Between Civ 4,5,6 how would you rate the depth of each game and the AI?

How would you rate the depth of gameplay and the AI in Civ 4, 5, 6? 1-10 scale would be nice.

 

As for the AI:

Civ 4-7
Civ 5-4
Cic 6-2

 

I wonder what keeps people playing with an AI rated that low (2)? Civ 6 is obviously a popular game and a successful title. I assume the majority play single player as I do. So it's curious how it hasn't completely died if the AI is this bad.

 

AI:
Civ 4 => 8/10
Civ 5 => 4/10
Civ 6 => 1/10

Civ 4 had very good AI right away. Civ 6 has worst AI in history of the game, even Civ 5 on release wasn't as bad. Civ 6 AI is completely incompetent at war, even with Deity bonuses it feels like taking a candy from a child, its just not fun to fight against AI.

 

I dont get it, why is a new game without any expansions compared to old games which had more patchs and two expansions each? I think we can make a good comparison when Civ 7 is coming in stores ...
But yeah, at the moment the AI isnt that potent, Civ 5's was definitly better (at the end) and Civ 4's too, but the last one I didnt played for a long time.

To make the question even unfairer, what about modded Civ Games? How would you rate the AIs of Fall from Heaven or Vox Populi compared to the 3 Vanilla games? Or what about compared to Deep Blue? And what about ... ... ...

 

Comparing the Vanillas since Civ 6 isn’t nearly completed yet. Civ 4 is still the best in the series overall. With respect to integration of historical information for Civlopedia when researching, the variety of units, the choices of initial Civs and the AI make it the best. The finialized version (Beyond the Sword) with corporations and religion, modding ability take it to another level. I always enjoyed the games. And I’ve said in other forums that using the mod Total Realism makes it unbelievably better (in fact, I’ve quit playing Civ 6 unless it is upgraded/updated appropriately and have already started a game of Civ 4 the TR mod). The AI was great in Civ 4. While the AI was nowhere near as good in Civ 5, Civ 5 when fully completed was decent enough. After playing as every civ, the path to victory became tedious. I never felt challenged in civ 5. Civ 6 has really done poorly with the AI. While I like the military support units, graphics, combat mechanics and districts; the weakness of the AI is absurd. Wars are boring. Just building a handful of units will result in an inevitable conquest of the world. The AI went from not building any units to making a lot of them but not using them. I encounter a city in which every space in the surrounding area is occupied with a unit. But at least it’s better than having one unit and garrisoning it. The constant denouncements over declared and secret agendas is unbelievably annoying. Spies are useful only for siphoning funds. The AI is never strong enough for me to sabotage space race projects. I loved being able to subvert cities, take over a city with culture strength and subverting units from civ 4.

 

Yeah, the AI in 6 is obviously pretty bad, we all know this. However, the thing about Civ 4 is that stacks-of-doom camoflaged the AI weakness by basically turning every fight into a slugfest. No tactics necessary. In fact, good civ4 players gave noobs like me good advice about not bothering to hold the ground or envelop the enemy.

To answer OP's qn:

AI:
4: 6
5: 5-8 (lanch to patch)
6: 3

Gameplay depth
4: 5-8 (launch to dlc)
5 4-7 (launch to dlc)
6: 6

 

Most players don't come on forums to discuss the best tactics or spend time learning the mechanics. Thus the AI could bascially be a placeholder and it would still suit their needs. This is probably also why they don't invest in a good AI either.

Consider that according to Steam, only 35% of people have unlocked the achievement for beating Chieftain difficulty or higher. For Civ 5, this is 22%. Now some people might be using offline mode I guess, but that should be fairly telling. Of course, this might also mean people don't finish games, but that's probably even worse.

 

It’s most likely the last point. I can’t tell you how many games I have played, saw an easy runaway victory that I just didn’t want to slog through.

 

I have played Civ 6 for roughly 750 hours over the past 8 months.
I have not played Civ 5 since Civ 6 came out.
I have not played Civ 4 since Civ 5 came out.
I have played thousands of hours of both (same goes for 1-3 as well).

I may be rating Civ 6 higher than other people due to this recency bias - but the fact of the matter is I enjoy 6 more than I enjoy the others at this point.


Depth:
Civ 5 w/ expansions - 9
Civ 6 vanilla - 8
Civ 4 w/ expansions - 7

AI:
Civ 5 w/ expansions + Mods - 7
Civ 4 w/ expansions - 7
Civ 6 vanilla - 5

 

Have to agree with you both. The AI could be dumb as a doorknob or as clever as Einstien, the truth is people get bored midway, all the fun of the beginning game petters out come boring mid game and this is a flaw with ALL past civ games that they always fail to address

 

To me, it's all about the ability to win. The Civ 4 AI always knew how to win on higher levels. The Civ 5 AI kind of knew how to win (but when going science and a spaceship part was built somewhere in the tundra, well.....

The Civ 6 AI just doesn't know how to win. At all. Period. This alone is why people don't finish games.

And remember, steam achievements are deceiving. Civ 5 didn't count achievements if you used *any* Mod (well, other than the mod achievement lol). Well, what's more important, an achievement, or a fun game using a mod where the AI is better. Civ 6 apparently allows achievements with mods, and you still have that few finishes.

I am currently playing a Civ 4 Mod that I never played before, Fall From Heaven 2. I have played so many hours of Civ 4 it's sick, and this has totally renewed my interest. The point of the rambling is the following: the modders have reprogrammed the AI to not only understand the mechanics of the game (including the Armageddon Counter), but also how to cast spells and so forth. And, the AI can cast a spell, create a unit, and use the unit *with purpose* shockingly! Compare this to Civ 5 where without a Mod to this day an archer can't move one tile and shoot.

So, it's a combination of factors, but the AI seems to not only be getting dumber, but to have less ability to be changed to being smarter.

I've had all three games at release. So, rankings for the vanilla versions:

Civ 4 AI: 8 (relative to the other two)
Civ 5 AI: 3
Civ 6 AI: 1.2 (the .2 is for those little early surprise wars at Deity)

A final note. My level of play for Civ 4 took a long time to get to Emperor, and still Monarch is pretty much the best level. Civ 5 it was Emperor and then to Immortal. Civ 6 I've already beaten Deity. This is always on a large map with a lot of Civs, so levels are relative to game settings. The only reason I say this is at this rate by the time Civ 7 comes out it won't even be interesting to me, and I bet there are *many* others that feel the same.

Firaxis, I know that I'm getting older, and that I don't matter as a result. But consider this. When I bought Civ II it was just for me, one purchase. When I purchased Civ 6, it was 4 copies for me and my children. Civ 7 will not have those 4 purchases at the rate this is going.

 

I think the AI agendas are really interesting. I don't see how it's possible for AI to get worse in this day and age but it must be because combat and victory rules have changed.

 

Did it, though?

I'm not sure people are considering CivIV "Tech Trading" when evaluating the strength of its AI. Or making someone your insta-friend if you give them your religion. Or killing all of a Civ's neighbors one by one and them believing that you won't do the same to them.

 

Absolutely meaningless when the vast majority of players deem the game unplayable without mods that disable achievements. Try harder with your reasoning next time or just stay silent. If this is the Metric the Devs are using they are likewise certifiably demented.

Moderator Action: Please be more civil in discussion. Telling someone to "just stay silent" is not appropriate for these forums. leif
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

First of all, the vast majority of players are not the ones on the forums looking for mods that make the AI more difficult. So I don't know how you would even begin to substantiate that claim. Secondly, if you had read a bit further down, you would see that:

And if you didn't know that, it's likely that you either don't play with mods or haven't played Civ 6. Either of which would undermine your statement.

 

When did I ever say that was my claim? It is easy to defeat your opponents point when you project so hard that you misrepresent what is actually said. At no point has my participation in this discussion ever been about mods that increase AI challenge.

Which is not something the person I am quoting ever said in this thread. Someone else bringing that up has no baring on my comment. You have a serious impairment if this is what you took away from my post.

Moderator Action: Please discuss the post and not the poster. Telling someone they have a serious impairment is inappropriate. leif
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

What I took away from your post is that you have no idea what you're talking about and no idea how to present an argument except with insults.

Same things I took away from this post. Oh, except that you can't spell also.

Moderator Action: Please return to the topic of the thread instead of each other. leif

 

I don't remember much about Civ 4 but Civ6 gets bonus points just because of unique agendas. Its like an entertaining little soap opera; Cyrus is like a smooth operator who is trying to steal your lady friend (ie. Cities) and he'll treat them so much better with his internal trade routes, Pairidaeza, and unpenalised yields. Tomyris sees right through him though.