madscientist
RPC Supergenius
I vote against an agressive AI. It just makes the AI dumber and they tech worse.
^^Maybe it is better to check if there is water or a mountain 1 NE of the warrior before doing that, don't you think ?....![]()
You're obviously a newbie. EVERYBODY knows that if you can't move the warrior 1NE you regen because the map is unwinnable.
Sisiutil has kept the number of Civs and map size the same throughout the ALCs. That's been constant and I doubt Sisiutil will change now. Lincoln's a good solid choice to increase the difficulty.
I kind of like this idea and am strongly considering it.I've found 3.17 slightly harder, so perhaps staying at Emperor for the first outing might be advisable?
Also Sis, did you consider my suggestion for using low sea level and having 2 extra civs (9 total)? That will naturally increase the difficulty a little and also make the late game more interesting. 7 civs really is awfully small and unchallenging.
BEst,
As armoredcrawler said, when I've played with Aggressive AI on (as in the Shaka game), I've found that the AI techs much slower, which tends to offset the advantages they gain through having more units, since I end up having better ones.Hello Everyone
FWIW, I agree with Mukuu, my view is that Emporer level games are the most fun to follow.
Personally I have found the latest patch more challenging and further, @ sisiutil, you play such an aggressive style yourself and yet you dont use the 'aggressive ai' setting. Not only does the AI build more units, but its more of a diplomatic challenge as well. I really think that you should have been using this setting since the Ragnar game.
Personally, I'd go with the move to Immortal at first, but if things don't work, go back to Emperor and consider another adjustment if you want.