backdoor domination--like it or not?

[BubbaYeti]

Just won for the first time on "King" and it was a "backdoor" domination victory. See screenie:

Spoiler :

http://flic.kr/p/8JPizC

I played Siam, and was going for a cultural win. I got placed in the worst possible position...in between two aggressive civs (France to my left, Aztec to my right) in the middle of a pangaea (it was actually generated from the "fractal" map setting)--it was really the opposite of the out of the way start one would like. So, anyway here I am chugging along with my 3 cities trying to max culture and struggling to avoid being run over. The best thing I did was make friends with France early; we had open borders very early on through the rest of the game. I agreed to fight several wars with Napoleon just to maintain the friendship.

As the game progressed, France started steamrolling. They took over the west part of the map, then struck east. There were literally MASSES of troops moving through my land from France to conquer the three remaining civs. It became clear that France was going to win, so I shifted gears. I built some trebuchets and moved all my available units to surround Paris. (what, those elephants? we simple Siamese are just putting on a circus...hmm, those catapult thingys are for the renaissance fair lol). This was laughable because by this time France was using artillery and foreign legions!

As soon as France knocked out the last civ's capitol, we struck. It didn't even take all the units.

So, right now I am in love with the way domination works...on the other hand the AI seemed completely unable to recognize the danger. What do the rest of you think about the new way domination is handled?

 

[UKScud]

So, right now I am in love with the way domination works...on the other hand the AI seemed completely unable to recognize the danger. What do the rest of you think about the new way domination is handled?

It's stupid as its unrealistic, and it should be binned. [My opinion of course]

Do you really feel you deserved that win? What points score did you get out of it?

 

[WarKirby]

Winning based on exploiting AI stupidity is never a good thing.

After the first time I lost a domination victory to someone I'd never even met in Civ IV, I turned it off permanantly.

 

[BubbaYeti]

Do you really feel you deserved that win? What points score did you get out of it?

Only 1064 points, so not a great rating. As far as deserving the win, Siam didn't really "dominate" the world, so no. On the other hand, I'm happy that I recognized the strategic opportunity to save a clearly lost game (plus first win on a higher difficulty level is always nice). However, truth be told, I wouldn't mind seeing the domination victory condition be something like: be in possession of all the other civ's original capitols (or maybe 3/4 or them?) rather than the way it is defined now.

Winning based on exploiting AI stupidity is never a good thing.

Aren't ALL wins at civ based on this, to some extent or another? You outplayed/outthought/outstrategized the AI and won? I see your point though...to some extent you want the AI to be to a certain level of competency, in all game aspects, including victory conditions.

 

[brindle]

Only 1064 points, so not a great rating. As far as deserving the win, Siam didn't really "dominate" the world, so no. On the other hand, I'm happy that I recognized the strategic opportunity to save a clearly lost game (plus first win on a higher difficulty level is always nice). However, truth be told, I wouldn't mind seeing the domination victory condition be something like: be in possession of all the other civ's original capitols (or maybe 3/4 or them?) rather than the way it is defined now.



Aren't ALL wins at civ based on this, to some extent or another? You outplayed/outthought/outstrategized the AI and won? I see your point though...to some extent you want the AI to be to a certain level of competency, in all game aspects, including victory conditions.

A simple fix without putting back in the tedious "own 60% of the land" C4 mechanic would be to force the domination win upon owning ALL AI capitals. that would fix the 'quick strike against last mammoth AI's coastal city' cheeze.

 

[Abremms]

i opened this thread thinking it was about something completely different.

I think its a good idea, but the AI needs work, they don't protect thier capitals.

also, i wish it was to "take and hold all capitals for 10 turns" or some such, and then make the AI put real effort into retaking thier capitals. that way you can still backdoor thier capitals, but there is more risk that it wont work and you'll take heavy losses. AI should for sure try harder to retake thier capitals at any rate.

 

[Mustakrakish]

You fell in love with IT?

Yak, that domination victory is poo... I call it "alright I'm bored, time to end this" victory.

Hope they'll rip it off the game AND BURN IT!!!

YES it deserves to die and I hope it'll BURN IN HELL!!!

 

[Aristos]

On the other hand, I'm happy that I recognized the strategic opportunity to save a clearly lost game (plus first win on a higher difficulty level is always nice).

I'm sorry, but I don't call THAT "strategic opportunism"... to me, it's something more like "pathetic bug exploitation", because it sounds like you were playing the early version of the game (before "patches"), where you could declare war with open borders active and not be expelled from attacked country after declaration...

THAT is not strategy, my friend. In fact, to be honest, there is hardly any strategy left in civ0.5, sad but true...

 

[carlisimo]

I think its a good idea, but the AI needs work, they don't protect thier capitals.

also, i wish it was to "take and hold all capitals for 10 turns" or some such, and then make the AI put real effort into retaking thier capitals. that way you can still backdoor thier capitals, but there is more risk that it wont work and you'll take heavy losses. AI should for sure try harder to retake thier capitals at any rate.

I agree completely. I like the idea behind Civ V's domination mechanic, but the AI needs to appear to take it seriously and there should be an opportunity to retake it.

 

[Venger]

i opened this thread thinking it was about something completely different.

Well played sir, well played...

 

[Gath]

Domination wins are far too easy now.

 

[pagh80]

The only problem i see is that he was able to win without having control of all the other old capitals. That can easily be changed though.
The idea behind the domination victory is fine though.

 

[gunter]

As I pointed out in another thread, if the AI defended its capitols like a human it would be impossible to conquer them.

 

[CYZ]

I love backdoor domination!






Wait.....

 

[Abremms]

As I pointed out in another thread, if the AI defended its capitols like a human it would be impossible to conquer them.

nah, there is no nut that cannot be cracked with the right strategy. make the level of capital defense contingent upon difficulty if need be, but i for one would welcome a challenge.

 

[Pantastic]

The current domination win feels cheesy. If they make the AI realize it's vulnerable to it and defend its capital, it wouldn't be nearly as bad, but until the AI gets a lot better it's just an easy way to win.

 

[WarKirby]

Aren't ALL wins at civ based on this, to some extent or another? You outplayed/outthought/outstrategized the AI and won? I see your point though...to some extent you want the AI to be to a certain level of competency, in all game aspects, including victory conditions.

Not really.

Outmaneuvering the AI in a mixed land battle to eventually capture their empire, is an exmple of a good way to win.

Whereas, building up a stack of doom outside the enemy borders and moving in when they move their troops away (because they don't recognise it as a threat) is not.

The point to think of is, would this tactic work against an average human player? Anyone with half a mind would see your 50 units and build up their defenses in the nearby area, as well as switching research more towards military

 

[polypheus]

Well this victory condition as it exists now shouldn't be called "domination" simple as that. It should be called "last capital standing". The point of this victory condition was to recognize when you "dominated" without making you tediously prove your clearly dominating status by making you mop up each and every city even though you clearly could given time.

But this is easily fixable:
1) Make it so you must capture ALL capitals.
2) Make sure you hold all capitals for 10 turns. (or 5 or 20 or whatever, long enough to prove you can hold on to it at least).

Problem solved.

 

[Pantastic]

Whereas, building up a stack of doom outside the enemy borders and moving in when they move their troops away (because they don't recognise it as a threat) is not.

When I tried this, the actually AI recognized my stack as a threat. So he asked me 'are those units preparing to attack me', even though we were the only two left and there was nothing but him on that continent. When I said 'oh no, they're just passing through' he was fine with it since I had been honest until then.

They should program the AI to ignore honesty when someone might be making a game-winning move, since I don't care about my reputation once I've won the game.

 

[Collic]

I anticipate future AI updates prioritising capital defence, if not just leaving more units back for city defence in general.