I think the hotfix Patch changed more than in the Readme...

Socratatus

Emperor
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Messages
1,636
I`ve had a chance to run Civ 5 since the Hotfix patch and i`ve noticed a few (good) changes. i`ll list them.

1. Workers are much less likely to stop working for no reason now.
2. AI Civs seem less aggressive now. i`ve had two games on a continent with numerous Civs and not one declared war on me all the way into the Rennaissance. In fact, it wasn`t until a civ attacked another Civ that I had a Defensive pact with that I got dragged into a war. it seems that one has a decent chance of playing peacfully if he tries.
3. Mods. I notice that the game now REMEMBERS my Mods every session. before I had to retick the Mods, but now I don`t have to any more.

Good stuff.
 
I`ve had a chance to run Civ 5 since the Hotfix patch and i`ve noticed a few (good) changes. i`ll list them.

1. Workers are much less likely to stop working for no reason now.
2. AI Civs seem less aggressive now. i`ve had two games on a continent with numerous Civs and not one declared war on me all the way into the Rennaissance. In fact, it wasn`t until a civ attacked another Civ that I had a Defensive pact with that I got dragged into a war. it seems that one has a decent chance of playing peacfully if he tries.
3. Mods. I notice that the game now REMEMBERS my Mods every session. before I had to retick the Mods, but now I don`t have to any more.

Good stuff.

#2 sucks I hope it is not true. The game would be dreadfully boring.
 
I've only played one game since the patch. Started on a continent with Babylon and the Dutch. Was really surprised that neither of them declared war on me even though I settled cities aggressively and converted their cities when they asked me not to. It was really pretty strange, I had a massive army prepared to fight so maybe that discouraged them? Nevertheless, I hope #2 is not true and that my one game was just an anomaly
 
Nevertheless, I hope #2 is not true and that my one game was just an anomaly

Last night I started a game, and Suleiman took the city I planted near him with two CB and a horde of warriors at around turn 50. I had four CB of my own, but no roads and too far away, so *poof* went Machu.

I think it's just the luck of the draw. And I lost Machu for being stupid and not parking my army on it, which any rational person should have done considering how close it was to Suleiman.
 
I had a massive army prepared to fight

It is probably this bit - the AI sees your military score and reaslises you are not a pushover.
If you want a war, keep a smaller standing army - it will be more difficult but you will certainly get a war.
 
#2 appears to be random. I've played a few games with everyone playing nice, DoF's everywhere. I played another where Ottomans and Maya declared war almost right away, and a bit later Ghengis traveled all the away across from a decent sized continent to join in on the fun.

Only had the main and a single expansion, so it wasn't like I was bringing it upon myself.

Having a streak of Washington being in all my games and attempting to occupy my my empire throughout the entire game.
 
What I notice is the AI city-spamming like crazy. And pillage healing does make combat harder.
 
I play at immortal level, and I really have problem with AI aggressive city spamming. There are always 2 or more AI that spam cities right close at my borders which eventually drags me to war with them.
 
#2 sucks I hope it is not true. The game would be dreadfully boring.

I don`t think so. Everyone one else was still warring. I was actually trying very hard to be friends with everyone who wanted it and not start a war. Before, everyone would`ve eventually attacked me regardless what I do. Mindless attacking to be `less boring` is not good. If you want `exciting` simply be aggressive or not nice. that said I don`t mind the odd Civ attacking me unprovoked, just not everyone for no reason.

However, it might just be the luck of the draw, but so far, in two games, with close neighbours, no war if I play peacefully.

p.s. The city spamming still happens though, regardless if I warn them.
 
Hmmmm...they do seem a little less aggressive....in my current game it took forever for Sejong to DOW....though he hasn't been able to do much.... I've learned by lessons...I'm well-prepared...

This after "falling asleep" and letting the Atilla slip by my sentry unnoticed in my previous game. I had a couple of Archers but I didn't get them back fast enough and, alas, Madrid fell.... So I don't know...maybe slightly less aggressive, or maybe still a matter of the "luck of the draw"...???..

And it was a good game too...still in the early stages, my second city had Krakatoa ....as Spain that means 10-Science....from about turn 10 or 11 or so [maybe a bit higher...but I got the second city out "lickety-split" once I found the wonder...] ....I was churning through the early techs like I never have before.... some of those wonders are great if you can get them early....but their benefit gets watered down with time....

And thinking about a previous thread on Krakatoa, I wonder if the hot fix patch has made Krakatoa a bit more more accessible?.... As was said in that thread Krakatoa has usually been uselessly located somewhere mid-ocean... A welcome change if it is true... ;)
 
I find AI more aggressive in pretty much every single post-hotfix game, so i can't agree there, sorry.
Granted mainly i'm talking Immortal, but definitely not seeing less aggression by any means.

I do like that my game setup options are remembered...really awesome they finally implemented that.
 
I find AI more aggressive in pretty much every single post-hotfix game...i'm talking Immortal

That's been my experience as well. I find those with stronger militaries, who are within striking distance of me, are taking advantage of every opportunity to strike at my weak points. Although I've remained victorious (a few restarts), I've been very impressed post-patch.
 
In CiV feeling safe to me is not challenging. Sure, if the AI wasn't aggressive. I can sit there and build up my cities and concentrate on religion, and let my military lapse. The thing is I should have to keep looking over my shoulder. There has to be the possibility that other civs could attack at any moment, so I have to be prepared for when they do. Otherwise it would be boring.

Of course, there should also be a possibility for a peaceful game, but anxiety about the AI should never leave.

In any case, I do not think there is anything to worry about. I played my WWI scenario for a couple of hours the other night. Italy was at war with Greece. They sent two fairly large amphibious forces against Greece. One crossed the Adriatic via Northern Italy. The other assembled from colonies in North Africa. I was playing as Austria-Hungary and thought initially they were coming for me. If Italy did DoW me, I would have been finished. I have been in this huge slugfest with Russia for about 100turns. After signing a DoF Russia offered. Nicholas backstabbed me two turns later. It was an awesome backstab. I thought to myself...why, you dirty...

Anyway, my army has been battered time and time again by these screaming Russians. Nope! The AI has no shortness of aggression after the hotfix, as far as I can tell. :D
 
In CiV feeling safe to me is not challenging. Sure, if the AI wasn't aggressive. I can sit there and build up my cities and concentrate on religion, and let my military lapse. The thing is I should have to keep looking over my shoulder. There has to be the possibility that other civs could attack at any moment, so I have to be prepared for when they do. Otherwise it would be boring.

Of course, there should also be a possibility for a peaceful game, but anxiety about the AI should never leave.

Unfortunately, this is rather contradictory. A strategically peaceful game is not possible if one has to worry about the AI attacking at any moment. As long as the AI is on random backstab timers, about the best you can hope for is a defensive game, not a peaceful one.
 
Unfortunately, this is rather contradictory. A strategically peaceful game is not possible if one has to worry about the AI attacking at any moment. As long as the AI is on random backstab timers, about the best you can hope for is a defensive game, not a peaceful one.

A peaceful game is possible. Many have been able to do it. However, I do not know of any strategy game that you do not have to worry about your opponents attacking you or drawing you into a war. Trying to play peaceful in a strategy game is challenging indeed. CiV is supposed to be built for that possibility. Although, I am a warmonger, and I prefer an aggressive AI anyday over a pushover. I would not play if the AI sat there and let me conquer it, without fighting back or trying to stop me. Playing peaceful has never been all that interesting to me.
 
I've played 2 games since the Hotfix and neither one were they less aggressive.

*Catherine went on a tear and conquered Dido and all but 1 CS on her continent, settled a city on the tip of my island and started sending units over. I had to DoW to start sniping the units with my Caravels to keep her from sending more, then she invaded with a pretty varied army. She had gatlings, cannon, rifles, cavalry, and cossacks.

*The game I'm playing now has Harold west of me and Suleiman on the south. I finished Statue of Zeus, next turn both DoW'd and sent in some pretty formidable armies with good mix of Comp Bows, Spearman, and catapults to my measly archers and warriors. The only thing that saved me was walls and archers in my 2 cities. I had a lot of jungle tiles south so I was able to put a scout on a hill to watch troop movements. My western city was on a hill and had 3 river tiles in front.

Actually that's not aggressive as much as good AI. Your neighbor builds a Wonder for taking cities, you have an army, he doesn't. When he gets one he's gonna come whoop you. Now or never!
 
Top Bottom