Info on Next Patch

gunter said:

You should have contributed more I agree

Click to expand...

Gunter. The only reason I respond to you is because you clearly need attention. There's no other reason why you keep creating strawmen and attacking them and that's all you're really doing here. You don't just bend someone else's words so that they become targetable, you pull things out of thin air, contribute it other members, then attack the member based on that.

So please, link to a single post I've made where I said the AI handled air and naval units greatly.

Wanna know the difference from me and you ?

I post in a thread saying my opinion against the developers , you express your against me.

I would suggest you to focus more on contributing offering ideas and criticizing if you believe the game is not good as it should be.

For example you could add just here below your opinion on naval and air units managed by AI.

Do you have a opinion beside the one on me ?

Thx

gunter said:

Wanna know the difference from me and you ?

Click to expand...

I don't create strawmans. Lie outright about other people's views and make a huge deal about a UI preference. I really don't want to hear what you think the difference is because I already know the difference. Anyone reading this thread can see the big difference between you and I so you're simply posting for your own benefit. I have little in common with you except with both know enough English to hold a conversation.

I post in a thread saying my opinion against the developers , you express your against me.

Click to expand...

Except you stated your opinion as fact and continue to argue the DNA argument which no one got until you finally said something about "emotion". At that, people started pointing out that AIs don't have emotion. At that point, you started attacking users directly.

So, while I was pointing out the flaws in your argument (like many other players, both anti and pro-CiV), you were attacking your critics directly by calling them Firaxians and for whatever reason, Republicans.

I would suggest you to focus more on contributing offering ideas and criticizing if you believe the game is not good as it should be.

Click to expand...

That's not how this works. I've been vocal about the difficulty of modding, the AIs problems with air and nuclear units, diplomacy, etc. The problem is that you see everyone who isn't foaming at the mouth attacking the game as being mindless fanboys.

For example you could add just here below your opinion on naval and air units managed by AI.

Click to expand...

That isn't the issue. The issue is that since I didn't say nothing about the AI's handling of Air units in this thread, you said that I believe the AI uses naval and air units to great effect despite the fact at no point have I said the AI even used air units. Actually, I'm one of many people who pointed out the AI doesn't use air units.

And I'm one of those people who think the AI can do more with navies but given I haven't been in a naval game for a long time now on a decent-sized map, I can't comment whether or not the patch improved anything.

Do you have a opinion beside the one on me ?

Click to expand...

You didn't ask for my opinion before.

Ok so let's try to move your energies speaking about the next patch as the title says.

Keep on posting against gunter doesn't help to build up a serious thread, after all if such a thread has been done on Civ Fanatics forums the reason is that a patch is under development but it seems you wanna patch me instead of civ V........and I can assure you I am not keen to be patched by men as you are trying to do.

Now Children, if you don't stop this bickering right now, I'm just going to turn this car around & go home!!!

Does anyone know if this patch only address the AI in single player games or will it also help the AI in multi player games?

Sonereal and everyone else, as hard as it will be, can we please all agree to ignore the village idiot?

Now, as to diplomacy, before CIV5 was first released, I was really excited to read that tiles could be purchased because I wrongly believed that 'land trades' and 'land sales' would be included as a new diplomatic option. Considering the significance of the Louisiana Purchase in regards to American history (just one of many examples), I thought this would have been great! I'd love to for land sales and trades to be implemented as a diplomatic alternative to wars for land.

Research agreements need to be reworked (many threads dedicated to this).

As to combat AI, I'm playing a game now in which I have Alexander blocked by closed borders from his frequent enemy....Alexander is vastly superior militarily to his opponent and is separated from his enemy by only a few tiles of ocean.....Yet, war after war goes by and Alexander never goes for an all out naval invasion (embark ability) which would undoubtedly defeat his enemy once and for all.

Also, I've played through a few games now (last one at immortal) and it seems that in every game there are at least a few civs that stay ridiculously small (3-4 cities) through the industrial age and beyond despite the availability of good land.....considering all the rewards that comes with high population (science etc.), the coding should definitely not allow for such ridiculous behavior.

I haven't seen the AI make any use of forts yet even though I line their borders with them in all strategic points.

It seems that the AI doesn't emphasize navy and certainly doesn't explore the oceans much.....

The AI isn't aggressive enough re: tile purchasing -- especially valuable tiles.

When playing with more civs then are available, the game generates multiples of some civs. In my last game, there were 3 Americas! The problem is that there is no way to distinguish them while conducting diplomacy. Example: Bismark asks me to go to war against Washington....okay....which Washington?!!

hmmm....I have many more, but I'll wait for now....

Oh, there seems to be a latent assumption that: friendship and selfishness are mutually exclusive concepts. Far from....a good partnership can provide that, ultimately, the only enemy left to defeat is your partner.

turingmachine said:

Does anyone know if this patch only address the AI in single player games or will it also help the AI in multi player games?

Click to expand...

No one knows exactly right now. They said they were just focusing on AI and Diplomacy so maybe MP AI will be improved a little bit but it should be one of the focuses in the next patch.

Atwork said:

Now, as to diplomacy, before CIV5 was first released, I was really excited to read that tiles could be purchased because I wrongly believed that 'land trades' and 'land sales' would be included as a new diplomatic option. Considering the significance of the Louisiana Purchase in regards to American history (just one of many examples), I thought this would have been great! I'd love to for land sales and trades to be implemented as a diplomatic alternative to wars for land.

Click to expand...

The problem is that there's a limit to how far tiles can be purchased and culture expands. Ideally, it would be possible for the limit be turned off so claiming the main fort of the Western Northern America could claim a lot of land.

Research agreements need to be reworked (many threads dedicated to this)

Click to expand...

I hate them.

As to combat AI, I'm playing a game now in which I have Alexander blocked by closed borders from his frequent enemy....Alexander is vastly superior militarily to his opponent and is separated from his enemy by only a few tiles of ocean.....Yet, war after war goes by and Alexander never goes for an all out naval invasion (embark ability) which would undoubtedly defeat his enemy once and for all.

Click to expand...

The AIs are super hydrophobic for....some reason.

Also, I've played through a few games now (last one at immortal) and it seems that in every game there are at least a few civs that stay ridiculously small (3-4 cities) through the industrial age and beyond despite the availability of good land.....considering all the rewards that comes with high population (science etc.), the coding should definitely not allow for such ridiculous behavior.

Click to expand...

Some AIs have a super low expansionist level and because they're terrible at defending, they usually end up gobbled up the expansionist AIs.

I haven't seen the AI make any use of forts yet even though I line their borders with them in all strategic points.

Click to expand...

Does the AI even build forts?

It seems that the AI doesn't emphasize navy and certainly doesn't explore the oceans much.....

Click to expand...

And going back to the hydrophobic thing. Rome has conquered nearly the entire continent he's on and I'm playing West versus East yet he doesn't feel like expanding onto our fragmented side yet.

The AI isn't aggressive enough re: tile purchasing -- especially valuable tiles.

Click to expand...

I haven't noticed but I wouldn't be surprised.

When playing with more civs then are available, the game generates multiples of some civs. In my last game, there were 3 Americas! The problem is that there is no way to distinguish them while conducting diplomacy. Example: Bismark asks me to go to war against Washington....okay....which Washington?!!

Click to expand...

The only solution to that is to play with less than the max civilizations or with a few custom civilizations. There are 19 free civilizations and those with Babylon have 20 so downloading two or three of the very nice custom civilizations would be your best bet.
hmmm....I have many more, but I'll wait for now....

Oh, there seems to be a latent assumption that: friendship and selfishness are mutually exclusive concepts. Far from....a good partnership can provide that, ultimately, the only enemy left to defeat is your partner.

Click to expand...

Hmm?

gunter said:

Yes, everybody agrees here, it was obvious and implicit that I was arguing about Firaxians mind wideness to decide to fix it or not, not the UI simple tweak.

This is CORE ( Firaxis mind ) , the DNA, yes again.

And now if you want to merge yourselves again all together like jackals against me I drop the ball, I am only waiting for the next patch when Firaxians will miss again an ounce of brain giving naval and air units a proper alghorithm of movement management.

An example ? Already given, no need to detail it or to explain what's written between lines, this is my opinion, this is a forum, you have to live with people who have ideas different from the mass, I am sorry if some republicans here disagree.


-

Click to expand...

LOL, yes!! The return of Gunter in the patch thread. I was hoping for a resurgence. It better be good down below.

To stay on topic. I hope the AI and diplomacy are improved. I agree with Louis the XXIV re: some documentation. I mean what is a Secrecy Pact? I know it doesn't declare war, but what else does it do? Do all civs know I have it against the one civ? Why can I trade with them still? Can I upset the guy I agreed to have a secrecy pact with if I trade with the odd man out?

Atwork said:

When playing with more civs then are available, the game generates multiples of some civs. In my last game, there were 3 Americas! The problem is that there is no way to distinguish them while conducting diplomacy. Example: Bismark asks me to go to war against Washington....okay....which Washington?!!

Click to expand...

It's worse when Napoleon asks you to join him in his crusade against Napoleon.

Aussie_Lurker said:

Now Children, if you don't stop this bickering right now, I'm just going to turn this car around & go home!!!

Click to expand...

Yes you are right, sorry guys.

Back to thread now



P.S. naval units, airplanes managed by AI, naval units.

I have a feeling that after the next patch a lot of people will complain that the game is too hard and it's impossible to win

Oh well, one can hope

Atwork said:

...and it seems that in every game there are at least a few civs that stay ridiculously small (3-4 cities) through the industrial age and beyond despite the availability of good land.

Click to expand...

What I really like to see is that the other civs stop expanding when the good land is taken. I would love to see a late game where not every bit of polar landscape, total desert and tiny mountain corner is taken by yet another city after they allready have 25+

If I happen to leave one spot open that could possible hold a city, even if it would not even be able to expand 1 tile in each direction I can bet that one civ sooner or later is going to walk up to that spot and plop a city down. Yes I like good AI expanding but let them judge need for growth after a certain level. Balance folks, balance!

A core problem is a problem that is tied to the way the game is designed and therefore needs a re-thinking of the whole foundation to be fixed. Having a (already existent) screen displayed when you are in conversation with a leader is hardly a core issue, it's just a simple UI tweak.

Click to expand...

It's not a simple UI tweak, it's a designers choice to not implement it in the diplomacy screen, when you get a offer from another CIV. The DEV's chose to give you little information. That is a desing issue to me. If or if not this can be simply fixed is invalid in this discussion. Or are you trying to say the DEV's made a mistake ? A UI mistake? NO ? ===core issue, period.

Oh, wait....you gonna say; it's a feature, right ?

Jediron said:

It's not a simple UI tweak, it's a designers choice to not implement it in the diplomacy screen, when you get a offer from another CIV. The DEV's chose to give you little information. That is a desing issue to me. If or if not this can be simply fixed is invalid in this discussion.

Click to expand...

Well we can't know for sure if they did it on purpose or not, only Firaxis knows.

My impression is that there was not a conscious decision from the designers to hide that information in the leader conversation screen. It's probably something they wanted to do but, as for many other little things, they didn't because they run out of time.

Jediron said:

Or are you trying to say the DEV's made a mistake ? A UI mistake? NO ? ===core issue, period.
Oh, wait....you gonna say; it's a feature, right ?

Click to expand...

Relax mate, you look tense

Oh, there seems to be a latent assumption that: friendship and selfishness are mutually exclusive concepts. Far from....a good partnership can provide that, ultimately, the only enemy left to defeat is your partner.

Click to expand...

To clarify: all I was trying to say is that sometimes the best way to play to win (selfish motivation) is to forge strong partnerships with other civs. Humans understand this. This AI seems to avoid cooperative partnerships even in situations where it would be in its best interest whether in the short or long-term.

Example: In the game I'm playing, Greeks and the Ottomans have been going at it, back and forth all game long. Both are minor threats in terms of their position relative to my borders.

The Japanese are positioned to south of both the Greeks and the Ottomans and quite a distance from me (we are no threat to each other). The Japanese are very small but their positioning would make them a valuable strategic partner to me. Also, given that the Japanese have had numerous wars with the Ottomans, I would also be a valuable partner from the Japanese standpoint.

So, I have tried to reach out to the Japanese to strengthen them relative to everyone else on the continent and to hopefully have a partner against the Ottomans. It would be in both our interests.

I've supplied Japan with a substantial amount of GPT for 120 turns or longer, strategic and luxury resources, and I've generally agreed to their requests. Yet, they remain hostile with me. wtf? We both hate the Ottomans, we've both been at war with the Ottomans, I treat them with gifts and respect.....yet they're hostile, they won't make fair trades, they don't want research agreements, and they want me to pay for open borders even though closed borders prevents them from opening a second front against the Ottomans during their wars..... so dumb!

The AI (in this case Japan) should realize that their best interest resides in buddying up with me for the time being -- riding my coat tails a more powerful position in the continent -- eventually using their preferred status with me to negotiate mutual war against Ottomans, thereby expanding their empire.

By embracing a strong strategic partnership with me Japan could easily become the #2 power on the continent. As the #2 power, Japan might one day be a rival to me. As it is, Japan is weak and stupid.

The AI doesn't put enough weight on trade. At all.

It would certainly be interesting to know which parts of the Ai and diplomacy are most important to people, for me it's three things, firstly the inability of the AI to either make long term alliances and/or it's inability to understand that sometimes friendship is more effective than war.

Secondly the lack of diplomatic options available other than war, (no espionage etc) and thirdly the late game insanity of the AI leaders triggered by one of them that is about to achieve a victory, due their hardwired need to win the game at any cost.

I was going to make a poll with various options in it, but i thought better of it as if i leave out something that is very important to someone else it would be unfair and the poll would'nt be representative or correct.

i just wonder what is and is'nt possible with a patch.

I don't know where to put it, but one thing that occured to me:

Why do we have "fishing boats" with the new embarkation feature? Instead of just giving the workers the embarkation feature?

Anyone care doing a mod? ;-)

mitsho said:

I don't know where to put it, but one thing that occured to me:

Why do we have "fishing boats" with the new embarkation feature? Instead of just giving the workers the embarkation feature?

Click to expand...

Because a worker is much more expensive than a fishing boat. And for a reason.