Hahaha, Civilization V is all about military now.

???

Cultural victories ARE about war in the first place, aren't they? In civ5 vanilla, nothing beats a wide puppet empire for cultural victories. If you're talking about BNW, tourism is invariant with the number of cities you hold, but has a strong correlation with the number of great works you have, with are in turn most easily gained by conquest. Units are cheaper than great people and archaeologists, and you'd be restricting your opponents' culture production at the same time. I don't see how a tall empire can lead to a cultural victory.

Forgive me if I'm wrong - I'm new to this forum, and haven't seen many of your articles yet.
 
bcyy said:
???

Cultural victories ARE about war in the first place, aren't they? In civ5 vanilla, nothing beats a wide puppet empire for cultural victories. If you're talking about BNW, tourism is invariant with the number of cities you hold, but has a strong correlation with the number of great works you have, with are in turn most easily gained by conquest. Units are cheaper than great people and archaeologists, and you'd be restricting your opponents' culture production at the same time. I don't see how a tall empire can lead to a cultural victory.

Forgive me if I'm wrong - I'm new to this forum, and haven't seen many of your articles yet.
Click to expand...

Not really. In some situations culture victories can be fastened by conquering a cultural runaway but it's not necessary and peaceful cultural victories focus on science, reaching Internet fast.
Once that's done, if you reach it fast enough you'll get influential on the AI with a musician or two.
 
You have to invest in military. You may want to play a builder game or something but if your weak you will get exploited. So even of you don't want to attack, you still have to build defensively. Also you have to make sure your part of a coalition. If your strongly allied with a more forceful neighbor, manipulate him into attacking an enemy preemptively. Or get involved in a defensive pact. That way AI is so focused on them that they can't come after you.

One time I was dealing with Rome on another continent. He was an authoritarian who declared war on his 2 freedom neighbors Persia and Polynesia. I was a freedom civ as well and couldn't afford to let him just steam roll. So i sent a small military to take one of Rome's cities. Then i launched an air assault on nearby cities and let Hawaii and Persia March in and take the cities. That way i wasn't being an agressive war monger but i made sure I retained control of the board. If you want to be a super power no one can act in anyway that's detrimental to your interests. You can't stick your nose in the ground and act like the boogie men will go away.
 
bcyy said:
???

Cultural victories ARE about war in the first place, aren't they? In civ5 vanilla, nothing beats a wide puppet empire for cultural victories. If you're talking about BNW, tourism is invariant with the number of cities you hold, but has a strong correlation with the number of great works you have, with are in turn most easily gained by conquest. Units are cheaper than great people and archaeologists, and you'd be restricting your opponents' culture production at the same time. I don't see how a tall empire can lead to a cultural victory.

Forgive me if I'm wrong - I'm new to this forum, and haven't seen many of your articles yet.
Click to expand...

beetle said:
Tall peaceful cultural victory is a particularly interesting challenge IMHO, and one that I have not achieved.
Click to expand...

Please direct your attention to the Brazil ICL over in Strategy & Tips. Culture victories are about researching Archaeologist / Hotel / Airport / Internet as quickly as possible. Conquering a cultural runaway is sometimes but rarely faster than just continuing to grow and wonder-spam. You need an exceptionally strong empire (map roll) to do both. Stealing great works is nice but if the AIs see you as a warmonger you will lose open borders and trade gpt.
 
OnceAKing said:
You have to invest in military. You may want to play a builder game or something but if your weak you will get exploited. So even of you don't want to attack, you still have to build defensively.
Click to expand...

No, you really don't. It's a lot simpler (and cheaper) to have the AI invest in military and then send them some shiny rocks, or colorful plants, or horseys to go play with their toys in someone else's backyard while you quietly build all the important wonders than to invest in your own military. Yea, sometimes the AI goes off it's meds and there's no amount of bribing you can do to keep from getting attacked, but ever since the changes to early warmonger hate I'd say 90% of games you can get by without ever getting in a fight if you're diligent about keeping the AIs squabbling amongst themselves. Maybe it's different on lower difficulty levels where the warmongering AIs don't build such ridiculous carpets of doom making it harder to get them to declare war on the entire world for 3/gpt, but on immortal and diety it works just fine anyway.
 
CivAddict2013 said:
So I'm playing France going for a tall Cultural Victory. Pretty much doing better than everyone else in culture. Whole world backstabs me. Insta rage quit.

I just realize now that this game is all about military. The AI will all gang up on you just for doing better than them.

Might as well just pick Germany and call it a day. The game; at least against the AI, is all about military.

You don't spend every last dime on military; you're screwed.
Click to expand...

So you didn't see yourself as the enlightened french rulers of the world bringing your superior snail eating snooty culture to the unwashed masses of barbarians attacking your kingdom? I'm disappointed at your post now. :(
 
SULOMON said:
Of course the AI will gang up they don't want you to win.
Click to expand...
Sad thing is actually, the AI doesn't really care about you winning. Upcoming DV vote and you bought all the city states as allies? Oh, AI will happily sit on its 5K+ gold and do nothing. Imminent CV and you ask your best friend who's the only one who's not succumbed to your culture for Open Borders? Of course, let's make a deal for 2GPT so we can enjoy some of all those wonderful pop music tours your country hosts.

So no, AI doesn't gang up on you because you're winning. AI gangs up on you because you have inferior military power.
 
kaspergm said:
Sad thing is actually, the AI doesn't really care about you winning.
Click to expand...

I agree, it's boring now. I fell like all decisions of AI and barbarians are to annoy you next few turns, no real strategies.
My current example is waypath. It's like units are coded to penalize you next turns. Example : Foreign units in middle of a battle or healing near a barbarians campement.
 
Tall cultural victories are super easy. Especially if you can get a wonder in each of your 4 cities for the aesthetics 33% boost.

You can get an absolutely insane amount of culture if you manage to get a lot of wonders and pick cutural heritage. Going tall nets you the most GPs as well for historical landmarks and extra culture from specialists/great works.

Even if i dont use a culture civ, i can typically get close to 1k culture/turn without the worldfair boost late game. Around 500 or so tourism/turn before internet and other boosts.

I do find it odd that everytime my capital gets almost all the tourism/culture though. Hotels/airports only seem to give tourism off stuff like wonders and greatworks, and almost all of those are going to be in your capital anyway.

So far i havent seen the AI actually threaten me military. They always go on the defensive, its super easy to beat off a massive invasion force with just a few ranged units. Then they just turtle.
 
It's always fun when this guy posts. There's a grain of truth buried under so much hyperbole that it's difficult to take seriously.
 
kaspergm said:
Sad thing is actually, the AI doesn't really care about you winning.
Click to expand...

I think it's because you are too good. I am still struggling with Immortal and all my games take 400+ turns. I definitely feel competitive pressure as there is usually a couple AI civs are getting close to CV and/or SV at that point. I agree with you that they sit idly on piles of money, but at this point, I am okay with that! You might also complain that the AI will trade luxes with the player, even though he doesn't need the happiness boost and you do! I am okay with that as well. The AI can be something of a spoil-sport with a late-game DoW (although this seems much more common with GnK than BNW), but I think it is good game design that there is not more of this behavior (and there could be, with the money and luxes). So I think it is fair to characterize the AI as trying to win, but not in an aggressively spoil-sport kind of way.
 
beetle said:
I think it's because you are too good. I am still struggling with Immortal and all my games take 400+ turns. I definitely feel competitive pressure as there is usually a couple AI civs are getting close to CV and/or SV at that point. I agree with you that they sit idly on piles of money, but at this point, I am okay with that! You might also complain that the AI will trade luxes with the player, even though he doesn't need the happiness boost and you do! I am okay with that as well. The AI can be something of a spoil-sport with a late-game DoW (although this seems much more common with GnK than BNW), but I think it is good game design that there is not more of this behavior (and there could be, with the money and luxes). So I think it is fair to characterize the AI as trying to win, but not in an aggressively spoil-sport kind of way.
Click to expand...
First of all, I'm not that good, I only play on Emperor. :lol: Second, I agree with you that there's an important difference between the AI disliking you because you are winning and the AI trying to prevent you from winning. I hated how in vanilla, AI would dislike you for pursuing the same victory as them, that made zero sense and was very disruptive for diplomatic relationships. As such, I don't want the AI to become negative towards me if I'm ahead of them, that would kill the entire diplomatic side of the game.

However, AI should prevent me from winning - not necessarily in the "everybody DoW you if you are close to winning" sense, but in the "not handing me the victory on a platter" sense. So what I really want is some sanity checks when it comes to stuff like diplomatic victory voting - after all, when I buy out their city state allies, it is an attack on their interests, and at the very least, AI should by default by allies back if they have the gold to it and they can see I'm about to win the vote. If that was done, diplomatic victory might actually become a challenge.
 
kaspergm said:
First of all, I'm not that good, I only play on Emperor. :lol: Second, I agree with you that there's an important difference between the AI disliking you because you are winning and the AI trying to prevent you from winning. I hated how in vanilla, AI would dislike you for pursuing the same victory as them, that made zero sense and was very disruptive for diplomatic relationships. As such, I don't want the AI to become negative towards me if I'm ahead of them, that would kill the entire diplomatic side of the game.

However, AI should prevent me from winning - not necessarily in the "everybody DoW you if you are close to winning" sense, but in the "not handing me the victory on a platter" sense. So what I really want is some sanity checks when it comes to stuff like diplomatic victory voting - after all, when I buy out their city state allies, it is an attack on their interests, and at the very least, AI should by default by allies back if they have the gold to it and they can see I'm about to win the vote. If that was done, diplomatic victory might actually become a challenge.
Click to expand...

But really, if you're at the point that you have the WC votes lead, even if somebody snakes you out of the votes last minute, your delegates will only grow as the game goes on, because you'll keep getting delegates from winning. And if you have all of the CS's in your back pocket, you're probably dominating the game from all of their bonuses, and you can stack the WC on the next vote on issues. So snaking your CS's last minute may delay a diplomatic victory, but it will be hard to stop it.
 
Trackmaster said:
But really, if you're at the point that you have the WC votes lead, even if somebody snakes you out of the votes last minute, your delegates will only grow as the game goes on, because you'll keep getting delegates from winning. And if you have all of the CS's in your back pocket, you're probably dominating the game from all of their bonuses, and you can stack the WC on the next vote on issues. So snaking your CS's last minute may delay a diplomatic victory, but it will be hard to stop it.
Click to expand...

But by delaying you, it gives them time to complete their culture or science victory.
 
To be fair, a big part of whether or not the AI blocks you from a diplo victory is the bias coding. Civs with high friendly/protect will mess with your diplo victory, while civs with high bully/conquest/ignore won't. I'm kind of torn on whether I would want them to program the AI to block you as hard as possible on diplo victories honestly. On the one hand it's just way too easy half the time, on the other if you've ever had, say, a runaway Alex in a diety game who has decided he's never letting any city-state get away from him for even a turn you know the AI can make (peaceful) diplo victories impossible on higher difficulty levels. D'oh well, is BE out yet? :p
 
Manannan said:
I'm kind of torn on whether I would want them to program the AI to block you as hard as possible on diplo victories honestly. On the one hand it's just way too easy half the time, on the other if you've ever had, say, a runaway Alex in a diety game ...
Click to expand...
Well I don't play diety, but I've tried runaway Alex allright. I still say they should try to block you if you can - after all, if you try for conquest victory, it would be kind of an anticlimax if AI didn't use their military units to defend themselves. I guess the Alex thing with diplo victory is similar to having a run-away Sejong in a game where you try for science or a run-away Shaka in a game where you try for domination. It's something you'll have to adjust your overall strategy to cope with.

On the bottomline, diplomatic victory is a de-facto economic victory, and I could even live with that if the game was constructed so that you needed to be the economic leader to win this victory type - i.e. you needed so much gold that you could buy out all city states without the AI being able to buy them back. Then you would have earned your diplomatic/economic victory fair and square. But the fact that you can win with AI's sitting with 5x your gold in the bank just doesn't make sense.
 
beetle said:
OP, your threads seem hyperbolic, but since others have responded, I will dog pile too.



I have a similar experience in that someone always DoWs me. The mass gang-up is rare (thank goodness) so far. If that happens to you every game, you may be doing something wrong.



As far as casus belli goes, in game mechanics, different ideologies is just as provocative as forward settling or religious conversion. So, pretty much the opposite of “no reason”.



I find that difficult or impossible most games.



You don't need endless units, just a few more units than is your habit.
Click to expand...
Well it doesn't happen every game. But when it's does; it's rather annoying.

But you do need a lot of units though. If you just have a few Artillery guarding your cities; that's not going to be enough.

My point is; is that if you try to play completely peaceful... The AI gangs up on you.

In that particular game; I was friends with most of the AI.

Then out of nowhere; whole world declares war. The game states it's because of different ideologies; but I don't think so. I think they just gang up on weak civs.

In fact, it seems the AI gangs up on you no matter what. You play peaceful? You're too weak. You play aggressive? You're a warmonger.

I've found a solution though; to just build a whole bunch of units.
 
Or just get gifted a lot of units. If you're allied with the militaristic City States they'll take care of your military for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Thinking about bailing on Civ V for VI...
Replies
17
Views
3K
Licentia
Licentia
Fergei
The impact of modified settings (India, Emperor, 31 Civ, Continents)
Replies
10
Views
910
Fergei
Fergei
The_J
hard-drive.net: Is Civilization VI Better Than Civilization V? The Numbers in the Titles Say Yes
Replies
9
Views
2K
Mahasona
Mahasona
K
[BNW] How many cities is best for Immortal and large maps?
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
consentient
consentient
D
Military Scaling Discussion
2 3
Replies
53
Views
4K
azum4roll
A
Top Bottom