Difficulty level?

[Aquila SPQR]

I usually play Civ IV on noble with tech trading turned off (it's a fair play IMO - without any AI advantages etc). Prince with tech trading turned off result in much harder gameplay (at least for me, a casual player).

So I started a noble AND game. Way too easy. First in everything without real difficulty. Switched to prince. But it's still too easy. I'm still first in everything without problems.

So it seems that AND is much easier than vanilla. Is this true? And no - I'd like to play on fixed "standard" difficulty level, not on some "flexible" difficulty or something like it.

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

I usually play Civ IV on noble with tech trading turned off (it's a fair play IMO - without any AI advantages etc). Prince with tech trading turned off result in much harder gameplay (at least for me, a casual player).

So I started a noble AND game. Way too easy. First in everything without real difficulty. Switched to prince. But it's still too easy. I'm still first in everything without problems.

So it seems that AND is much easier than vanilla. Is this true? And no - I'd like to play on fixed "standard" difficulty level, not on some "flexible" difficulty or something like it.

What kind of map and which mapsize and speed are you playing with? AND wasn't very well balanced lately. Also which version of AND are you using? I was trying to make the game more balanced by tweaking some xml files in the gameinfo xml folder and now I'm involved in AND2 resurrection project so I home some of my changes to make the game more balanced will make it to the final version. If you're using AND2 you can check some of the latest topics in this forum: there's a link somewhere pointing at a first version of my balanced files (still to be improved). Sorry I can't provide more details but I don't have a good connection here on holiday so I can help you better only when I get back at home in a few days.

 

[Sgtslick]

I would love to see a reduction in city maintenance costs in ancient/classical era. Its so restrictive in terms of game play, you are forced to stay on 3-5 cities while the AI can get lots (10+).

I like the AI having advantages but this just pigeon holes the player way too much. Its so easy to go broke running 0% science in classical era, especially if you don't get a religion!

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

I would love to see a reduction in city maintenance costs in ancient/classical era. Its so restrictive in terms of game play, you are forced to stay on 3-5 cities while the AI can get lots (10+).

I like the AI having advantages but this just pigeon holes the player way too much. Its so easy to go broke running 0% science in classical era, especially if you don't get a religion!

Which version of AND are you playing with? Is it AND2? I'm currenly addressing this kind of unbalance problems but I need to know the following details: map type (mapscript), map size, gamespeed, difficulty level, revolution on/off.

 

[IPEX-731BA5DD06]

Sgtslick, its how your playing that affects that, I have no problem with city maintenance costs. You really need to get Currency soon after writing. Building the Bazaar's, Jewellers, and another which I've forgotten, get out out of that.

Its really no different to Normal Civ, you can't build an Empire with out a Currency. Quoted and true in game.

 

[JosEPh_II]

I would love to see a reduction in city maintenance costs in ancient/classical era. Its so restrictive in terms of game play, you are forced to stay on 3-5 cities while the AI can get lots (10+).

I like the AI having advantages but this just pigeon holes the player way too much. Its so easy to go broke running 0% science in classical era, especially if you don't get a religion!

Am I hearing you right?

JosEPh

 

[Aquila SPQR]

I'm playing on Gigantic map size, and on RoM Terra. Speed - snail. AND 1.75C. I also have the same problem as Sgtslick - top civs can easily have 10+ cities and power ratio of 0.7 (even 0.5) while I can barely support 7-8 cities. Not to mention that without Tech diffusion they also manage to be plenty of techs ahead of me...

But it's also strange - some civs know how to play (have much more cities, techs and bigger armies than me) and some... on turn 500 are still stuck with 3 or 4 cities. I think there's too huge difference between prince and monarch. With my style of playing prince is much too easy for me, while monarch - much too difficult. Well, not actually difficult, because when other civs get huge bonus to everything - I call it cheating and it's not about "difficulty" anymore.

 

[Sgtslick]

Which version of AND are you playing with? Is it AND2? I'm currenly addressing this kind of unbalance problems but I need to know the following details: map type (mapscript), map size, gamespeed, difficulty level, revolution on/off.

Been playing monarch earth evolution 2 map (random resources) which is huge. I just did a work around; in gameinfo/eras.xml I changed classical to 0 maintenance from 25 and also give 150 starting gold for ancient start to everyone. This was better. I found such a huge difference though in terms of the AI in mid game, im in late renaissance epic speed at the moment and im quite far ahead (1st gnp) out of 26 civs. I think AI needs needs this kind of advantage, but I still don't like it. Oh and im using the svn (so its revision 380 from memory).

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

Guys,, there's something here that needs to be clarified.
Difficulty level IS (and can not be different in any way AFAIK) based on "cheating" by AI. You cannot make AI smarter or dumber: you can teach AI some military tactics, make it capable of using (or producing or placing )units properly but that's it, AI will always use what you've taught it, regardless of difficulty level. And this is jtanner's job. The only way to make the game more difficult or easier, is to give AI some advantage or penalty and that' s exactly what difficulty level do (and what I'm trying to balance)! Playing at an easy level make it harder for AI to research techs, produce units ,build wonders, etc. Playing on a hard level, makes everything easier for AI . So if you're falling behind with techs and you can't catch up with AI or you can't expand, you're. probably playing the wrong way or playing on a level that's too hard for you. Having said that, AND2 should be much better in this sense.

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

Been playing monarch earth evolution 2 map (random resources) which is huge.

Ok, right now you are playing then with the original xml files which were not very well balanced. Until now only noble level has been balanced and only on normal speed (for every map size)
. When I get back at home in a few days, I will resume my rebalancing work.

 

[IPEX-731BA5DD06]

I just don't understand your problems.

I'm playing a Gigantic map, Emperor level, but speed is eternity.

The only time I have trouble is in the 1st 1000 yrs, when you only have 1 city, don't have archers or stonetools for Javileers. (have lost a couple where AI decides to attack me very early, marches in to my 2 warrior defense's and kills me)

I expand my 1st city to its limit, while beeline Archery (no qualms here).

Once I have a reasonable core city, pop maxed out, I start my expansion to 3 cities (max under despotism to be settled.)

Research other techs to get out, build other cities, but always develop them fully.

Expand repeat, etc.

I settle each city for a 3 ring radius, along a river (if possible) and visable resources. Building the commerce boosting buildings, makes a HUGE difference to my economy.

Doing this I can easily dominate my continent by AD's, and complete and utter control by 1000 AD.

Current game, I have 70 cities, I was 300 or so credits in the green at 35% research. (before I had to worldbuilder a save). I'm probably 2 era's clear of the pack on the 2nd Continent, and no just playing as I really enjoy developing my cities to the max (Civ game of Sim city)

Its not that hard, yes I do have economic crunches, mostly through over expansion, and keeping far way cities. Revolutions, early on cities can spawn revolutionaries, but once I hit Senate, with Monotheism, with or without a founded religion. I mean here one religion spread to all cities and adopted. I'm fine, revolution quickly falls.

Victory in wars, building wonders all helps.

Game is built for Marathon speeds, its only modification by 45degrees that change that.

 

[Sgtslick]

I guess the problem IPEX is if you are on a continent where there are 4 civs for example and there is room for something like 25-30 cities. You will only be able to get 4-6 really, while some of the AI will have 10+ probably. I don't mind this so much its just that even with only 6 cities compared to an AI who has say 10 in classical I would still have big economic problems most likely (with 6 cities) at this point in the game.

It would be better to give AI a different advantage early such as growth and worker rates and additional happy/health bonus and additional research bonus, rather than restricting the human player to a certain play style.

 

[IPEX-731BA5DD06]

I still don't understand.

Maybe because I play 'start as minors' it makes the difference.

1st builds in a city, elder council and a fire pit, one for science, the other for culture.

I build Bazaars and bead makers.

I tech Metal casting for spears, build jewellers then writing for Schools of scribes.

Does the AI spam cities all over, you bet it does, 1 -3 population, no infrastructure, garrisoned by one or 2 units.

I just build my stack and slash and burn.

Early exploring, I can usually accumulate between 500-2K worth of credits.

Early on Cottages are a financial drain. They use up citizens, don't provide enough food/commerce. A complete waste of time. (personally I NEVER use them)

I fall behind in tech, wonders, cities power, etc. Its power at POINT of application that matters. No use having a 50 unit army, if its on wrong side of your empire, you border cities are only garrisoned by 1 archer and a spear, with 20 workers running about.

Maps I play are nothing less then huge, so I'm looking at 5/6 on starting continents (2 of them) Barb's may evolve into further civs, revolutionaries etc.

I can't understand what your complaining about, virtually all my new cities are cash flow positive from day 1, Oh, maintenance will rise with population/buildings, and my forces can drive me into the red. But a pillage and burn of a barb city or 3, helps.

Its just a matter of game play and expectations.

Expect to fall behind in technology, cities, power. Farms grow population, cottages don't. They don't really become effective till much later. Change your game play from normal civ, adapt, evolve but most of all enjoy it.

 

[Sgtslick]

I don't like disagreeing with a fellow Melbourne brother but I will lol. Its not totally game wrecking or anything but its definately very pigeon hole like. Its not a matter of you shouldn't expand past 3-6 cities until you have the at least 15-20 techs or whatever it is. Its that you can't. Unless you want to seriously lose the game at the very start and watch as your units are striking and being deleted (left feeling helpless and frustrated), then play this way, thats essentially what the game is telling you.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

IPEX - my monarch games are always the same - struggling with poor economy at the beginning. AI is spaming cities. I also try to claim land, but not always as quickly as AI. My main problem is with army - AI has bonuses and can easily muster a huge army. I can't. At least one of my cities have to constantly produce military units - in other case I'll quickly become "weak" and someone will invade me. And unit maintenance is killing my economy. Add to this cottages with no commerce bonus (I still haven't figured whether or not it's a bug)...

My actual game - 9 rivals met. And I have with 3 of them power ratio of 0.7 and with one - 0.6. I have to build units, and they cost me money. And I can't "produce" more money as fast as I build units. My cities simply do not grow so quickly and not always have plenty of river/coastal tiles.

For my style of playing (I like ecomonic growth, rather peaceful gameplay etc) monarch is simply too hard (and prince way too easy...).

 

[Sgtslick]

Aquila don't build much of an army before catapults, its always been this way in civ4 if you ask me. Before this point I always just play defensively but fight a cold war of grabbing good city spots. Usually I only build warriors and archers pretty much exclusively, even if I have copper/iron I don't want it because I then couldn't make warriors which are so dirt cheap and give +1 happy when you get monarchy ^^; They are also good for claiming tiles in this mod, such as disputed resource tiles that are in-between you and AI. 0.6 Army vs ai isn't so bad, oh one important thing tho is try and become your neighbours religion asap, then you can safely relax a bit and just build nothing but buildings. If they ever demand something always give it, you could even gift them $30 occasionally if you got spare money

In terms of cottages in ancient and classical era they aren't work it but once you can unlock the upgrades for them I always get them on grassland tiles and floodplains (especially river tiles).

Trade caravans are pretty good.

Oh and have you tried building settlers and deleting them Aquila? That gives you a nice solid income if you don't have a neighbour to send your trade caravan thingies too.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

Well... I once did not focus on army, then neighbour invaded me and burnt one of my cities. Since then I try to have abigger army And no - I never tried it (with settlers). If this is some sort of game exploitation, then I don't do it. Fortunately there's this trade caravan. It's a life saver

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

Game is built for Marathon speeds, its only modification by 45degrees that change that.

Actually no, it's not. So far my modification only involves noble difficulty level and normal gamrspeed. I will definetly balance other gamespeeds and difficulty levels but right now they are exactly as they were when Afforess stopped working on AND.

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

monarch is simply too hard (and prince way too easy...).

This is why I'm working on rebalancing the game. Right now a game on normal gamespeed and noble level (with my modification, included in the latest revisions) is probably almost as difficult as a game on monarch. But trust me, once I'm finished tweaking every level and speed, the game will be much better!

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

0.6 Army vs ai isn't so bad

I agree, it happens almost every time to me, although it doesn't stay so for too long. There are many ways to face this situation, for example using diplomacy to get help from strong neighbours or trying to remain friendly with the strongest ones. And anyway, nobody says that you're going to win every game! If you want a game where you are sure you will win, just play on settler! By the way this is the reason why I always play with Mastery Victory: I like to know that I've played a good game even if I've ranked 2nd or 3rd.