Not to mention that people seem to be mixing up the difference between a game and a simulator. The Civ series is not nor never has been a grognard civilization simulator. It's closer to design to a board game. It's meant to be faster pace with less minutiae. Personally anyone lamenting that...
WHAT?!? Forbidden subject... Now I wish I paid attention to these forums a little more over the years.
EDIT:
Well I can only speak anecdotally but it seems like the theorycrafting now is much better. /shrug just an opinion.
Yes this was basically the point I was trying to make. The computer shouldn't declare war unless it thinks it can get something from it. CiV toward the end did a better job with this. Civ6 is a bit sad right now, but I'm confident someone will fix it.
I don't know Civ 4 was released back in 05. This site was around, but not as useful as today. Players are much better at these kind of games. With that said I think people are getting better at Civ faster than the computer AI is.
One thing I always thought Civ 3 (I think it was 3) did that I liked was having an offensive and defensive value. Right now the reason horses are so strong is because there is no real downside to the speed. When horses had terrible defensive values it would lose badly to even a swordsman who...
You can't manipulate a machine if the code for it to be manipulated doesn't exist. If the AI would only declare war when it wants to declare war then there's nothing you could do. Besides what domination player would wait for the AI to declare. The whole point of domination is to go on the...
You don't have to do that. Just add more civs on whatever map type you're using. Right now it's easy to expand quickly because there is so much free space. Add 2-4 more civs and it will be considerably more constrained.
I agree, that's why I said I just wished it was less penalties. You still get egregious if you take cities when you were the one declared against. It should be at most medium or even low.
From the article it sounds like Jon actually likes the idea of 1UPT better than the stacks, but wasn't able to get a good enough implementation with solid enough AI to meet his standard.
Good luck with this. I don't think tall will ever really be viable in this version of Civ. By removing global happiness and replacing it with the current resource system it really encourages more of a wider approach. Also since they removed most of the percent bonuses you lose a lot of stacking...
I hope we're not too far off from the day that a developer can rent time for an AI like Watson to get better at their game by playing 1000s of games. The idea would be to snapshot at various times, this of course would require Watson to spit out some useful code to import into the game, and that...
I always felt that was a short coming of the Civ series. If you're the one being aggressed upon then you should have severely reduced warmonger penalties whenever you go on the offensive.
I think this would be easily fixed by, instead of counting every tech and civic they just have specific marker techs and civics that increase the cost. And maybe give an option to where it's random techs and civics that increase the cost. I like the idea of how its done. There's more ICS here...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.