AutomatedTeller
Frequent poster
This is a remarkably hijacked thread.
Yes, clearly failgold with trees is powerful. You should try it on arboreal...
Yes, clearly failgold with trees is powerful. You should try it on arboreal...
Yep...and the bigger the maps, the more units, the more redonk lag gets.I remember when I bought a new (beastly) computer and thought, "finally! I can play past 1000ad in civ4 without every click taking 2s to register". I also remember my feeling of disappointment when it still took just as long...
Yeah, I heard that same song and dance about IV when I purchased IIIComplete circa autumn 2007. Now that I have purchased IVComplete earlier this year, I hear this about V. It's a shame that devs are using the "consumers" as their "beta" testing ground. This is fine and dandy when it comes to open source software. Heck, that's the whole point. But when it comes to "retail" versions, things like UI must work. Patches are supposed to be for polish only.Civ5 otoh has no soul at all. It's just plain stupid and makes me wanna kick the developers in the nuts.
If Blizzard could make the AIs smart enough to beat most humans at Starcraft II, Firaxis should be able to make smarter AIs too.
Granted, Blizzard has A LOT more money to spend on development.
All other things is secondary to that.
Back to topic: To summarize, fail-gold from forests is really GOOD. Any objections?
just like the bs they brought in the game instead of civics (keep forgetting what it's called... maybe because it's such a horrible game mechanic compared to civics)
This was one of the chief reasons for the hate against IV. "What is this civic crap, [censorship] that!"
1UPT does blow. That's a totally different game a la Panzer General II.
So there is always to strike balance between good AI and fun AI.
you have to realize that since it's mathematically impossible for AI to "playout" the map to the win through simulating turns, that every programmer tasked with programming AI here will have to do mostly heuristic algorithms maybe combined with min-max (but I think civ devs don't use min-max at all).
That means that AI in CIV can't be better then the human who programmed it.
there is always to strike balance between good AI and fun AI.
@TMIT: is it possible the unit-move slowness has something to do with multiplayer? I can imagine some sort of display-after-each-move is needed there, but maybe they forgot to turn it off for single player?
you have to realize that since it's mathematically impossible for AI to "playout" the map to the win through simulating turns, that every programmer tasked with programming AI here will have to do mostly heuristic algorithms maybe combined with min-max (but I think civ devs don't use min-max at all).
That means that AI in CIV can't be better then the human who programmed it.
Btw just for the lulz... when I was studying programming I had there a course about AI and programming AI (well it was mostly only part of the course) and I have to say that I loved it.
So there is always to strike balance between good AI and fun AI.
That said, it wouldn't hurt for somebody to turn on the profiler and find out what the CPU is doing between turns.