Civilization 5 Rants Thread

[historix69]

If you start building a wonder, it is visible on the map next to your city.

The AI's decision to build a wonder should be based on a random number (throwing dices) ... I noticed that by going back to a save game and doing things different like attacking/not attacking a barbarian, the random seed for the AI's decision might be changed so that AI will choose something else. (This can be noticed e.g. when you have a save game and AI chooses a Pantheon belief in the next turn.)
However when AI already started building the wonder, you can only go back and try to optimize your own production, e.g. by changing your research plan, improving tiles, buying high productive tiles, buy a worker, chop down forests, sacrificing food and gold, start a Golden Age, spent a Great Person, choose a different Social Policy ...
It is one of the most significant qualities of Civ games that you can go back and try a huge number of different strategies ... e.g. sacrifice food, population, gold, faith, expansion for momentary production ...
Compared to the AI you have the advantage that you now know roughly in which turn AI will finish the wonder so you can use this info in your strategy when you replay the last 10-20 turns. (depending on last save game and game speed)

 

[docbud]

I realize it's not cheating, but it is frustrating when you reload from 10 turns earlier and still get beaten. For example (this is only a rough example).

I get beat for a wonder on turn 50 by one turn. So I go back to turn 40 and start chopping forests, go to full production mode, etc. I see that I can build the wonder sooner and should have it done by turn 47.

Turn 47 rolls around and the AI has built the wonder and beat me by one turn.

So--I had gone back and shaved off three turns off the build time, but the AI did the same thing?

So, I then go back 20 turns and again, I get beaten by one turn.

This it not all the time, but I have had it happen.

And this is before spies.

But it has been explained that it's not cheating and I have to take the expert's words for it (i.e., the ones who know how to read the codes).

But sometimes it sure seems an AI is predestined to get that wonder.

 

[historix69]

I usually play on equal terms with AI with a mod which removes the hurry wonders ability of the Great Engineer and have goody huts turned off ... if I miss an early wonder I really want to build, I usually can go back to a save game (or even the start save game) and work out a strategy to get it ... unless maybe the AI really starts in a superior position, e.g. with better food or production tiles.

 

[Acken]

Not that thread again.

 

[Chum]

Are you including all of the wonders everyone manages to successfully build in your 95% statistic?

 

[HughFran]

I posted a thread about this before but a lot of people on here don't seem to think it is the case. 95% is an exaggerated number but it does get very frustrating. Especially when you reload, try to complete it earlier and still get beat. I don't think it is cheating but it is damn annoying!

 

[Walter R]

This thread topic comes up from time to time, and it only serves to demonstrate that the Forum is split between:

1. those who insist there is no 'cheat' code, just confirmation bias on the part of the player, and
2. those who learn from experience!

 

[danaphanous]

^^^

I remember ages ago, when I first started playing and was trying to learn to do better, reloading to complete a few wonders earlier. I saw this happen where I lost a wonder by a couple turns. So I reloading, microed to beat the AI, then still lost it by 1 turn--it was enfuriating.

What I know now is that by reloading and changing your micro you change the RNG so the game develops differently. You SHOULD expect things not to be the same from that point forward, and sometimes this means the AI also changes his priority on the wonder. I know they don't always because sometimes reloading works. It's just so noticeable when it does happen it sticks in your mind.

Pretty soon after that I stopped reloading because it just wasn't worth wasting my time if this had a chance to happen anyway. These days I don't usually race for wonders anyway till I get a tech lead because Deity AI build them so fast so it doesn't affect my game much.

Exceptions are wonders I've learned the AI doesn't particularly like: Pyramids (because most don't go liberty and even if they do they like a couple other wonders better) , Oracle (no idea why), Porcelain Tower (because they rarely open rationalism). I also often pick up Eiffel Tower because I can get there first, Statue of Liberty if freedom, and hubble. But that's about it. If I have an engineer from something like pyramids I also sometimes use one midgame to pick up Leaning Tower and engineer a second wonder. It slows the scientist rate but if you're winning anyway it's fun to score a combo like Leaning Tower --> Forbidden Palace or Sistine Chapel. All these wonders really help a liberty game.

 

[Chum]

I posted a thread about this before but a lot of people on here don't seem to think it is the case.

Because it's not, that's why.

 

[miaasma]

it's very frustrating, especially when reloads don't better the situation, but i've never seen any evidence that suggests the AI "cheats" beyond utilizing the enormous advantages they get at higher difficulties

 

[Illianor123]

The AI are good at spying on you and will adjust their construction to counteract your own adjustments.

 

[HughFran]

Because it's not, that's why.

Your responses on these threads are always so aggressive. Learn to calm down

 

[HughFran]

I agree with danaphanous - I've learned which Wonders the AI don't really favour and build those (if applicable). If there is one I think will really help my game I will try to B-Line for it, otherwise I don't bother on the higher levels. It's just too difficult to keep up!

 

[Chum]

Your responses on these threads are always so aggressive. Learn to calm down

Aggressive? In 5 words?

I don't think that word means what you think it means. Which is probably true, since you also think the game is somehow cheating just to make sure you don't get wonders.

 

[HughFran]

Aggressive? In 5 words?

I don't think that word means what you think it means. Which is probably true, since you also think the game is somehow cheating just to make sure you don't get wonders.

Well, you've just proven my point with that last response. Also, I said threads (plural) not thread - I've seen you post in other threads and you always come across as condescending to other users. And for the record, I did not create this thread, somebody else did

 

[Chum]

Well, you've just proven my point with that last response. Also, I said threads (plural) not thread - I've seen you post in other threads and you always come across as condescending to other users. And for the record, I did not create this thread, somebody else did

I think this proves my point that you're projecting.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=567474

I didn't say you created the thread. You said you agreed with it. Honestly, if you're gonna hitch your wagon to a statement like this from the OP -

The game cheats to make you rage quit, and no amount of logic explanation and proof will convince me otherwise.

...then there's no reason in having a rational discussion, I might as well make one liners that are about as valuable.

Now, if you want to ACTUALLY have a discussion about things, I'm more than happy to do that, and I think my track record proves that quite nicely. If you want to just sit around and complain about things instead of figuring out why you lost and actually get better, then why would you expect me to do anything other than point out how ridiculous these emotional rant threads are?

There's no aggression in my post, I don't care one way or another of anyone else ever plays this game again. Don't try to pin your rage quits on me.

 

[psparky]

I frequently beat the AI to a wonder by one turn. I can tell, because they often rage quit.

At least I think that's why my game sometimes crashes.

 

[poxpower]

95% of the time, they get it every time.

 

[danaphanous]

This thread topic comes up from time to time, and it only serves to demonstrate that the Forum is split between:

1. those who insist there is no 'cheat' code, just confirmation bias on the part of the player, and
2. those who learn from experience!

lol. I would rephrase this and say there are two kinds of players here:

1. Those who mod the code and know exactly what the AI does and the math behind it

2. Those who experience things in-game and make subjective assumptions.

Seriously though, I'm not sure why anyone would argue that the modders have overlooked such a blatant AI cheat code like: "steal wonders from players at turn 1". If it existed someone would have seen it by now. I have not dug through the code myself but I trust the people who have and what they've said. We're not just insisting because we have some idea of "fairness". We actually know, we've looked at the code and there's pages of info on what the AI actually does and the bonuses they DO get. And once I knew this info I could see it matched my ingame experience better then my previous assumptions based on experience. Math doesn't lie, this is a computer program we're talking here. There's some RNG but the AI doesn't deviate much from prescribed behavior. What the RNG does do is change AI decisions. As I said above if you reload and make enough different decisions you change the random number tree in a way that causes the AI to also make different decisions. All the actions that contain some RNG in civ5 do so by using a random number tree. So your actions do affect the AI actions that have some randomness to them. You can think of it like an RNG butterfly effect if it helps. Sometimes this can result in them putting cities on production focus, chopping an extra forest, or deciding to use a great engineer. I've experienced what you are saying, but it doesn't happen all the time, just sometimes and I'm pretty sure this is the reason.

 

[joncnunn]

Moderator Action: Merged "The AI beats you to wonders by one turn 95% of the time" into the main rants thread.