The AI city planning is stupid - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  Support and Troubleshooting
  The AI city planning is stupid

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   The AI city planning is stupid

WrexSoul posted 03-28-99 03:04 PM ET
The AI is stpuid in one very annoying respect: Base zones. They have an awful tendancy to overlap their own cities with new base areas. I think you should add a small fix for automated and AI colony pods to only build if they're at least 5 squares away from the nearest base.
I think this'd help a lot.
- WrexSoul
\/ .
vvv
JaimeWolf posted 03-28-99 10:03 PM ET
What makes you think that zoning your cities carefully so they don't overlap is a better strategy?
Often I don't use close to all the squares around a city so another city overlapping in the area isn't an imposition.
James
JasHawk posted 03-29-99 01:24 AM ET
I use the limit of my base areas all the time. And i find its behaviour annoying too. In fact if a pact brother lays a city that overlaps one of mine i go straight for vendetta. and also when i take another faction i colony pod cities that overlap into the ground.
matt
Zero posted 03-29-99 09:27 PM ET
I've found that going for zero overlap is not very important, since you can't use all the squares until you have enough population. It's more important to get the best individual city sites, even if it means that you have a degree of overlap. Hab domes show up pretty late in the game, so just getting 14 squares per city won't limit you for a long time.
In the late game it's more efficient to have zero overlap, true - except, of course, that overlap lets you fit more cities onto a given continent, and that gives you more bang for your satellite buck.
Evk posted 03-29-99 09:44 PM ET
Well, I think we have to take the degree of overlap into consideration here. Almost all my cities are touching or overlap a few squares and that's fine, but the computer sometimes builds cities literally two or three squares away from another one. You can't make a good argument that this is good planning.
WrexSoul posted 03-29-99 10:26 PM ET
I'm not talking about personal city development here. Your own ideas are just perfectly valid. But for opposing factions, the have no regard for planning, and often have the worst overlap ever. Not only does this hurt their own faction and developing capabilities, but they usually don't even do it to get bonuses or resources, and build horribly regardless. This is annoying to me, when they overlap MY city squares (and since they have a newer city they usually get their borders pushed into my city radius. Not only that, but when you get the stage of conquering their bases (one of my favorite fast ways of expanding my colony, especially early on or when I'm clearly technologically superior, or in this game a new twist with Mind Worms since I'm so fond of the Gaians), you get cities that can only use 15 or so of their potential 20 city squares.
Now an example of absurdity I was talking about happened last game, when Peacekeeper Lal bulit three cities, like this
---OOO
--OOOOO
--OOBOO
--OOXXX
---XXXOO
-OOXOBOO
OOOXXOOO
OOBOXOO
OOOOO
-OOO
I know it may look crappy, but this is the kind of computer base-planning that goes on.
If you don't see what I mean paste this in a fixed size text editor.
It is something that is deeeeply annoying, and would probably be easy enough to fix, since it already has something to find the distance from nearest bases for the territory borders assignment.
What you do with your own territory is up to you.
- WrexSoul
\/ .
vvv
Evk posted 03-30-99 02:22 AM ET
I intend to fill mine with chicken and whores.
Radegast2 posted 03-30-99 05:31 AM ET
EVK; Great Idea, how do you design those in the workshop?
I also got bored with the faction leader graphics, so patched the gifs with 'different' views!
Evk posted 03-30-99 12:56 PM ET
You desire the secret of Chicken and Whores? Certainly, if you will transmit 150 energy credits to cover my costs (heh heh heh)
David Short posted 03-31-99 12:01 PM ET

ahem.
To push this one slightly back on topic.
It belongs in the strategy forum.
The placement of cities may not be what you consider to be optimal, but it is hardly foolhardy.
In the begining small cities are the way to go.
Remember that two size one cities will produce from 4 squares while one size two city will only produce from three squares.
Well known result from the mongol strategy in the original civ.
Smaller overlapping cities can also specialize. and diversify.
Of course at the end when you have size 75 warrens, your production comes from orbital installations and not from your city squares anyway.
The only faction who really has to worry about placing cities for optimal growth would be Lal.
dfs
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: The AI city planning is stupid
WrexSoul	posted 03-28-99 03:04 PM ET The AI is stpuid in one very annoying respect: Base zones. They have an awful tendancy to overlap their own cities with new base areas. I think you should add a small fix for automated and AI colony pods to only build if they're at least 5 squares away from the nearest base. I think this'd help a lot. - WrexSoul \/ . vvv
JaimeWolf	posted 03-28-99 10:03 PM ET What makes you think that zoning your cities carefully so they don't overlap is a better strategy? Often I don't use close to all the squares around a city so another city overlapping in the area isn't an imposition. James
JasHawk	posted 03-29-99 01:24 AM ET I use the limit of my base areas all the time. And i find its behaviour annoying too. In fact if a pact brother lays a city that overlaps one of mine i go straight for vendetta. and also when i take another faction i colony pod cities that overlap into the ground. matt
Zero	posted 03-29-99 09:27 PM ET I've found that going for zero overlap is not very important, since you can't use all the squares until you have enough population. It's more important to get the best individual city sites, even if it means that you have a degree of overlap. Hab domes show up pretty late in the game, so just getting 14 squares per city won't limit you for a long time. In the late game it's more efficient to have zero overlap, true - except, of course, that overlap lets you fit more cities onto a given continent, and that gives you more bang for your satellite buck.
Evk	posted 03-29-99 09:44 PM ET Well, I think we have to take the degree of overlap into consideration here. Almost all my cities are touching or overlap a few squares and that's fine, but the computer sometimes builds cities literally two or three squares away from another one. You can't make a good argument that this is good planning.
WrexSoul	posted 03-29-99 10:26 PM ET I'm not talking about personal city development here. Your own ideas are just perfectly valid. But for opposing factions, the have no regard for planning, and often have the worst overlap ever. Not only does this hurt their own faction and developing capabilities, but they usually don't even do it to get bonuses or resources, and build horribly regardless. This is annoying to me, when they overlap MY city squares (and since they have a newer city they usually get their borders pushed into my city radius. Not only that, but when you get the stage of conquering their bases (one of my favorite fast ways of expanding my colony, especially early on or when I'm clearly technologically superior, or in this game a new twist with Mind Worms since I'm so fond of the Gaians), you get cities that can only use 15 or so of their potential 20 city squares. Now an example of absurdity I was talking about happened last game, when Peacekeeper Lal bulit three cities, like this ---OOO --OOOOO --OOBOO --OOXXX ---XXXOO -OOXOBOO OOOXXOOO OOBOXOO OOOOO -OOO I know it may look crappy, but this is the kind of computer base-planning that goes on. If you don't see what I mean paste this in a fixed size text editor. It is something that is deeeeply annoying, and would probably be easy enough to fix, since it already has something to find the distance from nearest bases for the territory borders assignment. What you do with your own territory is up to you. - WrexSoul \/ . vvv
Evk	posted 03-30-99 02:22 AM ET I intend to fill mine with chicken and whores.
Radegast2	posted 03-30-99 05:31 AM ET EVK; Great Idea, how do you design those in the workshop? I also got bored with the faction leader graphics, so patched the gifs with 'different' views!
Evk	posted 03-30-99 12:56 PM ET You desire the secret of Chicken and Whores? Certainly, if you will transmit 150 energy credits to cover my costs (heh heh heh)
David Short	posted 03-31-99 12:01 PM ET ahem. To push this one slightly back on topic. It belongs in the strategy forum. The placement of cities may not be what you consider to be optimal, but it is hardly foolhardy. In the begining small cities are the way to go. Remember that two size one cities will produce from 4 squares while one size two city will only produce from three squares. Well known result from the mongol strategy in the original civ. Smaller overlapping cities can also specialize. and diversify. Of course at the end when you have size 75 warrens, your production comes from orbital installations and not from your city squares anyway. The only faction who really has to worry about placing cities for optimal growth would be Lal. dfs