Game Theory: Civilization 5
Civilization 5 is a real time strategy game (RTS) that has been around for many years now. Players are pitted against each other or against AI and must build up a civilization from scratch in order to conquer their competitors. Like many of the other blog post about Game Theory, strategies for RTS games can easily be broken down into a payoff matrix and analyzed to acquire Pure and Mixed strategies. Of course, since Civilization 5, like all RTS’, contains many features and rules that create very complex and varied strategies there’s very little room for me to represent the whole game in one payoff matrix. Thus, for the scope of this blog, I will focus on the overall, typical strategies that 2 players can pit against each other.
The typical strategies that players choose from are economy, diplomacy, and aggression. With a focus on building the civilization’s economy, players are able to build up wealth, level up in technology faster, and make expansion efforts easier. The trade off in doing this strategy would be a weak militia which puts them in a bad position during combat, but by focusing on economy, one can win by simply outpacing the other opponents. Diplomacy is another route players can take. In a typical map, there are many other civilizations that neighbors the players. These are controlled by AI in a 2 player match, which can themselves choose which strategy to implement depending on the players actions. If the diplomacy strategy was in play, these neighbors can become valuable allies and resources. In the late game, one can win on diplomacy once the Atomic Era begins and the United Nations is found. The most popular but also most difficult strategy is going all out offensive. In order to win through aggression, one must conquer the capital cities of all the civilizations in the game. This is easier said then done, especially if other player take the aggressive route. With all these strategies in mind, I have crafted a quick payoff matrix of the game below.
| Player A | ||||
| economy | diplomacy | offense | ||
| economy | 0.5,0.5 | 1,1 | 0,1 | |
| Player B | diplomacy | 1,1 | 1,1 | 0.5,1 |
| offense | 1,0 | 1,0.5 | 0,0 |
From this matrix, one can see that there is no clear dominate strategy. It requires a mixed strategy, which makes sense since RTS games must be well balanced or else there can be no variations in gameplay. It is interesting to apply game theory to modern day strategy games and try to decipher who can win once they take a firm strategy.