1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Chronicles of the Ctrl-Z derision

Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall - Dawn of Civilization' started by migck, Jun 20, 2016.

  1. migck

    migck Señor de la guerra

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    176
    So, I'll begin this post by admitting what might be old news: I waste exceptional amounts of my (rather worthless) free time playing this mod... in Ctrl-Z mode.

    'Shameful' probably doesn't even begin to describe it. At this point, I'd probably need a few months in a reeducation camp to learn how to play CIV properly again, but... tinkering with history at every step so that it fits my preferences is just too damn addictive. And the recently included platybuilder is just a godsend in that regard.

    However I'd rather not center in my shameful ways, but rather, I'd like to try and share what I've been able to notice this way, so that it might help to improve the mod. Because the real problem I see, going from the above, is that the AI seems to have a lot more trouble than usual at making sensible choices due to being constrained by the additional ruleset from RFC.

    The main issue to begin with: stability. From my experience, it would seem the main cause of 'peaceful' collapse is the AI insisting on running hazardous civics and civic combinations that chip away at stability. A timely intervention in worldbuilder to give them compatible civics more often than not will keep them alive and even reverse an unstable tendency. Unless I'm mistaken, I don't think the AI can factor stability when choosing civics: they don't know the good and bad combinations, nor do they know that they should avoid open borders with richer civs if running mercantilism (a kinda important factor).
    The individual leaders prioritize their favorite civic regardless of the others, so you have Gustav Adolph running Vassalage and speeding up the Vikings' re-demise more often than not. They also don't seem to care too much about changing them ASAP if starting with backwater ones, so Mansa Musa doesn't seem too eager to switch from animism to organized religion for example, nor do they seem to do any active efforts to expand their state religion to avoid religious disunity.

    Another thing that's more of a little nuisance, the difficulty or impossibility to get a cramped yet historically pleasant city distribution in some areas by the AI alone, due to cultural frontiers. I'm thinking of places like the Caribbean, which more often than not ends up with three cities (if they even reach it): La Habana, Saint Domingue/Road Town, and Grenada/Martinique. It can hold up to six, badly optimized perhaps but it'd make for more tension and interesting situations. Yet the AI will generally not settle cities right next to another civ's cultural frontiers, so in the Caribbean the first to arrive usually secure all spots.

    And about settling, the difficulty for the AI to reach the edges of their historical area in due time. I've never seen the AI England or Canada settle Vancouver, nor the Russians reach Kamchatka. I guess with their tendency to accumulate troops disregarding infrastructure, they decide not to settle anymore due to increasing upkeep costs.

    But in the end, I'm thinking that no matter how one tries to script it around, the CIV AI is just going to be able to do what it can do... amassing troops and throwing it at problems. Which it doesn't even do that well. Things like sending an all-siege weapons party against a city, you know, the thing that load screen tells you not to do :p , while the thick of the army rests at a home city because they can't figure how to ship them there. Perhaps K-Mod would have helped there, but I recall merging it was not possible in the end. Or.. what if we go the Civ V route and do away with transport ships altogether? :lol:

    So perhaps all the historical areas are mostly for the human player to worry about, and the AI just an obstacle to surpass or an amusement to watch. I'm not sure if there's a legit issue here or if it's more of a long rant on my part. After all, this mod is not about following history to a T, so the fun is also in how it deviates from it, even if due to AI shenanigans.
    Sorry for the long post, and hope there's any useful idea here. One way or another, I'm having more than enough fun with this mod, so thank you Leoreth (apparently one of Prussia's finest now, hmm? ;P) for all your hard and excellent work.
     
  2. need my speed

    need my speed Rex Omnium Imperarium

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2009
    Messages:
    2,093
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    European Union (Magna Batavia)
    Shameful? You enjoy the game that way - what is there to be ashamed of, considering this is a single player game? I would enjoy this game far, far, far less, without the opportunities the World Builder offers me (and, of course, saving and loading games).
     
  3. trevor

    trevor Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2002
    Messages:
    234
    This.

    The stability rules are great for human players but until the AI understands the importance of civic combinations (or more leaders are added/takeovers pushed earlier) or of the bad relations penalty then the only result is a lot unnecessary grey.

    Would making stability only apply to over-expansion solve this?
     
  4. Just an idea

    Just an idea Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2016
    Messages:
    19
    Maybe AI would handle civics better if every leader had multiple favorite civics. Diplomatic bonus for favorite civic would have to be reduced thought.
     
  5. ezzlar

    ezzlar Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2001
    Messages:
    1,653
    Easiest would be letting AI and human player having different stability calculations.
     
  6. Imp. Knoedel

    Imp. Knoedel Properly Paranoid Proletarian

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    Messages:
    8,684
    Location:
    The cooler Germany
    The AIs already only suffer half of the instability they should.
     
  7. Makudomi

    Makudomi 初春型四番艦

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2016
    Messages:
    50
    Location:
    Miyadzu, Kyoto
    Didn't know this. That almost makes me want to play "equal stability mode" for laughs. :lol:
     
  8. Leoreth

    Leoreth 心の怪盗団 Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    33,722
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Leblanc
    Only for civics though.
     
  9. Ballazic

    Ballazic King

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2003
    Messages:
    627
    Location:
    Canada
    Spoiler :
     
  10. Tomorrow's Dawn

    Tomorrow's Dawn Heroes Never Die

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    3,618
    Location:
    SF Bay Area


    In honesty though, if you need a leg up, play on a slower speed.
     
  11. need my speed

    need my speed Rex Omnium Imperarium

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2009
    Messages:
    2,093
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    European Union (Magna Batavia)
    He does it for fun. Why is that shameful? Why should I play differently than I like to play because it's somehow 'cheating'? What, cheating against myself?
     
  12. Malchar

    Malchar Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Messages:
    499
    Location:
    Saint Paul, Minnesota
    It's only shameful if you purposefully play badly with one civ so that you can switch to another civ and take advantage of their new weakness.

    Then again, all's fair in love and war. :king:
     
  13. migck

    migck Señor de la guerra

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    176
    Perhaps I should center this on AI stability problems then. Some things I notice regularly on most games: the Vikings seem to always collapse in the 16th century, then come back with Gustav Adolph, and recollapse shortly after in the 19th or 20th century. Iran seems to be impossible to keep alive into the 20th century no matter how good I set them up, and the Mexican, Colombian and Argentine civs do seem to always lack in stability too.
    I recall that some civs also have their stability adjusted to historical trends when controlled by the AI, so for example the AI Romans will have their stability sink lower and lower after 1 AD so it's pretty much impossible they survive into the Middle Ages. But given how these last four civs are having their stability affected, I'm wondering:
    from a code standpoint, could it be that for example, the Iranians are keeping the Persians' 'historical trend', so that their stability is being affected in a 'Persian' fashion even if they aren't the same civ anymore? Or the same deal for the Mexicans/Aztecs or Colombians/Mayans?
     
  14. Tomorrow's Dawn

    Tomorrow's Dawn Heroes Never Die

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    3,618
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    lol

    You're free to play however you like, but at some point, it's good to play the game without cheating.
    My post wasn't as much "git gud" as it was an encouragement to try to work up the difficulty ladder.
    Everyone starts somewhere.
     

Share This Page