Info on Next Patch

The AI doesnt play to win, that is obvious at this point, they can have nanotech and not make the SS. So to say they plan to win is inaccurate. They will also refuse to attack run-away civs, clearly if they were playing to win they would figure out that they need to do that.

I wish people would stop saying "the ai plays to win" and actually talk about the problems they have with the AI.

Does playing to win mean they declare war on you at times you wouldn't expect? Perhaps there are factors causing them to do so that are not related to "winning".
 
Nowdays modders are a crucial part of a game success, above all games like civilization so a dialog and at least one beta patch could improve a lot the final result.


Maybe but I don't think a lot of players would like the idea of Steam auto-downloading a "beta" patch. ;)
 
Everyone here , one way or another, are posting in the patch thread. This means the matter is hot.

We deserve a good second patch, above all because it is AI related.

Please do not forget how the AI uses naval units, randomly moving them here and there even if at war....
 
I think the last patch illustrated that there were and probably still are a few basic bugs that have had a negative impact on AI and those are easier to fix.

At the risk of bringing up a fight again, I think a core issue with the AI is the notion that it is now playing to win.

A real human plays to win, but doesn't do so robotically. There's a bit of role play and a bit of emotion and a bit of irrationality. The human knows that they are playing Civ and a Civilization, diplomacy, war all mean something outside the ones and zeros of the game.

the AI doesn't know this. In Civ4, by not playing to win, the AI could be coded to behave like a nation/Civilization in an easier way.
In CiV, it is harder to maintain that element of irrationality and randomness that represent's the human's understanding of the tropes and unwritten rules of the game. That being long term friends may not be in your best interests in an absolute sense, but it is part of the flavor of what Civilization is about.

So the job is much harder for the AI developer....on top of the combat issues, you have to basically code the AI in such a way that it behaves the way a player would expect a civilization's leader to behave while still trying to win the game.

Another problem is that there are very few diplomatic options available other than war, there is no espionage or sabotage at the moment, no tech stealing either, if the AI becomes angry it only really has one recourse.

With a few more diplomatic options the game could become more indepth, where a peaceful Civ may have prefered to spy or sabotage on an enemy before, now they too only have war as their way to show displeasure, it leads to the AI leaders all acting in a similar way.
 
Another problem is that there are very few diplomatic options available other than war, there is no espionage or sabotage at the moment, no tech stealing either, if the AI becomes angry it only really has one recourse.

With a few more diplomatic options the game could become more indepth, where a peaceful Civ may have prefered to spy or sabotage on an enemy before, now they too only have war as their way to show displeasure, it leads to the AI leaders all acting in a similar way.

Yup. Like I said before, simply making it possible to be 'friends' with the AI is not going to be enough. The entire system needs to be complexified, otherwise is will always feel 'gamey' and unrealistic.

The AI doesnt play to win, that is obvious at this point, they can have nanotech and not make the SS. So to say they plan to win is inaccurate.

Indeed, the AI does not play to win at all. The other big example is the UN votes. I have seen the AI spend money on CS prior to the vote, but only a small amount of their bankroll, in effect saying "I'm not playing to win, I'm only playing to set a certain $$ amount the player must surpass to win". Which is fine from a gamedesign standpoint (though the $$ amount needs to be higher :crazyeye: )
 
Yup. Like I said before, simply making it possible to be 'friends' with the AI is not going to be enough. The entire system needs to be complexified, otherwise is will always feel 'gamey' and unrealistic.

So i suppose what i am thinking now is that maybe the streamlining was a little bit too heavy, like pruning a bush too much, i hope a lot more is added in the future because i like the Civ 5 base, if it was a pizza i'd like more toppings.
 
I won't lie, I'm awaiting this patch with baited breath! I supremely hope that this will be the patch that reignites my interest in Civ5. I don't want them to bring back the visible & obvious diplomacy modifiers (like -1: "Our close borders spark tensions"), but I *do* want to know if the AI is Friendly, Pleased, Neutral, Displeased or Hostile towards me-& I want to be able to ascertain the key reason why (why else would you have a foreign advisor).

I'd also like to see a return of the more role-playing AI's we had in Civ4 (or at least the *option* in the game set-up) & a return of proper foreign trade (though I doubt we'll see that until an expansion). i.e. I want those things that made interacting with the AI so Immersive & Fun in Civ4. That doesn't seem like too much to ask, does it?

Aussie.
 
A "right to passage" that opens up civilian movement and trade between borders should alleviate some of this as well.

There should be an international penalty applied to all civilizations who attack a friendly civilization.

The AI should try its best to maintain a balance of power when its not already ahead of the curve.

Yep, these are all key issues. I'd like to see my actions actually mean something in the diplomatic scheme of things-I want open borders, gifts, resource trades & research pacts to *truly* boost my relations with a Civilization to the point where I don't need to constantly fear a sudden attack from them at any moment-if they do, then there should be a massive penalty for doing so (for human & AI alike)-both domestic (happiness) & international (diplomatic penalty).

Aussie.
 
I don't know. I was playing Civ4 and my monitor shed a tear. I had to wipe it away with a tissue, pat it on its back, and tell it that everything was going to be okay.

Then Civ5 came out.

LOL, classic. My computer cowers in fear every time I threaten to throw it out a window ;).
 
The diplo patch has to be linked with improved victory conditions. Right now the AI seems to be programmed so that only domination means something. They are useless when it comes to any other condition. (And not that swift with domination, to be honest.) However it is fixed, improved victory conditions will greatly help the AI: Monty wants to win by Domination; he should be far more difficult to reason with than Gandhi (Mr. Culture) or Washington (Mr. Apollo Program) or Harun (Mr. Diplomacy.) The Civ IV system should be a model to be transcended, not copied.

An extra thought for a future expansion:

I do not mind opaque diplomacy. It would allow the reintroduction of espionage. I do not mean that annoying garbage from Civ IV (poison the water, sabatoge the workship, disrupt the library production) but real espionage:
-get part of the enemy map
-get a (partial) glance at the enemy tech tree
-get an idea of the enemy relationships
-get a glance at enemy social policies
-get a glance at enemy cities
-steal a tech
-spies are invisible: make open borders mean something
-maybe even get insight into the enemy's plans
Real espionage: information gathering. The modifiers from Civ IV were silly. Take some risk, use some effort to get the diplo info. Instead of espionage points, missions can cost money; the more you invest, the greater the chance for real rewards. If you fail it might mean war.
 
A lot of people in this thread seem to want to go back to the Civ IV model of diplomacy where you can gift your way into friendship, or simply being friendly makes you friends.

Honestly I really don't agree with that at all. I think its not realisitic that you can just gift useless crap and expect an alliance.


I don't think that this is what people are asking for *at all*! What people *are* asking for is that genuinely good behaviour towards the AI be rewarded through the actions of that AI towards you. Obviously what kindnesses they rank higher than others will depend on their flavors-& its true that in some games some AI's won't give a *toss* about your kindness, but will simply see it as a sign of weakness (whereas they might respect your *military* strength!) Either way, its about the AI seeming much less *random* & *Cut-throat* than it currently is!

Aussie.
 
I have only played a few games through to completion, but these are my thoughts so far - I thought I might as well list my thoughts in case the devs are stopping by...

Good:
- I like that AI complains if you start getting friendly with their city states.
- I like how they taunt you about your army being small etc.
- I like the AI complains about you settling too close to borders etc.
- I like how Civs start ganging up on you for warmongering - which actually adds to the fun of warmongering significantly.

Suggestions for improvement
- Gifting units to city states is cool - but the AI really does seem to waste them.
- Would be nice to be able to gift workers as well so they can hurry up and connect a resource you want.
- How do you tell where you stand with the AI? I really mis the + and - modifiers in the diplo screen with Civ4 and Colonization, so I could tell what was pissing him off and what he was happy about. Bring that back.
- It's weird how the AI offers open borders without any strategic purpose. Eg, I'm the only one with seagoing ships, I turn up on the other continent and off the bat they offer 2-way open borders. I'm free to explore their continent, knowing they aren't capable of exploring mine. Really dumb deal for the AI.
- It's confusing when AI 'demands' resources. In Colonization, maybe Civ4 there was a clear difference between 'asking' and 'demanding'. It's not so clear now.
- When a luxury resource is demanded, it's not clear whether it's your only one or not. I generally don't mind giving away Ivory to keep the AI happy so long as I have a spare for myself, but that particular diplo screen means I don't know how many of a resource I have to trade with.
- Planting a city on a trade-route-forming road should be almost like an act of war. When a road is bringing in 30GPT in trade route income, and a 'friendly' neighbour plants a city on it, it basically means you have to smite them. You shouldn't be seen to be 'warmongering' for protecting your own roads, and it would be nice if they knew to expect a smiting. Same applies to tampering with roads.
- Do pacts of secrecy / cooperation actually do anything?
- What's with AI asking to trade 1 luxury in exchange for like 6 other luxuries and thinking it's a fair deal? I understand why this was the case in Civ3, but this shouldn't apply in Civ5 - the luxury has a mostly fixed value, which isn't dependent of population size.
- Sometimes I'll station a unit on an isthmus with hills to stop a civ from exploring past it. Would be nice to see some sort of negative karma being applied for blocking an area the AI would like to explore.

Hopefully some of these will be looked at in the patch.
 
I'd add a few other suggestions:

1) AI's idea of "warmongering" should be refined. For example, you should not be deemed a warmonger when other civs declared on you and you are merely fighting back (you have to take some cities in order to get a fair peace agreement). Also, the AI should not get angry at you for attacking a civ that they themselves do not like (e.g. if they have a Pact of Secrecy against that civ).

2) There should be negative diplomatic consequences for giving units to a city-state that the AI is at war with. As it stands, you can blatantly supply tons of troops to a city state and the AI doesn't seem to care that you are helping out their enemy.

3) Improve the AI's perception of when they are losing a war and should sign a peace treaty. It makes no sense for an AI to refuse peace when they have lost many cities and you have troops gathered outside their remaining ones.

4) The AI should be more willing to sign defensive pacts or give you free stuff if you have a very good relationship or if you are much more powerful than them.
 
I miss having friends like in Civ IV.

I know that Shafer and the other guy have said in many interviews that they wanted to change diplomacy in a way that the player could not make the AI do things that were against its best interest. But sometimes those situations make me feel more immersed and are more fun.

In Civ V, I feel like I have no connection with any of the other AI Civs, they just seem like emotion-less robots that will backstab me the moment they have a chance. This is something I hope they address in future updates.

How is Civ4 diplo any less robotic than civ5? if anything the boring +1 for this , -1 for that mechanic of Civ4 is even more robotic. Rose coloured glasses methinks.
 
How is Civ4 diplo any less robotic than civ5? if anything the boring +1 for this , -1 for that mechanic of Civ4 is even more robotic. Rose coloured glasses methinks.

Well at least they were basing their feelings for you on things you *actually* did. Also, it was very *easy* to ignore the specific bonuses & penalties & just focus on their general attitude towards you-an attitude that actually *meant* something. Now the AI just does whatever the hell it feels like, regardless of what you do for-or against-them. I've read of situations where the AI bad-mouths a player who has just helped to liberate them from a 3rd party, & thats just *one* of the idiotic things the AI does in Civ5. In Civ4, if I liberated a Civs city, they really, *really* liked you!

Aussie.
 
AI and Diplo: natural choice for improvement.
If they really DO improve that to some "normal" state, then I guess Vanilla Civ5 will be up to be finished as a Beta
- from then it will be BALANCE and BUG themes for small fixes for the single player
(multi is a whole other issue...)

So I believe AI/Diplo is the 2nd Big Patch,
MP will be 3rd Big Patch,
maybe some refinement after that, but things will head to some kind of Expansion DLC.

Oh, and along this they shall give community the SDK, too...

I hope AI/Diplo Patch will come before Xmas, along with the 2Civ DLC
 
Not only does an AI and diplo patch make sense because it's the worst part of civ5, but also because other bad aspects are moddable and this 2 aren't.

I already use mods that bring back the statistics windows, improve resource usefulness, increase tech time and decrease build time, make buildings more useful, and such things. But it seems without sdk it's not possible to revamp diplomacy and AI. So focusing on this 2 aspects was the best idea.
 
Top Bottom