1UPT - final verdict?

[shaglio]

By no means was I advocating to completely do away with city sieges. How else would you be able to capture a city without getting up-close-and-personal with it. But it seems like the vast majority of my battles are city sieges, and I'd prefer a more balanced experience between them and field battles.

 

[Lord Shadow]

Sounds reasonable, though it seems to be mostly a challenge for the AI, who would be told to try and intercept attacking armies before they reach its cities.

Also, a party found at a disadvantage in a given war might hold out better entrenching themselves around the cities to make use of their ranged attacks. That might be why, as it is, most wars are all about city sieges: if the AI is strong enough it comes out at you (gunning for your cities, but you can meet it earlier), but it's not often that powerful in the face of a human player.

 

[Roxlimn]

City ranged attacks are of marginal benefit. Aircraft and Nodes provide more of a homecourt advantage.

 

[Bezurn]

If the map size was increased and the minimum space between cities was increased to 6-8 tiles between them then it would be a good idea to bring 'forts' back into the game as a meaningful improvement.

The map scripts would need to be adapted for the larger gaps between cities. Perhaps forts could provide territory control of in a 1 hex radius to shore up the gaps between cities, and a minimum distance between forts would need to be 3 hexes.

I do think that increasing the map size and city distance would make for a more enjoyable 1upt game.

Oh, and forts should be constructable by infantry, not workers. The workers would be busy enough connecting all of the resources and roads between cities.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

What if the game had a new type of "hybrid" unit that could do both a ranged and a melee attack but you could only choose one per turn? In civ5 terms, it could represent a battalion that has both swordsman and archers in it. This type of unit would preserve 1upt while still giving the player the same benefit of a stack like in mupt.

 

[Acken]

Regarding cities I've never liked the bombarding mechanic of cities. It's weaker in CBE than in C5 however. If it was up to me I'd remove it and just keep hit points + decreased damage through defense stat. Always felt it allows too much recklessness in the game and is mostly beneficial to humans rather than AI.

 

[Hail]

for 1upt to work it needs:
1. much bigger maps
2. a competent AI (obviously it must be competent in a reasonable timeframe)

both of these with Firaxis are not happening.

why?
1. Firaxis is obsessed with 3d and shiny stuff. giant maps are a big no-no.
2. you can dream all you want. it seems, every game Firaxis writes the AI from scratch.

 

[Kutuzov]

for 1upt to work it needs:
1. much bigger maps
2. a competent AI (obviously it must be competent in a reasonable timeframe)

both of these with Firaxis are not happening.

why?
1. Firaxis is obsessed with 3d and shiny stuff. giant maps are a big no-no.
2. you can dream all you want. it seems, every game Firaxis writes the AI from scratch.

Not arguing with point #1

#2. Same with pretty much any 4x game, Firaxis, Amplitude, whatever. And yes, they likely do have to write the AI for a new Civ game from scratch. Different systems for the AI to manage you know

 

[Hail]

#2. Same with pretty much any 4x game, Firaxis, Amplitude, whatever. And yes, they likely do have to write the AI for a new Civ game from scratch. Different systems for the AI to manage you know

they do not.

every civ game has tiles, citizens working tiles, etc.

 

[Gorbles]

Different tiles that do different things, updated and/or wholly new game mechanics that feed into these tiles, new Victory conditions that work differently to previous ones.

Tell me Hail, why are you so sure about AI programming?

 

[Gort]

#2. Same with pretty much any 4x game, Firaxis, Amplitude, whatever. And yes, they likely do have to write the AI for a new Civ game from scratch. Different systems for the AI to manage you know

They didn't write the AI from scratch for this game. The AI code still contains references to the Maya and Research Agreements and loads of other Civ 5 stuff. Chances are they just took the Civ 5 AI and put in a few new bits for the truly new systems in BE.


-<Row Name="AI_GS_UN_SECURED_VOTE_MOD">

<Value>300</Value>

</Row>


-<Row Name="AI_GS_SS_HAS_APOLLO_PROGRAM">

<Value>150</Value>


-<Row Name="RELIGION_BELIEF_SCORE_CITY_MULTIPLIER">

<Value>3</Value>

</Row>


-<Row Name="RELIGION_BELIEF_SCORE_WORKED_PLOT_MULTIPLIER">

<Value>8</Value>

</Row>


-<Row Name="RELIGION_BELIEF_SCORE_OWNED_PLOT_MULTIPLIER">

<Value>5</Value>

</Row>


-<Row Name="RELIGION_BELIEF_SCORE_UNOWNED_PLOT_MULTIPLIER">

<Value>3</Value>

</Row>


-<Row Name="RELIGION_MISSIONARY_RANGE_IN_TURNS">

<Value>10</Value>

</Row>


-<Row Name="RELIGION_MAX_MISSIONARIES">

<Value>4</Value>

</Row>

 

[Bezurn]

A spoiler tag for the code would have been appreciated... Now I know the secrets to winning the UN victory, how to maximize my religion yield, and MORE! No reason to keep playing now that the rabbits out of the bag!!

 

[Kutuzov]

they do not.

every civ game has tiles, citizens working tiles, etc.

You're the one that suggested that they did.

 

[Kutuzov]

They didn't write the AI from scratch for this game. The AI code still contains references to the Maya and Research Agreements and loads of other Civ 5 stuff. Chances are they just took the Civ 5 AI and put in a few new bits for the truly new systems in BE.


-<Row Name="AI_GS_UN_SECURED_VOTE_MOD">

<Value>300</Value>

</Row>


-<Row Name="AI_GS_SS_HAS_APOLLO_PROGRAM">

<Value>150</Value>


-<Row Name="RELIGION_BELIEF_SCORE_CITY_MULTIPLIER">

<Value>3</Value>

</Row>


-<Row Name="RELIGION_BELIEF_SCORE_WORKED_PLOT_MULTIPLIER">

<Value>8</Value>

</Row>


-<Row Name="RELIGION_BELIEF_SCORE_OWNED_PLOT_MULTIPLIER">

<Value>5</Value>

</Row>


-<Row Name="RELIGION_BELIEF_SCORE_UNOWNED_PLOT_MULTIPLIER">

<Value>3</Value>

</Row>


-<Row Name="RELIGION_MISSIONARY_RANGE_IN_TURNS">

<Value>10</Value>

</Row>


-<Row Name="RELIGION_MAX_MISSIONARIES">

<Value>4</Value>

</Row>

We were told right at the start that this game was built off the Civ V BNW code. No surprises there. Thus the endless complaints about the game being a reskin if Civ V and the outrage from some that they were asked to pay the full whack for DLC.

I'm not suggesting that you did either of these. I merely post it to support that we all knew this game was not built from scratch.

 

[Hail]

Different tiles that do different things, updated and/or wholly new game mechanics that feed into these tiles, new Victory conditions that work differently to previous ones.

Tell me Hail, why are you so sure about AI programming?

I am not sure about AI programming. in fact, I am very unsure about AI programming.

however! min-maxing a function, a wide/deep search through possible object states to find the required one (pathfinding), etc. are not an AI

You're the one that suggested that they did.

They do. but they do not have to

 

[Gorbles]

Pathfinding and AI are, in fact, very closely linked in a number of ways. Probably not so much when it comes to turn-based gameplay, but eh. A* and similar search algorithms are used across a wide variety of AI logic systems (as well as pathfinding in any game, or pathfinding through a particular tree to reach a logical decision, etc, et al).