Just listening to episode 129 of Polycast, the opening discussion on is Civ V worth playing I had a thought on improving the AI's (at a global level) and the game.
It was said that the AI's DOW the player often, even if there has been a history of "peacefulness". Combine this with there being no real reason to forge long term friendships (combine or is it forced upon the player due to those DOW's?), the game kinda feels like your manipulating some AI's for research agreements and just viewing the rest as AI's that will eventually hate you.
What the game needs (or more likely what I hope Civ VI will have) is a meta-game history for the player and the AI's, and better in game incentives for co-operation. As the game stands there is only one winner and thus no reason to come second. But if the player and more importantly AI's had a meta-game goal of not winning single games but to have the best average finishing position over a number of games, combined with the in game mechanics that encourage teamwork then you would get the AI's evaluating "hey, this guys doing alright, I'll try and buddy with him to get a second place which is still pretty good".
At the meta-game level it would provide a number to rank human players and give us something to brag about (but would need some way to stop humans "gaming" the options, maybe humans play ranked games only on continent maps?). It could also provide the AI's opportunity to learn if the game details were uploaded (or am I being too future thinking to believe games companies would not just program AI's but include a way for them to improve against humans to give humans a better experience, especially when game data is available? No skynet jokes please )
Anyway it might be better.....
It was said that the AI's DOW the player often, even if there has been a history of "peacefulness". Combine this with there being no real reason to forge long term friendships (combine or is it forced upon the player due to those DOW's?), the game kinda feels like your manipulating some AI's for research agreements and just viewing the rest as AI's that will eventually hate you.
What the game needs (or more likely what I hope Civ VI will have) is a meta-game history for the player and the AI's, and better in game incentives for co-operation. As the game stands there is only one winner and thus no reason to come second. But if the player and more importantly AI's had a meta-game goal of not winning single games but to have the best average finishing position over a number of games, combined with the in game mechanics that encourage teamwork then you would get the AI's evaluating "hey, this guys doing alright, I'll try and buddy with him to get a second place which is still pretty good".
At the meta-game level it would provide a number to rank human players and give us something to brag about (but would need some way to stop humans "gaming" the options, maybe humans play ranked games only on continent maps?). It could also provide the AI's opportunity to learn if the game details were uploaded (or am I being too future thinking to believe games companies would not just program AI's but include a way for them to improve against humans to give humans a better experience, especially when game data is available? No skynet jokes please )
Anyway it might be better.....