RB3 - Daring Deity with Ottomans

Hmm. I guess we had a protection deal going with Helsinki then? You could have taken Monty's money and used it to pay off Napoleon I suppose, I can't criticize the decision to try and get Helsinki back though. Without the tech-trading menu from civ4 and with Aztec never showing up as top or bottom demographically, no way to tell where they are at in tech.

Yes I think we did. In hindsight not taking the peace offer was a real blunder but I just saw a lot of spearmen (not even pikes) and thought that the two cats plus three knights near Istanbul should be able to grind through to Helsinki. I guess I under-estimated the deity AI.

Wow I don't even know what to say. I know exactly how SevenSpirits feels- I often look at a big battle and think "OK I'm sure I could win this, I just don't really want to". It's really stressful and not fun, especially when making just one little slip can be so devastating. You guys handled it well though. We haven't lost any units and Monty is already offering peace.

Alpaca- when the AI wants to negotiate peace but says they can't make a reasonable deal, that means they're only willing to take peace if you offer them a LOT of cities.

I'm sort of hoping that this war gets finished before it comes around to me again, because I'm really not looking forward to all that micromanagement. At least we've got trebuchets coming in soon, and cannons pretty soon after that. I think we'll be safe, it'll just be a lot of grinding.

Well I lost a catapult when the combat didn't do the expected damage and I chose to sacrifice that rather than a knight. That would have been avoidable if I hadn't taken the risk but I wanted to take that elephant down. Another lesson learned, though, I should know that taking risks like this is bad play on deity.

Lurkers Comment:

Does the 62 patch mean that neither party gets the tech from an RA, if war is declared? I would think the side that declare would lose theirs, but the attacked side did not break the deal. They should gets something back, either the tech or the investment.

Yes it does. I think this is a necessary nerf to the research agreements but it's annoying the AI doesn't even wait a single turn for it. Or maybe they figured out "hey, it's deity, I have wads of cash but the human has none" :p
 
First of all, major kudos to SevenSpirits and alpaca for playing us through some of those rough turns. That did not look particularly fun or interesting there, more akin to doing actual work.

This game itself feels like a total joke. We've played 125 turns, up to 200AD. In that brief span, we've had war declarations from *SIX* different AI civs:

* Japan
* Greece
* Rome
* France
* Aztecs
* Siam

Despite having enemies on every side, and a gigantic front to defend, the AI still hasn't managed to capture even one of our cities. They can take city states, but only because they're spread out and not part of our own grid of settlements. In Civ3 or Civ4, if you faced that many war declarations on Deity, you'd be dead in seconds. In Civ5, it means lots and lots of tedious turns killing AI units. :rolleyes:

Um, I guess we try to get peace with at least one or two of these AIs, right? Maybe we should take whatever Aztec option is on the table, just to make things easier. France especially would be nice to have peace, although it doesn't sound like Napoleon is interested. We've almost got our backlines settled, and then we can start moving forward and conquering/razing the AI's cities. It feels like we could do one of two things there:

- Go after Siam first, since they're the strongest AI.
- Go after Siam last, and remove our western front by conquering Aztecs/France first.

I have no idea which would be preferable, and it might be determined by in-game circumstances. Good luck uberfish.

Not even looking forward to my turns at this point... :(
 
Lurker:

Yes it does. I think this is a necessary nerf to the research agreements but it's annoying the AI doesn't even wait a single turn for it. Or maybe they figured out "hey, it's deity, I have wads of cash but the human has none" :p
Yeah, let's keep hoping that Civ5 AI is capable of something more than randomly move units around. If we'll just keep telling that to ourselves perhaps it'll come true? Within our heads only, but still :D

EDIT
As for the thread it'd be best skip Siam(strong Phants) and France(20:strength: Musketeers) and focus on Monty, but since none of the big guys want to have peace, and Alex looks like it wants to join in the dogpile... :dunno:
 
I think our best bet is to stay at war for a while with everyone, at least until they offer us a sweet peace deal. As long as we're at war we can wear down their armies, killing their veteran units and preventing them from upgrading pikemen -> riflemen. We can also prevent them from building up a huge force that could roll over us if they declare war suddently. Meanwhile we're earning good experience for our catapults, and GG points.

We don't really need to go on the offensive anywhere, just holding the line is fine. If we do get the chance to go on the offesive, though, it's probably best to go after Siam since they're the #1 civ for now.
 
lurker

just to strengthen the feeling of diplomacy in this game...
Today i started earth map King settings with Iroquis after settling 4 cities at T60 I was DoWed by 2 AIs...

wtf the devs were thinking? they just made the game with no real diplomacy, it's stupid, when I would want to play rush games I could go to multiplayer scene...

good job on fighting deity AIs though... I hope you will own them!
 
First of all, major kudos to SevenSpirits and alpaca for playing us through some of those rough turns. That did not look particularly fun or interesting there, more akin to doing actual work.

This game itself feels like a total joke. We've played 125 turns, up to 200AD. In that brief span, we've had war declarations from *SIX* different AI civs:

* Japan
* Greece
* Rome
* France
* Aztecs
* Siam

Despite having enemies on every side, and a gigantic front to defend, the AI still hasn't managed to capture even one of our cities. They can take city states, but only because they're spread out and not part of our own grid of settlements. In Civ3 or Civ4, if you faced that many war declarations on Deity, you'd be dead in seconds. In Civ5, it means lots and lots of tedious turns killing AI units. :rolleyes:

Um, I guess we try to get peace with at least one or two of these AIs, right? Maybe we should take whatever Aztec option is on the table, just to make things easier. France especially would be nice to have peace, although it doesn't sound like Napoleon is interested. We've almost got our backlines settled, and then we can start moving forward and conquering/razing the AI's cities. It feels like we could do one of two things there:

- Go after Siam first, since they're the strongest AI.
- Go after Siam last, and remove our western front by conquering Aztecs/France first.

I have no idea which would be preferable, and it might be determined by in-game circumstances. Good luck uberfish.

Not even looking forward to my turns at this point... :(

Yeah deity is really bad. It's so much of a grind every turn starts taking > 10 mins. It's fun doing that for 20 turns but on this difficulty it never stops. That's why I usually prefer Immortal or Emperor, I play against myself most of the time anyways because the AI isn't so much of a challenge. Napoleon, by the way, sent three or four more archers for our old horseman to clear up.

I don't think we have the resources to push an attack to be honest, not with a two-front war. If we peace out with Monty, and he agrees to make peace with Brussels, we might be able to push against Nappy or Siam but the timing is bad for a war against either due to their strong UU. I think we should wait until we have artillery and stay at war with everyone until then. Luddite mentions an important point: It's useful to "leech" the AI continuously so they don't build up an army that can just overwhelm us. Staying at war with them is, quite strangely, a better idea than signing a peace for 20 turns or something.

@Guardian_PL: I was being sarcastic, too ;)
 
Guys, I am sorry about this, but I can't play any more. It's so boring that I'm actually close to tears. It's a combination of the bad interface, having to order every single unit individually, being unable to effectively queue any commands, having to hover over tiles to check if they have roads because the trading post graphics look like someone ate all the extra roads you are not supposed to build and then puked them out, having to kill so many freaking AI units, building the same 3 things in every city, and the city governors not working well on their own.
Ouch - This lurker can't believe the amount of issues and unhappy people with the game.

All these reports are killing any attempt to rekindle interest in the series. This is from someone that played Civ1 with the settlers looking like covered wagons thru 4. Along with colonization and alpha centraui (sp?).
Not to mention ran 100 Civ3 SGs, played a few GOTM, and some RB events...
Right now if I wanted to play more Civ it will be 4!
 
(lurker here)

Sulla is correct about survival against consecutive early war declarations by 6 deity level AIs being crazy. The poor military AI is the single greatest problem for Civ V right now. The ICS stuff is problematic, sure, but it is easily fixable. Hell, I already fixed it myself in my game through modding. Should I have to do that? Nah. But it doesn't break the game because it is so easily fixed.

But if the military AI is ridiculously pathetic there's almost nothing we can do about it. There's no way to fix things if the AI cannot use its military in at least a mediocre fashion. The AI doesn't need to be the second coming of Napoleon to be able to defeat a human player when it has an order of magnitude more units of a higher average tech level, it just has to not be completely incapable of the most basic functions.

I hope Firaxis fixed the AI 'cause I don't know if we can.
 
(lurker here)

Sulla is correct about survival against consecutive early war declarations by 6 deity level AIs being crazy. The poor military AI is the single greatest problem for Civ V right now. The ICS stuff is problematic, sure, but it is easily fixable. Hell, I already fixed it myself in my game through modding. Should I have to do that? Nah. But it doesn't break the game because it is so easily fixed.

But if the military AI is ridiculously pathetic there's almost nothing we can do about it. There's no way to fix things if the AI cannot use its military in at least a mediocre fashion. The AI doesn't need to be the second coming of Napoleon to be able to defeat a human player when it has an order of magnitude more units of a higher average tech level, it just has to not be completely incapable of the most basic functions.

I hope Firaxis fixed the AI 'cause I don't know if we can.

Although it's true that the AI does a lot of stupid stuff in this game, I think people are unduly harsh on it in this respect. The fact is that once you get past early warrior/horseman rushes, any sort of offensive war is extremely tough in this game. The defender has all sorts of advantages. 1 UPT means they can only move a limited number of units at once, and rivers/mountains really consctrict the movement, while the defender enjoys road movement. For example that horde of spears that Monty has looks scary, but he can only attack us with at most 5 at a time, and we can actually kill 5 spears/turn with catapults and knights without losing anything. The attacker can't see into the terrain, so they're forced to move in blindly. Defending seige units can kill units in one blow as they come in, while invading seige units get destroyed easily by mounted units. And of course anything that ends turn on open terrain is as good as dead.

There's just no good option for invading at this point in the game. If you want to invade the AI you usually have to wait for them to throw away all their units, first.
 
lurker's comment:
Ouch - This lurker can't believe the amount of issues and unhappy people with the game.

Yes, the game is fun at first, but the fundamentally broken game design and AI pretty much limit its replay value.

Also, there's something really weird going on with the game testing. For instance, I'm not sure how they could not have noticed the fact that broken research agreements due to war give the tech anyway immediately, since that's going to happen pretty much in every single game.

The fact is that once you get past early warrior/horseman rushes, any sort of offensive war is extremely tough in this game

The 4/5-move mounted units help a lot with this, since you can just go back if you see something unexpected, and can just attack repeatedly from the same square with multiple units in the same turn (retreating the previous attacker).

FWIW, I just won a deity standard pangea by domination on turn 157 by attacking everyone with Companion Cavalry and expanding exclusively through puppets after 4 cities (ICS might be better though, at least for non-Greece).

Regarding the game, a few tips/question:

1. Why are you not fully exploring the map? Wouldn't a scout and/or work boat be a good investment, due to the information, natural wonders and city states to find?

2. You can sell cities to the AI, especially useful for just conquered cities that you don't want or need.
This is particularly effective if the city is next to an allied city state at war with whoever you are selling the city to, since the city state might well conquer it, and use it to produce military units to assist you.
They don't always buy them: they seem to be more willing to buy if they are near to their territory and have resources nearby, but not totally sure.

3. You can sometimes get the AIs to declare war on each other for cheap. For instance, on turn 110 Montezuma would have accepted 190 gold + OB to declare on Napoleon, which might have been quite a good investment, as it wastes their units without tying up your units to do that yourself.

4. The Ottomans have the Sipahi, which is a 5-move 22-strength mounted unit, and thus probably as overpowered as Greece's companion cavalry and an apparently good candidate for an army to take over the world. It might take a while though until you can get a sizable number of them.

 
(lurker!)

There's just no good option for invading at this point in the game. If you want to invade the AI you usually have to wait for them to throw away all their units, first.

I actually agree with you for the most part; I just think the fact that the AI is so perfectly willing to throw away hordes of units is a serious issue. The AI should play much more defensively unless they have overwhelming numbers, serious tech advantages, or nothing but clear terrain ahead.

The argument that anybody would take massive casualties in a serious attack through terrain against prepared defenses before the advent of things like artillery and air power is true... which is why it is monumentally stupid for the AI to be so willing to do it. Trading 10 units for 0 of the human players is not a winning strategy under almost any circumstances.
 
lurker: Probably the AI - just as the human - does not know what else to do in this game ;)
 
Aoeu, to reply to your good comments, it's been almost impossible to explore the map because we've been at war for the entirety of the game. Couldn't really afford to go send units exploring with the enemy at the gate. I wish we had done better, but you play the hand that you're dealt. We've also made the decision as a team not to sell cities to the AI for cash, which is a pretty egregious exploit. Why the development team left that kind of thing in the game is beyond me. :confused:

Getting the AIs to declare war on one another is a good idea, and one that we should keep in mind. Might be too late now though, since we appear to be heading for an Always War situation here. Finally, the sipahi would be a great unique unit, if it wasn't a replacement for the lancer, and thus horribly unupgradeable. (Why don't knights upgrade to lancers? It makes the lancer almost completely useless as a unit.) Maybe we'll rush buy one or two of them; can't see us actually building very many though.

Thanks for the comments, all. :)
 
lurk

@sulla
lancers should be good at hunting other mounted units from the tooltip description (why don't we see bonuses/maluses as in CIV I don't understand, another artificial difficulty thing?), so I suppose they could be good against the siamese for your game right now.

I too don't understand why they are not upgradable from knights, but probably because of the hidden bonus?
 
lurker's comment:

Just for what its worth, I know this is probably an arduous slog for you guys, but its really interesting reading for us lurkers. RB succession games had a lot to do with making me fall in love with Civ4, and they're only reinforcing my opinion that Civ5 is many miles away from being a game I want to keep playing. Still, I appreciate the effort immensely.

 
Every unit only has one upgrade, for knights it's cavalry. Lancers are a very problematic kind of unit:

- They get a -50% defensive bonus. This means when they defend, they're dead almost all the time. Especially against artillery which one-shots them without upgrades.

- They can not be upgraded into nor be upgraded from, making them worthwhile only for a very short timespan and only if you buy some.

- They are also not especially good against cavalry because they are weaker and receive no special bonuses. It's another one of those blatant lie tooltips like the wonders or Freedom Policy :lol:

And no, the elephants get +50% against mounted units so they would still be very strong against lancers. You can use them like I use knights, for hit and run, and the Sipahi would probably be decent for that with their 5 moves. But they're nowhere near as powerful as CC (not that that's a bad thing) which not only have five moves but are also stronger than any other unit they can face for a long time.

Another interesting thing about the Sipahi is their free pillage but since the deity AI has a blanket of units on every tile and rivers still stop them that's pretty useless, too.

I agree that trying to bribe the AI into war is probably a good idea. I sometimes try to but the problem is that the AI so often changes its mind that you'd have to check every few turns, which is extra annoying. If the interface were actually as good as is always claimed, you should have an overview panel of who would accept which treaties.
 
So I have a two front war to fight, again.

t125 - Sign peace with Monty to move those troops to the French front, because we don't have enough troops to make progress on three fronts at once, two might be manageable. The Helsinki situation is obviously annoying, but there are just too many forces to deal with right now and there is a city and about 15 troops in the way. Can't see how to kill the wounded elephant at Genoa without losing units, I make our units hold our ground. That city has 29 defence anyway (curiously, the city state appears to have a great general) and shouldn't fall in a hurry.

We have a couple of universities in production which I'm not sure about but don't have strong feelings about, so I leave them alone.

On the computer's turn: Monty wants a pact of secrecy against Napoleon and I accept, war between these two would be very helpful. Rameses wants a research agreement, but also wants us to throw in an extra 100 gold... I simply won't trade 2-for-1 or throw in extra gold for a research agreement that benefits both sides equally because it offends my sense of fair trading. So I tell him where to stick his research agreement.

That new Egyptian city is now shooting at some random Siamese troops, hopefully they'll take it out and I can get rid of the city that way.

t126 - 4 outdated French units are killed, quiet on Siamese front, 1 elephant shows its face up north and I send our pike that way. Hired an extra scientist to speed physics by 1 turn from 4 turns to 3. I sold the monument in Neapolis off, for 6 gold, and disbanded one worker taking us down to 8 which seems quite sufficient for everything.

t127 - 2 more outdated French units killed. That one elephant in the north seems to be deterred by our pike. Siam is moving on Akhetaten now.

on the computer's turn Genoa spawns a pike which kills the wounded elephant for us. Go city-states! Knights seem to be a particularly bad unit choice for us right now considering Siam's troop composition.



t128 - Physics is in, Steel in 3 turns. Neapolis burns down. I guess I can wait for Siam to get rid of Akhetaten. I upgrade our 4 catapults to trebuchets. Ayshe and Bursa finished their settlers and I order two more. I notice Edirne has been set up as a production centre and is making a knight. Because these ICS cities could be working any tile in the 3 radius it can get rather confusing what they're supposed to be doing. Anyhow I put the knight on hold since Siam's mainly fielding elephants and pikes right now. Switch it to a barracks instead, which should be done around the time we get gunpowder.

After some thought I decide to rebuild Neapolis on the same site, obviously naming the replacement city Neaneapolis. Akhetaten is actually a great defensive location, we can put ranged units behind the city and the city and river will protect them. One of our two new settlers is destined for a coastal site in the NW and the other for the hill 3SW of Constantinople if I can push the French forces back some.

t129 - Oh crap (I don't think this screenshot needs more description)



Anyway, we get to shoot that first elephant for now taking it to 60% health. Pikemen! Get ready to earn your pay!

On the French front I managed to push forward slowly - they're having a hard time taking Brussels. Angkor Wat was built, probably in that Aztec city just to our west as it's been expanding borders rather fast.



t130 - Akhetaten is surrounded by Siamese forces and at 2 hp now, however in their haste to capture the city they're completely ignoring the presence of our army. I paid Ramesses 50 gold for his open borders so I could kill 2 elephants and a cat that were next to the city while Siamese forces are distracted, definitely worth it.



computer turn: Akhetaten fell to Siamese forces as expected, our top knight was attacked by an elephant but the river crossing meant it survived, and we have a pike ready to take his place. City state pikes are doing a great job of killing archers but I think Brussels is probably going to go down soon.

t131: steel to gunpowder, do some quick arithmetic and fire a couple of scientists somewhere in the north - after checking around our cities (Economic advisor doesn't help annoyingly) it looks like the scientist situation is:

GS due in MLP on turn 145, rifling due on about turn 158, and GS due in Ayshe on turn 169

so that 2nd GS will be too late to speed our Artillery progress.

City state pikes are doing a great job of killing enemy archers. I advanced our forces some more to fill the gap in the Monaco/Brussels defence line and founded Kayseri. Also one more Northern backyard city went up.



Took out Akhetaten with the knights, killing a green health elephant unwisely hiding in the city for free, and reform our defence line:



Because of the roads our trebs can move 1 step, set up, and throw rocks at that elephant, killing it. So far 4 elephants down to us and 1 down to Genoa. That Siamese city to the east has a knight, I'm not sure where they got it from since the elephant UU replaces knight, probably a city-state. Our military advisor reports that we have a very confused crossbow wondering exactly where 1.6666626903 movement points get you:



t132 - Killed more obsolete French troops as usual, only seen one musket on that front for some reason. One elephant crossed the river to attack Fort Akhateten, unfortunately due to an unlucky combat roll we didn't kill it with our knight in the city and left it at 1 or 2 hp. On the computer's turn the elephant attacks the city and dies but does 9 damage in the process (ouch), while another elephant suicides trying to cross the river against our pike on the hill.

The city-states have muskets now.

t133 - doesn't look like I can hold the city but I can at least wear Siam down, another elephant that crossed the river was killed by our pike and treb bombardment. Unfortunately the Siamese knight I mentioned earlier shows up, charges our wounded pike down across the river and kills it for my first combat loss of this game (boo, hiss). I decide not to make another pike and save our money for janissaries instead since gunpowder is in very soon. France is retreating with very heavy losses on the Kayseri front and Brussels is saved.

I notice the knight keeping an eye on greece is our medic, and order him to swap places with one of the wounded ones at the Siamese front. Edirne finished its barracks, I let it get back to work on the knight it was producing previously.

t134 - Another unlucky combat roll with a pike left me in the situation with one badly damaged elephant next to the 2hp city of Akhetaten again. Since the city is definitely going to fall on the computer's turn, I decide to sell it back to the Egyptians for 75 gold, because they've been getting free bugged open borders from us for a while and I want something back in return.

computer turn: Well that didn't go as expected. For some reason, selling the city to Egypt magically repaired the defences to half health, then on Egypt's turn it rushbought the city walls you can see in the screenshot. Meaning it barely survives this turn, which I didn't really expect or want to happen - I wanted Siam to capture it so I could recapture dammit!! On the bright side, this means our pike in the city gets to live. The next elephant that shows up will probably take the city.

t135 - Just healing/consolidation this turn. Here's our position, most units are on fortify mode but they should all be visible on this screen except for the knight pulling sentry duty at Osaka.



No decent trades were available this turn so I didn't trade anything. Instead I just stockpiled money so we could rush out janissaries if needed. Monty wants a research pact (he's not demanding the extra 100 gold like Ramesses is, which is a relief), I'd probably take that one. He is unwilling to go to war though and no one will sign peace. Now that we've stabilized, maybe we can think about putting a 3rd battle group together and opening another front against Siam east of Kyoto. Btw I love our Japanese puppet governors. They build useful things like circuses! Unfortunately we now have minor beaker overflow because the cost of the gunpowder tech changed while we were researching it, not sure if this is a discount for other civs knowing it like civ4 has.

I had fun trying to figure out the best moves to push the AI back. Gunpowder due in 1, I guess that will boost our currently low power rating. Forbidden Palace due in 9. Artillery in about 30 at a guess, less if the FP boosts our science rate significantly.
 

Attachments

  • RB3 500AD.Civ5Save
    760 KB · Views: 172
Lurker:


Excellent round uberfish, well done and kudos for perseverance! :goodjob:

I guess that playing Civ5 in short bursts like that can be actually ok - if one person would be to kill off that bazillion units turn after turn after turn... :crazyeyes: Now at least you get to have a breather while other participants are skeetshooting :)
 
Nicely done! I love how that Egyption city traded hands 3 times during your turns, and went in a full circle back to Egypt. I hope it does that again lol. I also like your city name choice.

I notice Siam has a lot less units in that last picture. Hard to really tell, but it seems like a good sign.
 
Top Bottom