Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Aristos, Apr 2, 2019.
I disabled them all. I may have to clear them from my files.
Well, I believe the original goal of the patch was to make it so the AI would give diminishing returns on resources, valuing them less as they get more of them. That definitely does not work here, instead it's a hard cap per trade, which you can do over and over again to achieve the same result as one big trade would have if not for that cap. The hotfix removed the worst exploits, but the trading works no better than before the first patch which aimed to improve it, so that's still a failure grade in this particular area if you ask me. But at least I can play the game without feeling like a cheater now, which is good.
11 seems to be the cutoff number of strategic resources in most cases, so that's the number you should start with when selling. Then scale down manually to see if they still give the same amount. This may be affected by the era, game speed and so on though.
Good point, I was so frustrated by and laser focused on the skyrocketing gpt bug in the past few weeks that I forgot about why trade was revised in the first place..
Anyone have an issue with an AI that will not give gold when peacing out? This may be intentional, just checking. I believe I was offered gold for peacing out when I took several cities earlier in the game. But currently with the Khmer I have destroyed his entire army, pillaged all his trade routes, and every single tile in his empire, and he still won't offer a peace deal nor any gold. I'm able to trade even peace treaties, but he won't offer anything. I did not take any cities in my war with the Khmer, so that may be why. I'm okay with this, just checking if it's intentional.
Can't say for sure but sounds like normal AI behavior to me that I have seen before. Depending on how they are feeling about winning/losing they sometimes don't offer peace at all, sometimes only even peace w/ no gold, and sometimes they give you gold. Who knows what exact calculations they make behind the scenes. Taking cities from them certainly makes them feel a lot more like "losing" though.
Thought one thing this patch addressed was that AI would give away less of their entire treasury when losing a war (did they put a cap?), so any situation where the AI doesn't give away free stuff is an improvement IMO
Well not exactly. In that specific case you could trade resource for resource or resource for luxury which means you could get resources and luxuries which you do not have for almost free. If you say, that with the gold you have acquired in mentioned way you can buy resources and luxuries you do not have/own very cheaply, then that is similar. Is it so?
Someone else reported this in a different thread a few days ago. I don't recall if any mods were involved. The advanced setup worked fine, IIRC, it was just missing from the basic setup screen.
Yes, that is what I experienced.
Wait what? Plains starts are the best. Do you mean like flat plains with no features?
Just to make sure, may I ask which version of the game PC users have now? Aspyr might not have released the update for Mac or Linux after all. I still have 18.104.22.1684 and I believe PC's were updated to 22.214.171.1247? Can anyone confirm this, please?
Can confirm. PC version is updated, Mac and Linux are not yet.
If they have a military emergency against you they will not make peace no matter what. As soon as the emergency expires, they will be quick to settle. This goes for all the civs in an emergency.
I appreciate the confirmation. May I ask what happened and when are we getting the hot fix?
Excellent overview. You'll be happy to know that we've now got the rest of the correct behavior in place. Once the AI purchases/trades for up to double the amount they actually need, they no longer care to acquire any more.
Dennis, we really appreciate you coming here and discussing this with us.
are you guys working on a better map distribution of strategics?
They did another QA update this morning.
Interesting. I wonder what it will cover.
Please define "better". Do you not find that clustering... and therefore scarcity... adds motivation for trade and warfare?
Unless there are unreasonable cases that require special treatment (e.g. Mongols start with no horses on their landmass), I find uneven distribution to be desirable.
Separate names with a comma.