To me complaints seem to be less that it's too hard and more that it's too snowbally for winning AIs and too poor for losing AIs. A lot of these people stylistically want to see a tight pack of opponents throughout the game rather than 1-2 superwinner megabosses. While the latter is harder, it's an aesthetic difference too. More and more I'm thinking this might be modmod territory, as Gazebo has said he doesn't like rubberbands and anything that changes this is inevitably going to be some degree of rubberband.
Deity Difficulty
- Thread starter Stalker0
- Start date
To me complaints seem to be less that it's too hard and more that it's too snowbally for winning AIs and too poor for losing AIs. A lot of these people stylistically want to see a tight pack of opponents throughout the game rather than 1-2 superwinner megabosses. While the latter is harder, it's an aesthetic difference too. More and more I'm thinking this might be modmod territory, as Gazebo has said he doesn't like rubberbands and anything that changes this is inevitably going to be some degree of rubberband.
LifeOfBrian
King
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2019
- Messages
- 757
When on Deity an AI starts to runaway fairly early in the game, that means I'm more or less forced to become a warmonger fairly early in the game, either towards that particular AI or towards other, weaker AIs, and I can usually grind my way towards a victory even in such scenarios, but that often feels like a slog/chore compared to a mostly non-warmongering game.
The chances of winning peacefully against an early runaway AI are, in most cases, considerably smaller than otherwise. That could be addressed either by addressing certain runaway mechanisms (for example yields from building wonders, use of inquisitors by founding AIs etc.) and/or by improving AIs responses against (emerging) runaways. But I understand that there might be code or system limitations to that or perhaps Gazebo and the team will decide to not go in that direction.
The chances of winning peacefully against an early runaway AI are, in most cases, considerably smaller than otherwise. That could be addressed either by addressing certain runaway mechanisms (for example yields from building wonders, use of inquisitors by founding AIs etc.) and/or by improving AIs responses against (emerging) runaways. But I understand that there might be code or system limitations to that or perhaps Gazebo and the team will decide to not go in that direction.
But then everyone who wins on a given difficulty won't feel the same elation either.
We're adults here, I think we can handle it.
Only so much can be done on the diplomacy front, but I have been working on the "AI responses" part and will continue to do so.
Part of what is needed to deal with the wonder spamming runaways, judging by my current game, is more aggression. Austria wouldn't be a runaway with 19 wonders if her 2 warmongering authority neighbors had done the authority thing and attacked her effectively in the early game. Only lately (at around turn 280) are The Iroquois and Denmark trying to push her, and I rather imagine they'd have been more successful if they'd never let her get the huge tech and social policy lead she had when I first met her to begin with.
Of course if the AI acted that way I'd have never found out about this, because authority Rome and Persia were my neighbors and they'd have obliterated me long before caravels. But details. Point is that so long as they are not completely isolated, wonder runaways could be regulated with some good old fashioned war. And this would if anything make the game harder for players, too.
I do think there's some merit to the point that the AI getting paid for building a wonder, which is already a very rewarding thing to do, may be too much in the way of payments.
EDIT: On the matter of the AI it is also worth pointing the positives. In another of the games I played with this patch I suffered a pretty well timed attack by Songhai. He must have declared the second he had his UU ready to produce because it was actually mostly chariots and a spearman at first, but then his cavalry landed behind my city, which was not only surprising but meant that he was actually using the amphibious promotion from his UA.
Of course if the AI acted that way I'd have never found out about this, because authority Rome and Persia were my neighbors and they'd have obliterated me long before caravels. But details. Point is that so long as they are not completely isolated, wonder runaways could be regulated with some good old fashioned war. And this would if anything make the game harder for players, too.
I do think there's some merit to the point that the AI getting paid for building a wonder, which is already a very rewarding thing to do, may be too much in the way of payments.
EDIT: On the matter of the AI it is also worth pointing the positives. In another of the games I played with this patch I suffered a pretty well timed attack by Songhai. He must have declared the second he had his UU ready to produce because it was actually mostly chariots and a spearman at first, but then his cavalry landed behind my city, which was not only surprising but meant that he was actually using the amphibious promotion from his UA.
Last edited:
I have an idea for this that I'll implement soon.
One thing I'm noticing is a real huge jump between difficulties. Even stepping down from Immortal to Emperor feels like night and day. I wonder a little bit how much various difficulties are used, and if maybe cutting Warlord for example and using the additional space for finer gradation at the top wouldn't make sense.
JamesNinelives
Emperor
Hard to say as most of the people who post here are experienced at this point. I started on Warlord coming from BNW to VP. No idea what people learning the mod generally do though.
I thought the runaway diplo malus is removed at some point?
If AIs can deal with a runaway AI properly, they can also deal with you if you are the runaway, which can be challenging but probably not in a very fun way. Although player runaway is likely not as common in deity.
If AIs can deal with a runaway AI properly, they can also deal with you if you are the runaway, which can be challenging but probably not in a very fun way. Although player runaway is likely not as common in deity.
So I'll kvetch a little about deity right now. Religions are being founded on turns 65 and 71 in games I'm playing, with ancestor worship and god of the expanse. All religions are being founded by turn 83 in some games. The civilizations don't have tobacco or wine or incense. For comparison, I'm founding on turn 74 with a wine start, tradition, and goddess of springtime. Also, I should note that the AI is consistently going Divine Inheritance first pick for founder belief and the second founder then goes Hero Worship, even if the AI is not a warmonger.
bonniepbilly
Warlord
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2007
- Messages
- 144
Could it please be harder, so the YouTube deity players don’t always win?? It’s getting boring when you know the outcome before the game starts 
JamesNinelives
Emperor
Could it please be harder, so the YouTube deity players don’t always win?? It’s getting boring when you know the outcome before the game starts
Would they put the games they don't win on Youtube though?
Would they put the games they don't win on Youtube though?
I have put every single diety victory I have on YouTube.
*checks the graveyard that is his youtube vidoes*
sigh...
bonniepbilly
Warlord
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2007
- Messages
- 144
Would they put the games they don't win on Youtube though?
they play « live » asking for comments after each episode so no...
Could it please be harder, so the YouTube deity players don’t always win?? It’s getting boring when you know the outcome before the game starts
I see these players play on epic game speed, which makes it easier imo. I'd love to see some play on 'standard' which is my own preference of speed.
I think the problem might be that the AI's difficulty bonuses aren't scaling with game speed, which makes them more powerful on Quick, less powerful on Epic, and much less powerful on Marathon.
Posted on Github to see if this is intended.
