "cheats" but I do make distinctions for what might be bugs -they get fixed.

I suspect that the AI gets the Ranger as a random event more than I do,

I suspect that the AI gets luckier when it comes to planet quality

I suspect that the 35 PQ events are more likly if you are an AI.

BUT there is only ONE human ME, so I think it evens out. There are more AIs and I have to beat them all.

In my humble opinion, that makes the game more fun not less. :)
Reply #38 from Stardock Forums Top
Who said you can't use mods and submit scores? People do all the time.But if you use a mod that fundamnetlaly changes the game play, then yea, it'll get picked up as anamolous. I.e. you create a wonder that gives 500% to all your planets quality, etc.The mods we host here, as far as I'm awware of anyway, would not affect your metaverse submission.
End of quote


Considering I've been floating around in the top 50 rather comfortably without the use of mods, I'd say that their effect on the metaverse hasn't been that bad. So there's really no reason to worry about it much.

SeanB

Reply #39 from Stardock Forums Top
Also, I've tried modifying my race. Is that cheating? No...you have only so many points and you can't go over. How you distribute them should be irrelevent to the AI. Right? But the minute you modify your race, the starting point on the maps that you get will be a horrendous ones. I was actually once placed in the last square in the corner, with three habitable class 15 planets, but nothing else within 10-12 sectors. Did I play that game? No, I'd rather open up my wrists. Its like playing Civ where it would set you up on a tiny island. Forget it, AI. Give me another map.
End of quote


Not true, my first game of GalCiv I modified my race and started in a corner on a planet with a 26 rateing and 4 others (19,20,22,16). There was a few habited systems 4 sectors away with just as high planets. I had Tightly packed picked and gigantic galaxy.

One question I have is everyone is at war with pirates and space sharks but I have yet to see either and have explored 1/4 of the galaxy. Am I just lucky or do they only show up if you pick specific choices.



~SDC~
Reply #40 from Stardock Forums Top

Richard, you're problem is that you're an absolutist.

Whereas most people are generalists. You want to lump GalCiv in with every other game because you can find some obscure or relatively minor thing that doesn't really affect the overall play balance.

The AI, for instance, does not cheat on the tech tree. If it is getting techs it shouldn't, then it would be a bug.

For instance, your beef with the diplomacy AI stuff is that you want to label the AI as "Cheating like every other game" except that you apparently are oblivious to how other game AI players "play" the game.

Everyone who has followed this forum knows that the diplomacy AI has had to be changed many times since release due to human exploits. Yet go "Gotcha" when you find that the computer AI, when it deals with one another, still works the same as when the game was first released. Since release, special changes have had to be made with human vs. AI diplomacy because human players find exploits that have to be plugged. 

But the AI still has to evaluate deals, check its treasury, etc. In your absolutism, you would lump having a difference in diplomacy AI handling equated to games where the AI just gets free money or free units or improvements conjured from no where or where the AI gangs up on the human or whatever.  And incidentally, the AI makes no distinction between human and computer players when it makes a demand or trade offer.

So do you perhaps see why people object to such absolutism?

Reply #41 from Stardock Forums Top

BTW, events are random. It makes no distnction between computer and human. However, they are biased against whowever is winning.

Galaxy creation is totally random and not affected by difficulty level.

Reply #42 from Stardock Forums Top
Brad,

Just to clarify (as a relative newbie), are you saying that a trade offer from human to AI that would have been accepted at time of release might now not be accepted due to changes in the AI because of human behavior, but that the AI might still make that same trade with another AI?

Also, on the issue of "cheating", I think folks need to realize that this a very emotionally charged word, and clearly the dev team takes this seriously and a bit personally (which they are entitled to). I think most of the threads that have been upsetting folks have not been accusations of cheating in the sense that the devs *know* the behavior is occurring and are hiding it, but that some players believe there is a bug of some sort. The difference is very subtle but has a very different reaction from the devs.

Truthfully, this game is so complex it is entirelly possible that things are happening for reasons that aren't real obvious, and that's fine, but people want to understand certain behaviors, like why AI might get a tech they don't seem to have the prerequisites for. There is probably a perfectly reasonable explanation, we just don't know what it is. I think that's all most people want to know.

FWIW, I'm not a strategy gamer, but am really enjoying GC so far. The game is very approachable, even for me. I do think the dcumentation is lacking and the game would be even more approachable if some of the features were documented a bit better.
Reply #43 from Stardock Forums Top
Re: Diplomacy different between AI vs. between AI and humans.

Duh...that only makes sense.

I play Diplomacy frequently (since this list is full of old timers I assume most of you know what I mean). There are definitely deals I'd make with my friend Chris that I would NEVER make with my friend Pat, and that I would NEVER EVER make with my friend Scott's dad. Why? Because Chris will keep his deal, and Pat will stab me in the back at the first opportunity and Scott's dad is just so damn good that cooperating with him at all practically guarentees he'll win.

If you don't play Diplomacy, substitute Monopoly and it'll mostly make sense too.

I will make different deals with different people because as a human I can evaluate them:

1) how trustworthy they are. Pat developed his reputation as a back stabber over the course of many years and many different games. The computer can only judge your reputation on the game you're playing now. It has completely forgotten that each game for the last 3 games you've offered peace for tech and then turned around and shafted him anyway.

2) how good you are. I can tell "sure I can give Chris this great deal in his favor, because I know that by the end of the game he'll be burnt out and not thinking clearly and I'll have the advantage to win. The computer can't do this.

So, is the computer giving better deals to other AI but not to the humans an example of cheating? HELL NO. Its an example of the programmers trying to compensate for the fact that the computer can't tell how good a player you are or how trustworthy you are. That's why so much of the Diplo changes have dealt with closing exploits. Because humans are far more devious and treacherous and we came up with all kinds of screwy things the devs hadn't thought of.

Consider this. IF GalCiv allowed multiplayer and you were on line in a game of mixed humans and AI...would YOU make the same type of deals with the human players as you do with the AI? Don't even try to answer yes to that.

Or another way to view it. How many of us cheerfully turn over trade goods and such to MINOR powers that we would NEVER give to the majors. Why? Because we know the minors are crippled and thus not much threat (usually).

Now IF there is a bug that permits the AI to get battleships prematurely...hey, fantastic...thanks for discovering that and documenting it thoroughly and I'm sure the devs will get right on fixing it.

But labeling it "cheating" is not only wrong, its just damn obnoxious.
Reply #44 from Stardock Forums Top
Getting back to the yellow star issue, I don't think you can honestly say that it isn't a cheat. Sure, it's covered in the backstory, but my understanding is this was done after the fact to rationalize the fact that it was simply easier to program the game with the AI colony ships knowing where to go. This really no longer necessary with today's computing power, and since the human player doesn't get that advantage by default, I have to call it a cheat.

I'm not faulting the programmer(s) for doing it. I don't think cheating is rampant, either. But since we've established it *can* happen, you can't just kill every thread with "The AI doesn't cheat! Shut up!" You have to legitimately evaluate what the person is reporting with an open mind.

Bruce
Reply #45 from Stardock Forums Top
Geez. I have personally offended the head developer now. Enough is enough. I said what I wanted to say, and I'm done. No offense was intended, and apologize if any was taken.

-Drake

~SDC~
Reply #46 from Stardock Forums Top
I think there is a significant but subtle difference between an AI "cheat" and an AI "advantage".

The AI needs advantages to compete with human player so it should get its' tech say 10% cheaper, it should be able to produce things 10% faster, have some diplomatic advantages etc etc. This is because an AI is a set of "if then" statements that must necessarily lack the flexibilty and adaptability of a human mind. The AI needs bonuses to help compensate for the extra intelligence and adaptability of the human. It is certainly not a cheat if these advantages are of a fixed percentage.

OTH It most definitely is a cheat if the AI is just given things freely merely because the human has those things or merely because the human happens to be winning. (Of course, it could be argued that is OK if the AI is given certain things at fixed times. Say the AI gets a free tech every 25 turns but that is more in the nature of a fixed advantage as mentioned above).

Please distinguish between cheats and advantages to stop unpleasant rows. (It is OK to say one does not like a particular AI advantage bearing in mind that if the AI had no advantages the game would soon be mastered).

Another thing. If it were possible to create an AI as good as a human player it would be equally possible to create an AI that could do your job as well as you do so you get turfed out on the street. :D