Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by RohirrimElf, Sep 12, 2019.
Me a spelling mistake?
Just lost my capital to the AI for the first time ever (and that's on King!). In this update they seem to spam a lot of units. By the time I got attacked I only built units and one settler, still got overwhelmed. How do you defend on higher difficulties if the neighbor decided to rush you? Or do you just lose and start over?
From my experience that happened before the patch. Meaning they release silent patches.
AI finally started rebuilding its army, and I finally started loosing my units that was not happening in civ6 before.
Talking about a combat, the AI seems to be more focused on finishing a unit / killing at least one unit instead of trying to build more advanced tactics. What I believe works great assuming they have economy bonuses thus able to rebuild the army faster.
If this means they've changed the AI to follow the same logic as the Barbarians, it definitely makes the game more challenging. Before this patch, Barbarians were the real nuisance because they would ruthlessly take any opportunity to kill one of your units, which is a much bigger nuisance to the player than the AI, even if it means they'll lose one of their own, giving their production bonuses on higher levels.
There are no silent patches, but they also never give us the full patch notes, some things could have been changed already in previous patches.
Look at your .dll date and you will find no change. The game does not play the same all the time, a lot depends on AI decision paths and situation so you can have something seemingly appear ages after a patch but it was there all the time.
Played another 8-10 hours or so since typing the opening post. During my wars with Alexander as Barbarossa i’ve noticed losing a couple more units left and right as usual. The AI is more interested in killing of stray units if there is not a lot of risk involved. Pushing your luck against cavalry with ranged on the open ground is asking for punishment. Alexander had no trouble gobbling up 2 city states. But an ancient wall and an upgraded slinger (skirmisher) on his third war, was enough to hold its attack on a foreward placed city. He did not push hard. It might have be doable to hurt me there when timed right.
During my war with Genghis as Peter the great it was also very very hard to capture a single city (on a hill with ancient and midieval walls. It did not have units to defend). It was around the castles and trebuchets tech in middle ages. The city was so far from Genghis biggest chunk of territory. It was quite isolated from help. 4 trebuchets, 4 longswordman and a siege tower was not enough on a 2 way surprise attack. The city did have unpassable terrain (mountains on both sides+encampment) and an ugly sight block (hill) made it harder for my trebuchets. If i had the foresight what would happen. I would explore the seas and only attacked with 4 bombard corps an era later. The AI attacked the correct units on his city attack but did not bring reinforcements or counter attack on my south border. I could not conquer the city. Its defence rating and health was to high. Around 60 points.
I’ve still got the feeling that the AI does not take advantage of military power. There were multiple times where the AI could wage an earth scorching war. Crippling my economy and winning a city. i would not have been able to recover. While at other times the AI attacks me while not having an advantage. Its like firaxis makes the AI to forgiving for the human player or it just does not take advantage of weak spots in my defence. This patch seems like a meaningfull improvement do. And i’m happy with civ 6 as it is. Even do it could do more to challenge a human player.
Great experiment here too. Started a game with Norway on immortal level , my neighbourds were Barbarossa and Mansa Musa.
Musa made a stupid initial attack, but it was noticeable AI's new ability to pull back the injured units and also attack my weaker ones.
My counterattack was relatively easy, but much harder than before the patch. Now AI when under attack focuses on producing new units and makes good use of the units within the cities, which demands a very well-planned attack, under penalty of total failure.
In Brazil we have an expression "sangue nos olhos" (blood in the eyes), which means someone very angry. That is the definition of Barbarossa, which is destroying every city-state that lies ahead and has not just razed its neighbors Poundmaker and Curtin because they are also very good at the game.
My luck is that Barbarossa loves me (I'm his only friend in the world) otherwise he would have sent me to hell quickly. I'm looking for a culture win, but Curtin is very scientifically advanced. That will be very interesting. I pray AI will show some reaction power in future ages which will make the game really cool
I'm honestly surprised how so few AI patch notes made so big difference.
I made the same experience. It got better and I lose more units. I even had to build a few spearmen to deal with cavs... I never had to before. And I almost regret that I delayed building walls in my recent game. Didn't lose a City but it was close...
I noticed this as well with both civs and barbs. To a degree they might even do this too often. I was in a situation where I was sure I'd lose a unit to barb horsemen but instead of attacking with all units they decided to retreat one of their units to heal. It's true though that had he attacked and killed my unit he would've been in a vulnerable position and got killed himself the next turn so maybe they decided they'd rather not.
Could just as easily be jumping at shadows. Inductive reasoning strikes again, as it so often does after the patch.
The AI beelines Engineering, so seeing it crank out catapults to be the band is just a consequence of that.
NOW, having said that, I played a game of 300< rounds, and found that America not witnessed America starting to build aircraft but was actually using it enough to gain promotions. Ain't seen that before.
I think the combination of the AI upgrades from past patches like these:
Improvements to city defense tree when trying to get units into defensive positions.
Improvements to operational movements around mountains and other terrain.
Work well together with the improvements from latest patch like these:
Allow units to move out of threatened areas when endangered, even on neutral territory. This manifested in AI units staying still and fortified while being attacked by ranged or air until they were dead.
Some bias adjustments to improve attacks on enemy cities.
Improve range/bombard garrisoning and improve melee garrison logic to attack when it is safe
Don't try to assemble city attacks for target cities that have an unclear or hidden path. Improve ability to protect embarked units..
Well, my first Terra map deity game, standard speed and size, is finished, with Kupe of the Maori T263 Culture Victory.
Full disclosure: I played Harald, and Kupe was controlled by the AI all the time!
I was entertaining the thought of eventually making fun of Kupe for settling his capital in polar regions again, but daaamn:
And he did it by sending a flood of Rock-Bands to my lands, who, in the end, rocked my cities for up to 20 000 tourism a concert. My citizens took to acquiring second, third and even fourth homes, because they were constantly running out of wall space to put those Maori band posters on.
Faith situation below. He has mostly double than mine, there's a spike for Musa too, but Musa started playing music too late:
And he accomplished this holding 11 cities against 30 those of mine, and the world looking like this:
Aww, and I missed marking a couple of Kupe's cities in the very centre as well.
Again, T263 AI win, I can't remember such AI deeds in vanilla. I feel reinvigorated and very much looking forward for the next game!
I don’t know if the game has really gotten harder, but I’m definitely finding I can’t be as lazy as I have been previously.
Playing Vicky, Immortal, Large Continent or Small Continent maps, I’d previously found I could start with a Scout and get out two Settlers early and often still get a Wonder like ToA. That would somewhat depend on early diplomacy and friendships and terrain, and yeah sometimes I’d have to rein that in a bit (eg weaker start, aggressive AI). I could also usually hit an AI neighbour pretty hard if I needed to, but really needed Iron or Horses to make that stick.
I’m finding the AI players are now more dangerous early game, more aggressive, more forward settling, and I have to be more willing to get out early military rather than just settlers and builders. The AI on higher difficulties can really pump out ranged units, tear through walls, and capture cities - indeed, capturing a city and holding it can be tricky without careful planning, because without walls (given you’ve likely just demolished them) and being in the middle of you enemy’s empire the AI is quite capable of recapturing cities if you don’t have sufficient units to hold it. Attacking the AI requires much more discipline - the AI can get dug in like a tick with walls and ranged units, and it uses units better (although I can’t put my finger on what exactly it’s doing differently). City States joining the fray and Medieval Emergencies are also more of a factor. Early wonders are far more competitive.
Man, I love it. More please.
It’s also clearly not just about the AI being better. The changes to resources, Cav and Rams, buffs to walls, and even map generation (eg terrain seems more tactically significant to wars given how mountains are generated) have also made things tougher. I think the production boosts may have also helped the AI quite a bit, although it’s hard to say. Grievances are also more of an issue - before, everyone basically ignored early war, whereas now Civs can get quite upset initially although the Grievances wear off more quickly early.
I haven’t had a chance to play a game through past Medieval, so I can’t comment on mid to late game. The AI seems to still have problems with upgrading units (whereas City States don’t seem to have the same issues). I think I can also still bully the AI if I really lean into science and military eg campus spam, aggressive chopping, but hey that’s not fun.
I just played around. Macedon deity pangea standard. Settled three cities and secured iron. Chopped two campuses, an encampment and four unique swordsmen and went over to knock at poundmakers door at t55. I was fiercly fought back with horses, archers and levied warriors. I had to quit this game due to heavy losses and not even pillaged prey.
Yep, it’s nasty up there. It is like you need a combined army now and face em on flat ground rather than their cities. They still make mistakes there (but careful of mad horsemen)
This is a good patch.
Personally, I’m finding it’s much more important to have ranged support for my melee and cav units, although that’s no panacea because ranged are slow and squishy.
At some point I will try using Seige more. They’re just so slow to build and I need a heap because they get smashed by City attacks, but I think they may be a better way to capture Cities now.
I’m also finding an early GG is more important for war at higher difficulties. At higher difficulties, the AI’s combat bonuses are just hurting a lot more than they used to, and the extra movement is just so helpful. The encampment is also a better investment overall now given the tweaks to how it’s do bonuses work and additional production. So, that’s fun.
Can’t say I’m getting much use out of Anti-Cav units though. I guess Pikes v Knights is a thing, but I’m still more likely to just fight Knights with Knights. I think AC are now the only big “gap” in the combat mechanics at least until the late game. I’m surprised AC didn’t get a tweak in the last patch really.
I’m also really enjoying how England is now all about Iron early game - Swords and Knights. Good times!
Sounds like it is about time for me to get back into Civ 6. Excellent.
I was going to post a thread along these lines, but it seems like there’s enough threads going on at the moment.
But basically, yeah, Civ VI finally feels “good”. It seems hugely subjective, but between the June Patch and this September Patch, it feels like most of the game’s mechanics are now at least playable / have some impact, there are no massive gaps in gameplay (eg we have enough maps), and the overall challenge level is okay.
I still think there are a few places things could be a touch tighter - see here - and I think there is still room for another expansion. But if FXS stopped work on Civ VI today, the game is good enough that I’d still play it to death.
I’m really impressed how far the game has come in the past 9 months or so. I hope FXS do keep working on the game - it’s in such a good place and yet there’s still room for it to get better.
Separate names with a comma.