Rome Wasn't Built in One Turn: Replay-Grounded Reward Signals for Long-Horizon Freeciv Agents

Abstract

Training language-model agents to play long-horizon strategy games is hard because deterministic feedback is sparse and often arrives only at the end of a game. In-game scores can offer dense signals, but they do not reliably predict future outcomes: in 8-68% of position pairs across eight strategy games, the higher-scoring position leads to the worse outcome. We term this phenomenon scoreboard traps. In Freeciv, an open-source turn-based empire-building game where several players manage units, cities, and diplomacy over hundreds of turns, we look into better reward signals for gameplay agents. To facilitate this, we build CivHarness, an open system that saves current game states, branches on different decisions, and replays the game to future turns to provide measurable long-horizon feedback from saved positions. We use CivHarness to train CivTelescope, an LLM Judge that predicts which one of two game positions will yield the better outcome. On scoreboard-trap pairs, CivTelescope is 1.3-2.0 times more accurate than off-the-shelf language models, and it generalizes to new game starts, later turns, and unseen rules. We then train a Freeciv gameplay agent with CivTelescope as a dense reward, and call this recipe CivMarshmallow. When used in the middle stage of the game where scoreboard traps are common, CivMarshmallow reaches an average training phase gain of 8.94 points, 77% more than the best baseline, the end-of-game reward. Over the full 120-turn game, CivMarshmallow uses a hybrid reward that starts from the scoreboard or the end-of-game reward and shifts to CivTelescope as the game advances; this hybrid reward scores highest among the rewards we compare.