BtS WAY to easy???

[frob2900]

exactly, the advantage the AI has over the human in actual tech beaker costs is the same

Ok, yeah, sorry I misunderstood what you meant.

So, the issue is that various people are saying:

A) The increased unit costs and inflation in the XML (and also espionage) are causing slow AI teching.
B) The AI is somehow behaving in a way that slows it's teching down (prioritizing units, drawn out intra-AI wars etc.)
C) A mixture of these issues.

Now, espionage (and corporations) has been addressed in a patch and the XML values can be fixed at will by any player. That's the situation right now.

If it is AI behaviour issues that are causing slow tech, then we just have to wait an AI behaviour code patch to be released.

 

[uberfish]

Investing some cash in espionage is fine, tech-stealing is actually a quite efficient way of acquiring techs no one wants to trade. The AI just needs to use its built up points to steal tech from other civs instead of sitting on 15k points and repeatedly poisoning some poor city.

 

[frob2900]

Investing some cash in espionage is fine, tech-stealing is actually a quite efficient way of acquiring techs no one wants to trade. The AI just needs to use its built up points to steal tech from other civs instead of sitting on 15k points and repeatedly poisoning some poor city.

Ok, true. But is the inefficent use of Espionage the main problem? (I'm not saying it isn't.. I haven't played enough to have an opinion).

I'm assuming there is a problem, since while impossible to know for sure, there does seem to be some consensus among a number of players that BtS has dropped down the difficulty a notch, at least on Monarch+.

A poll would be interesting.

 

[Horace]

I think Solvers patch has lowered the amount the AI spends on espionage. This may have an affect on the speed it techs at (as more money should be spent on research..)

 

[Mango]

Guys, if it is too easy then bump it up one level. Most people who are good play on Prince or higher. If you find Prince is now too easy, play Monarch. You do not have to remain at your previous level. Find a balance that works for you.

 

[frob2900]

Guys, if it is too easy then bump it up one level. Most people who are good play on Prince or higher. If you find Prince is now too easy, play Monarch. You do not have to remain at your previous level. Find a balance that works for you.

What if someone plays Deity?

 

[Antilogic]

Well, I'll make a "Sid" difficulty just for you.

 

[frob2900]

Well, I'll make a "Sid" difficulty just for you.

Heh, I don't play Deity But the same logic applies. If the maximum difficulty is performing below-par, that is a problem. Of course, imho, it isn't much fun if the AI tech rate is stagnating on any difficulty level you like to play.

 

[SevenSpirits]

Guys, if it is too easy then bump it up one level. Most people who are good play on Prince or higher. If you find Prince is now too easy, play Monarch. You do not have to remain at your previous level. Find a balance that works for you.

In general, it seems counterproductive to make existing difficulty levels easier in an expansion.

 

[futurehermit]

Thanks Frob, I stand corrected, I read somewhere that the bonuses had been trimmed using Warlords Monarch as a baseline. That's what I was going off of.

I'm getting pretty sick of the "just bump it up a skill level" argument. Not only do the problems in question exist at the highest skill level, but that argument is missing the central thrust of the whole concern in the first place: The AI is not teching properly!

 

[frob2900]

Thanks Frob, I stand corrected, I read somewhere that the bonuses had been trimmed using Warlords Monarch as a baseline. That's what I was going off of.

The happiness bonuses are set after Warlords Monarch levels, I think.

I'm getting pretty sick of the "just bump it up a skill level" argument. Not only do the problems in question exist at the highest skill level, but that argument is missing the central thrust of the whole concern in the first place: The AI is not teching properly!

Seconded.

 

[neriana]

I don't know if BtS is easier than Warlords, but I do find it a lot more fun than Warlords. The AI seems to perform more intelligently, if less aggressively; and even without aggressive AI, I'm being attacked by those leaders who should be attacking me, like Genghis Khan. I'm probably one of those "wimpy" midrange casual players who likes a sandbox/roleplaying style.

However, espionage seems to be something of a problem; the AI does seem to use it too much, at the expense of more important things. Perhaps the AI should get a special espionage bonus at higher difficulty settings, besides using it more intelligently on every setting.

Also from what I've seen, aggressive AI should instead be called assertive AI or challenging AI. I'm therefore unclear as to what people who don't want to turn on aggressive AI, but who want a more challenging game, want. Yes, Alexander will be more likely to attack with aggressive AI, but Gandhi won't. Gandhi will be a lot tougher to beat to a space race with aggressive AI, though. Without aggressive AI, from the games I've played, it looks like Alex will be nearly as likely to start war but a lot less likely to win.

 

[ds61514]

Gandhi will be a lot tougher to beat to a space race with aggressive AI, though.

I would think Aggressive AI magnifies the effects of geography anymore. Sure if you're next to Alex prepare for war. But if you're next to Gandhi and it's ALEX who is next to Gandhi, well, your chances of winning are probably higher.

 

[FrancisMarion]

The best solution would be a smarter teching AI, but since that should be applied to all AI regardless of difficultly level the only real distuinguishing feature between the difficulty levels should be AI bonuses.

Having some of the bonuses flatline at Monarch doesn't make much sense unless the Civ people just want there to be as few bonuses for the AI as possible.

Once some of the other problems are sorted I think the current bonuses for Prince and bellow are fine and the bonuses for Monarch+ can be tweaked. In the meantime, the Aggressive AI option for me at least makes the game harder, so until they get it worked out, I'll enjoy the extra challenge.

 

[uberfish]

Hmm, tried a few starts at deity and my experience (fractal/normal speed/standard AI) is they are teching just fine even with some skirmishing, however I have been drawing some financial AI opposition. Great Wall pre-2000BC, Theology/Philosophy in BCs, Feudalism around 0, Rifling around 1000.

Also, if you start boxed into a corner, it's considerably more difficult to rush your way out because the AI fields metal troops to defend rather than just archers.

Anyway so far doesn't seem "way too easy" to me, but maybe it is luck of the draw with opponents.

 

[madscientist]

Some more input into the AI tech pace. Running Monarch Speed, Huge map/marathon speed. This time there are 7 civcs cramped into one continent. I am bordered by HC to the NW who does not have access to copper/horse/iron, Hammarabi to the west who is cramped by 2 other AIs, and Joao to the south who is ib some tough artic terrain and blocked in by myself. The tech pace in this game was staggeringly high, HC was cottage spamming everything, I can only guess he was trying desperately for catapults and gunpowder. Likewise Joao. The other AIs such as Agustus/Hannibal/Gilgamesh were also teching very well.

So perhaps the AI is responding more to overdevelopement and thus tanking thier economy. I added Solvers patch last Friday and have done it again so I think the EP fix is not in my game yet.

 

[futurehermit]

I've had some financial AIs (example Mayans, Dutch) tech quite well with large empires. However, I am finding this to be the exception and not the rule.

 

[madscientist]

But all 6 other AIs were doing this (not just financial HC). I think the AIs look at what other AIs are doing and adjust accordingly. If one AI hikes up the EP slider (by increased EP against them) the AIs up their's. If One AI is close by and start tehcing away the others will follow suit. Just another thought, I really don't know for sure why the AI techs faster.

 

[Lidjis]

At the risk of restating something already said I will add that I too have noticed that BTS demands a different play style. I play on emperor, and back in warlords I could win by warmongering early and often, playing peace just well enough to stave off total bankruptcy. I would fight 2-3 wars before rifling, then sit back with my larger territory and cottage everything to beat the AI's into space. From what I used to hear around here about the importance of warmongering on emperor+, I think that that is an experience that others had as well. In BTS I quickly realized that warring early and often is less effective. The AI builds more units, detering those early rushes, and more importantly the AI builds a variety of units and seems smarter in its unit counters. This is not to say rushing is impossible, but the combination of a smarter, diverse, more militaristic AI, along with the dip in quality of starting locations in BTS (there is never any food to whip up that axe rush), combine to make rushing a less viable strategy. With the AI tech rate slowed by peace and unit maintenance, playing peace has a higher chance of success at a higher level, which I think is great!

Of course warring still works, but it is best done mid game once you have achieved some kind of tech lead. Plus, I fought my first real defensive war in BTS, when immortal Aggressive monty declared war on me as boudica. I got to build my first Dun, and it was fun to actually feel threatened as monty's 4 25 unit stacks marched into my territory. I didn't have much of a tech lead, so it really felt like I was fighting for my survival.

I'm in no way saying I think the BTS AI is perfect, and espionage definitely needs some work, but for me at least, it has made me broaden my play style a bit, which I think enhances the game.

 

[darrelljs]

Anyway so far doesn't seem "way too easy" to me, but maybe it is luck of the draw with opponents.

Well, as I posted over at RB, I've one exactly one out of the five Immortal games I played with BTS, compared to somewhere around 2/3 win rate in Warlords 2.08. In all five games, even the one I won, the AI teched much better than 2.08. I've noticed that sometimes the AI has trouble with certain types of terrain, especially on Emperor where it doesn't start with a Worker anymore. Its odd, hopefully there will be more consistency after the changes going into the next patch. It reminds me a bit of the Better AI mod development, only now there are a lot more testers giving feedback .

Darrell