Ok, I have invested almost 2 dozen hours into the game and while I had loads of fun to begin with I have now reached the conclusion that the AI is simply too horrible for the game to be enjoyable. I knew that it suffered from some issues, but the fact that it literally doesn't build (or at the very least, extremely rarely) a lot of the units in the game like air power and nukes, doesn't build enough units unless you are playing on high difficulty levels and even then only because it cheats, and is just all around horrible at protecting itself thus removing all challenge from the game means that I just don't see the point in playing the game right now.

Don't get me wrong, I don't actually hate the actual game part of the game (though I do think it could use some improvements), its just that the AI is so bad that it sucks all of the fun out of the game. When and if it gets fixed I will probably start investing dozens of hours into Civ 5, but in the meantime I will probably just do something else with my free time.

Anyone else feels the same? :(

Anyone else feels the same? :(

Yes.

That, and I'm waiting for the permanent peace bug to be fixed.

The AI cant protect itself, thats the main problem. But its also not oppurtunist.

Early war with my neighbour Persia, one of my archers get severely wounded and I move him back behind my borders. One of Persias' scouts come into range, it can easily finish of my archer. Crap, lost an archer! - But no, the scout ignored it and continued exploring or whatever it did.

Also same war, I kill all their units within 10 turns whils not losing a single one of my own, mind you they were the aggressors, so they shouldve, right?

The only hard part is the Happiness hit you get from taking their cities.

Anyone else feels the same? :(

...yes:sad:

Every time I hear a naysayer of this game they remind me of Dermott from Venture Bros. "Civ V? Pfff. Man, I beat that game like a bajillion times when I was in kindergarten. I just use my patented GDR rush strategy and the AI's a total push-over. Except I don't play on harder levels because, like, the AI totally cheats."

@ something witty. I play civ 4 on deity and win about 50% of the time. The AI has advantages on that level that lead to production, money, and research bonuses. The AI is also given a jumpstart to get them going. It doesn't get stacks of a hundreds of units that would make it unreasonable to play at all.

The response the developers made to their game having a horrible AI was to give them so many units on higher levels that the AI doesn't need to have any strategy at all. It just puts a unit in every space and makes you try to plow through all of them.

The game is incredibly broken. I hope they will fix it, but unless they drop the 1 UPT system of combat I doubt they will ever be able to make the AI function properly.

Every time I hear a naysayer of this game they remind me of Dermott from Venture Bros. "Civ V? Pfff. Man, I beat that game like a bajillion times when I was in kindergarten. I just use my patented GDR rush strategy and the AI's a total push-over. Except I don't play on harder levels because, like, the AI totally cheats."

I laughed.

Last night's episode was fantastic + barfy

I'm sorry if I don't find the game fun knowing that the AI is getting massive bonuses. Don't misunderstand me, I realize that we will not see AIs that are very competitive for a long time, but I still expect the AI in strategy games I buy these days not to make stupid mistakes.

Like many have pointed out on these forums, the AI in CiV is just terrible, specifically tactically. I love many of the features that have been added, especially the idea of 1upt, but I find no enjoyment in watching the AI stumble around carelessly.

The response the developers made to their game having a horrible AI was to give them so many units on higher levels that the AI doesn't need to have any strategy at all. It just puts a unit in every space and makes you try to plow through all of them.

i havent tried to play on higher levels, remembering the uberstacks of the past, but thats exactly what you've described.

Now, though, they arent producing a stack of units that can plow through all your army and cities, they have to move it.

They get a production benefit, which they put into solid walls troops, which they kill you with.

The only way to beat Diety level, as always, is to play on Archepelago, with rain levels at highest, and hold a tiny island while they wipe each other out, until you get a cultural/space race/UN victory.

Or to put city states to highest and play as Alexander (with same condits) and make an army of others.:cool:

Lower leveled AIs may be more passive, but highers are still the same.

For sure it will be much more enjoyable (and I will get beaten more often, too!) if the AI fought war way better. Heck the other day, at Prince level, I sent an artillery to a city state at war with 2 others.. when everyone else still had Infantry... What did the CS do? It sent the Arty to the front line (with accompanying rifleman I had gifted right in tow) to be mowed down by Egyptian knights, then parked his rifleman within 2 hexes of the city to be bombarded into oblivion...

I've seen the same behaviour dozens of times now, the same "park a unit within firing range and leave it there with no purpose or reinforcement", over many games... it's really broken as people say.

Yet the same AI knows how to ROP rape (old Civ3 term "right of passage rape" aka putting units into position around a city, declaring war, no units are moved out so instant attacks on an important target who can't do anything against it).. so it should be fixable! Can't wait. Literally, can't wait, I still play lol.

There are always better things to do with your time than play a video game.

Like post on a video game forum.

I can't argue against the AI being bad, and it is a detriment.

If people can teach a computer to play chess, though, I'm pretty sure the devs can teach the ai to play this game.

Anyone else feels the same? :(
Yes. It just feels unlinke Civ to win every game from the beginning. I admit that Immortal was somewhat challenging, but mowing down scores of dumb AI units that move inside zone of control instead attacking etc is already getting old on me :sad:
Anyway, on to the Deity and then it'll be time put the game away and hope for the fixes. Which will come or not - after all soon it's going to be... Facebook Civilization!!! :rolleyes: Yay, right? Who cares about Civ5 when you have CivRev and CivFacebook? :crazyeye:

If you really want a challenge, find a game with good multiplayer support and play against other players instead of AI.

The AI cant protect itself, thats the main problem. But its also not oppurtunist.

Early war with my neighbour Persia, one of my archers get severely wounded and I move him back behind my borders. One of Persias' scouts come into range, it can easily finish of my archer. Crap, lost an archer! - But no, the scout ignored it and continued exploring or whatever it did.

Also same war, I kill all their units within 10 turns whils not losing a single one of my own, mind you they were the aggressors, so they shouldve, right?

The only hard part is the Happiness hit you get from taking their cities.

That only hard part is not really a problem thanks to the "ignore happiness" strategy.

That only hard part is not really a problem thanks to the "ignore happiness" strategy.
I completely agree. In my last game on Immortal thanks to vanishing luxuries bug (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=382974) I went all the way down to -79:mad: That didn't stop me from conquering whole continent, recover to +30:) and win the game in 1912AD.

Yeah I enjoyed it at first but the AI is really non existent during a war.... shelved til it gets fixed

Try OCC always war on Deity (not archipelago obviously since they cant invade...), seems like the only way to get a "challenge" in this game, normal map/game settings just don't do it anymore.

In Civ 3 I couldn't even get past Regent, but that's because I never bothered to learn to play the game correctly and just had fun with it.

For Civ 4 I played a ridiculous amount of games (a good thing imo) to eventually step up my game from Noble to Immortal, I once beat Deity but that's it. All standard map settings obviously.

Now in Civ 5 I'm steamrolling every Deity AIs with Horses/Swords/UU/you-name-it in the first 150 turns the same day I bought the game, there's not much thinking involved and almost no micromanagement required. Such a "strategy" wouldn't get you farther than Monarch on Civ 4, but even if they "fixed" this issue (more AI cheats?) and made Deity unrushable the game still feels VERY limited in terms of what you can do and how you can win, they just removed too much content from previous games and simplified the whole thing for casual gamers. It feels like I'm playing Civ Rev, which was ridiculously easy and boring.

I want my deep strategy game back. Civ 5 is all graphics and poor gameplay, sad.

Wow @Hassar - you've registered in 2007, in three years only 8 posts, and one in here...
Thank you for your input :)

The only hard part is the Happiness hit you get from taking their cities.

LOL! Quote of the day there. :) :goodjob:

Wow @Hassar - you've registered in 2007, in three years only 8 posts, and one in here...
Thank you for your input :)

Yeah. Unlike many Civ V lovers I've seen around here with less than 5 post and registered yesterday. Suspicious if you ask me...

I've actually seen quite a few of long time lurkers like me post their thoughts about Civ 5 so far :p

Yeah. Unlike many Civ V lovers I've seen around here with less than 5 post and registered yesterday. Suspicious if you ask me...
Nah it's ok, I think he's Canadian - they're one of a kind. Constable Benton Fraser from RCMP has built my whole ethical code and because Paul Gross I love Canada neverendingly :goodjob:
P.S. Sisiutil is Canadian too - I mean what else is there to say?

Oh Hassar's spoken again ^^

I got halfway through my first marathon game and have decided that I need to wait until there is either a major patch or expansion released.

One thing that might be nice to have more than a single setting for the difficulty level.

Like have AI be able to have settings like (beginner, rookie, average, intelligent, godly) then have penatly settings like Prince, King, Emperor, etc.

It might be able to done with a simple drop-down menu on the advanced setup screen that tells it you want the AI to play as "Smart" as you like rather than just use cheats.

I think the Civ 5 settings are already like that. The AI is as smart as it gets up to Prince ("normal" difficulty) and then the game explicitly says it gets advantages at higher levels.

If you really want a challenge, find a game with good multiplayer support and play against other players instead of AI.

So, you're saying, if you want a challenging game don't play Civ5?

Out of curiosity, how many people play a game that takes as long as a Civ game in multiplayer?

Can you promise not to complain again until the AI gets fixed?

Ok, I have invested almost 2 dozen hours into the game and while I had loads of fun to begin with I have now reached the conclusion that the AI is simply too horrible for the game to be enjoyable. I knew that it suffered from some issues, but the fact that it literally doesn't build (or at the very least, extremely rarely) a lot of the units in the game like air power and nukes, doesn't build enough units unless you are playing on high difficulty levels and even then only because it cheats, and is just all around horrible at protecting itself thus removing all challenge from the game means that I just don't see the point in playing the game right now.

Don't get me wrong, I don't actually hate the actual game part of the game (though I do think it could use some improvements), its just that the AI is so bad that it sucks all of the fun out of the game. When and if it gets fixed I will probably start investing dozens of hours into Civ 5, but in the meantime I will probably just do something else with my free time.

Anyone else feels the same? :(

So, you're saying, if you want a challenging game don't play Civ5?

Out of curiosity, how many people play a game that takes as long as a Civ game in multiplayer?

Civ multi-player games are super quick, all war games usually. Not very true to the spirit of Civ.

I got halfway through my first marathon game and have decided that I need to wait until there is either a major patch or expansion released.

Word.

It's so true, which makes it so much more sad...

I am also a former CIV IV deity player and man, does the AI suck in war!!

Countless times I have seen the AI move by barbarian encampments with their archer without even trying to fire or even walking past EMPTY encampments...

Whats worse, I gifted a unit to a city state to defend itsself. But instead of putting it into its heavily fortressed city, they move it onto a hill next to an enemy city! It gets bombarded, so they move it back. "Flee!!" I scream, what do they do? Move it right back there the next turn!! They never even used their crossbow man once to fire on the city! They just moved back and forth and got bombarded into oblivion... --> This is the prime example of AI unit "intelligence" in this game...

Something I like to do, to give me some fun from the game until AI gets fixed and finally the game is fully accessible to modders and they bring out some first emergency fixes:
Increase the no. of Civs a little above standard settings (e.g. Standard map with 12 CIVs) + Put all on random!
I like it, its fun! Random civ, random environment settings, random map, random personalities etc.

Thats how I still get my kick out of it, and you get to try some stuff out! :)

Whats worse, I gifted a unit to a city state to defend itsself. But instead of putting it into its heavily fortressed city, they move it onto a hill next to an enemy city! It gets bombarded, so they move it back. "Flee!!" I scream, what do they do? Move it right back there the next turn!! They never even used their crossbow man once to fire on the city! They just moved back and forth and got bombarded into oblivion... --> This is the prime example of AI unit "intelligence" in this game...

Perhaps it was just collecting experience points from the city bombarding it?

Yet the same AI knows how to ROP rape (old Civ3 term "right of passage rape" aka putting units into position around a city, declaring war, no units are moved out so instant attacks on an important target who can't do anything against it).. so it should be fixable! Can't wait. Literally, can't wait, I still play lol.


Is there ROP rape in civ5?
:confused:

When I declare war on the AI, my units are moved out of the enemy's territory!

I actually think the AI is pretty good overall, but has some aspects broken which ruins it. Specifically:

1. The AI doesn't know how to lay siege to a city. It sourrounds me, moves units in, but only takes pot shots and lacks cohesion. The AI needs to think in terms of unit clusters, not individual units - you put the Riflemen in FRONT and keep the Cannon in REAR, fortify the Rifles and pound the city with the Cannons. Shouldn't be too hard to program? Right now the AI thinks like a bunch of confused, leaderless Lieutenants rather than a General.

2. The AI will gift several Cities when losing a war. This should be removed completely. Capturing a City, even with all enemy units gone, takes time and will likely result in the death of one or more of my units. It slows me down and allows the AI to replace losses. Why is he throwing his entire empire sans Capital at my feet just to get 10 turns of peace? It makes absolutely no sense.

Is there ROP rape in civ5?
:confused:

When I declare war on the AI, my units are moved out of the enemy's territory!

ROP rape was patched in first or second update.

I just won on my first try at King and I have to say this is easier than civ4 by far. I always had problems with getting swapped by the AI war-machine in civ4 early game. In civ5 I am more than confident of beating the AI with a handful of units. I really hate the fact they have no navy at all (except England), and they always put troops into the water unprotected for me to destroy at will???

Not building enough units? I always see AIs building a lot of units. Much more then I could make for same size empire without getting drown in upkeep cost. But I'm playing on King so what do I know...

What is bigger issue is that my every unit is worth at least twice as his, since tactical AI is really bad.

For example, why would anyone shoot with ranged unit, when enemy troops is at adjacent tile, if enemy can't be killed with such shot. That's pretty much your dead ranged unit in next turn. Yet, AI does it all the time, instead fleeing two tiles in opposite direction.

Another issue is overpowering power of range 3 units. AI can't cope when attacked with something like that.

On the bright side, if the game is more simple in terms of options, it will attract lots of new players and that way keep the license alive and thriving. Not EVERYBODY over thirty still has time to play games for hours and hours.

Also, I could be mistaken, but wasn't the game designed with multiplayer in mind. Simple works better in Multiplayer and getting to make Civilization suitable for online multiplayer is quite a challenge.

If it is more for casual players like people say in this thread, give it to your friends as a gift! Get them hooked on Civilization! If it is that simple even your eighty year old mother could become a deity. She's seen the start of civilization after all.. ;-)

Also, I could be mistaken, but wasn't the game designed with multiplayer in mind. Simple works better in Multiplayer and getting to make Civilization suitable for online multiplayer is quite a challenge.

If it is more for casual players like people say in this thread, give it to your friends as a gift! Get them hooked on Civilization! If it is that simple even your eighty year old mother could become a deity. She's seen the start of civilization after all.. ;-)

The multiplayer support is really bad, though. Turns take *forever*, there's serious lag, no animations, the AI seems even dumber then in single player, and on it goes.

Civ 4 did MP better, and considering the suckiness of Gamespy that's saying something. The buddy I played Civ 4 MP with regularly doesn't even want to play a second game of Civ 5 MP because of just how slow it is (particularly the time between turns).

I tried Marathon today. Really determined to go for early domination. I conquered Europe & Asia with nothing but Hoplites, the AI apparently can't be bothered to build units proper. Staying stuck in Warrior & Archers while my Great General just lead 6 Hoplites around destroying civilizations at will before 1000 BC seems wrong overall in King's difficulty. I got bored n quit.