Deity unplayable!

[Tech Osen]

AI getting huge bonusses feels to me like a chess computer that instead of the ability to calculate a lot possibilities ahead it just just replaced the rooks and towers with extra queens.

 

[Victoria]

I don't think that one's correct.

well roughly its correct, to quote the historic movie "Life of Brian"

Brian: Who cured you?
Ex-Leper: Jesus did, sir. I was hopping along, minding my own business, all of a sudden, up he comes, cures me! One minute I'm a leper with a trade, next minute my livelihood's gone. Not so much as a by-your-leave! "You're cured, mate." Bloody do-gooder.
...
Brian: There's no pleasing some people.
Ex-Leper: That's just what Jesus said, sir.

 

[PYITE]

@bitula
Sounds like your main complaint is tech pace (very common complaint) being to quick. Read this thread and the threads linked within for some mod suggestions you might find helpful.

https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...ed-and-production-speed.623714/#post-14900510




I don't understand the complaints about the AI getting large bonuses on higher levels. This is how most games increase difficulty, the opponent gets stronger and more numerous as you increase difficulties as well as reducing the human players abilities.
Mike Tyson could knock down Little Mack with one punch.

 

[DizzKneeLand33]

Deity is just weird anymore. I drew Sumeria and made a commitment to go for something different. I've almost completed my cultural domination of the world after only taking over France (she was the ultimate spammer this game, only needed to build one settler). Planting ziggerauts everywhere I can, especially on rivers.

It's bizarre. I haven't built one campus *anywhere* and I'm still keeping up in science.

I don't even know what I'm supposed to do in this game anymore.

I don't think that one's correct.

I agree. The correct quote is "as Jesus said, you can't always get what you want...."

 

[Karpius]

I believe this thread illustrates just how subjective this game is on many levels.

Here are some examples of what can happen in this game.....

America founds the Muslim religion....
Scythia sends tanks and planes to conquer Japan....
Polish chariots are destroyed by Egyptian archers....
Some great Admiral grants Aztec a battleship armada....

Anyone see a trend for realism here? Is an unrealistic calendar really a game stopper?

 

[Tech Osen]

I believe this thread illustrates just how subjective this game is on many levels.

Here are some examples of what can happen in this game.....

America founds the Muslim religion....
Scythia sends tanks and planes to conquer Japan....
Polish chariots are destroyed by Egyptian archers....
Some great Admiral grants Aztec a battleship armada....

Anyone see a trend for realism here? Is an unrealistic calendar really a game stopper?

You started really well then down came the judgement hammer.

 

[Ryika]

I've already said that a few times in the past: Make the game year move dynamically based on the technological progress on the map instead of the one-size-fits-none progression that we have now.

 

[EgonSpengler]

The only thing immersion breaking is that Firaxis use a date as well as a turn number.

Good point. If there was an option to show the current era instead of the year on the main screen, I might use that.

 

[bitula]

I never play deity to be immersive, its just not designed for it.

Well this is probably the case, and much so after latest patch. So we came to this conclusion:

Play on King or Prince for (relatively) immersive but unchallenging game.

Play on Deity for challenging (until you learn the narrow scope of applicable/mandatory weird choices) but immersion breaking game play.

Not so cool…

I still hope they will change this. For example by locking eg.: atomic era discoveries until 1900AD. The AI can still run away with large infrastructure/army/culture etc advantage, which I have no problem with from semi-realism point of view.

 

[Karpius]

You started really well then down came the judgement hammer.

Perhaps, and it wasn't my intent to judge one wrong or right. I was simply asking the question, why can we accept some unrealistic situations and not others?

 

[Victoria]

Good point. If there was an option to show the current era instead of the year on the main screen, I might use that.

I would definitely use that! I mean its nice to know what the average era is.... its not easy to work out and not shown anywhere.

 

[bitula]

Perhaps, and it wasn't my intent to judge one wrong or right. I was simply asking the question, why can we accept some unrealistic situations and not others?

Because, for example, things like USA did not exist in 4000BC is logically impossible to fix, but that is not a reason to exclude such civs, since that would take away an essential constituent/flavor from this kind of game. Whereas preventing atomic age to occur in 500AD is possible.

 

[Takfloyd]

Well this is probably the case, and much so after latest patch. So we came to this conclusion:

Play on King or Prince for (relatively) immersive but unchallenging game.

Play on Deity for challenging (until you learn the narrow scope of applicable/mandatory weird choices) but immersion breaking game play.

Not so cool…

I still hope they will change this. For example by locking eg.: atomic era discoveries until 1900AD. The AI can still run away with large infrastructure/army/culture etc advantage, which I have no problem with from semi-realism point of view.

This has nothing to do with playing on Deity or not. If you're not reaching the Atomic era before 1000 CE, that just means you're not playing very well. This is how the game has been since launch. The research costs are massively undertuned.

I recommend using a mod to slow down research times. There are several ones available. Here's what I'm currently using:

Spoiler XML code :

UPDATE Technologies SET Cost = Cost*1 WHERE EraType ='ERA_ANCIENT';
UPDATE Technologies SET Cost = Cost*1.2 WHERE EraType ='ERA_CLASSICAL';
UPDATE Technologies SET Cost = Cost*1.3 WHERE EraType ='ERA_MEDIEVAL';
UPDATE Technologies SET Cost = Cost*1.3 WHERE EraType ='ERA_RENAISSANCE';
UPDATE Technologies SET Cost = Cost*1.3 WHERE EraType ='ERA_INDUSTRIAL';
UPDATE Technologies SET Cost = Cost*1.4 WHERE EraType ='ERA_MODERN';
UPDATE Technologies SET Cost = Cost*1.4 WHERE EraType ='ERA_ATOMIC';
UPDATE Technologies SET Cost = Cost*1.5 WHERE EraType ='ERA_INFORMATION';
UPDATE Civics SET Cost = Cost*1 WHERE EraType ='ERA_ANCIENT';
UPDATE Civics SET Cost = Cost*1.1 WHERE EraType ='ERA_CLASSICAL';
UPDATE Civics SET Cost = Cost*1.2 WHERE EraType ='ERA_MEDIEVAL';
UPDATE Civics SET Cost = Cost*1.2 WHERE EraType ='ERA_RENAISSANCE';
UPDATE Civics SET Cost = Cost*1.2 WHERE EraType ='ERA_INDUSTRIAL';
UPDATE Civics SET Cost = Cost*1.3 WHERE EraType ='ERA_MODERN';
UPDATE Civics SET Cost = Cost*1.3 WHERE EraType ='ERA_ATOMIC';
UPDATE Civics SET Cost = Cost*1.4 WHERE EraType ='ERA_INFORMATION';
UPDATE Eras SET GreatPersonBaseCost = GreatPersonBaseCost*1 WHERE EraType = 'ERA_ANCIENT';
UPDATE Eras SET GreatPersonBaseCost = GreatPersonBaseCost*1.1 WHERE EraType = 'ERA_CLASSICAL';
UPDATE Eras SET GreatPersonBaseCost = GreatPersonBaseCost*1.2 WHERE EraType = 'ERA_MEDIEVAL';
UPDATE Eras SET GreatPersonBaseCost = GreatPersonBaseCost*1.3 WHERE EraType = 'ERA_RENAISSANCE';
UPDATE Eras SET GreatPersonBaseCost = GreatPersonBaseCost*1.3 WHERE EraType = 'ERA_INDUSTRIAL';
UPDATE Eras SET GreatPersonBaseCost = GreatPersonBaseCost*1.4 WHERE EraType = 'ERA_MODERN';
UPDATE Eras SET GreatPersonBaseCost = GreatPersonBaseCost*1.4 WHERE EraType = 'ERA_ATOMIC';
UPDATE Eras SET GreatPersonBaseCost = GreatPersonBaseCost*1.5 WHERE EraType = 'ERA_INFORMATION';

 

[bitula]

This has nothing to do with playing on Deity or not. The research costs are massively undertuned.

Well sure it does, if someone is bothered by this immersion-wise. And you are actually most likely right: simply changing the era multipliers in the xml may solve my whole issue. I just wonder why are the research costs so much under-tuned by default??? I never used mods, but I am afraid I need to start using them if I want to continue to play

 

[RohirrimElf]

Well sure it does, if someone is bothered by this immersion-wise. And you are actually most likely right: simply changing the era multipliers in the xml may solve my whole issue. I just wonder why are the research costs so much under-tuned by default??? I never used mods, but I am afraid I need to start using them if I want to continue to play

You can start with using "Quo" mod. It slows down technology greatly as population does not longer count for more science. It does not totally solve the pace of the game do. As a result you end up with to much production.

 

[bbbt]

Well sure it does, if someone is bothered by this immersion-wise. And you are actually most likely right: simply changing the era multipliers in the xml may solve my whole issue. I just wonder why are the research costs so much under-tuned by default??? I never used mods, but I am afraid I need to start using them if I want to continue to play

I've said this before, but I think a lot of it less undertuning (though I think the year to turn mapping is definitely off) and a divide with how people pay the game. The game design is more for 'competitive' play: i.e. beeline to particular techs to complete your victory type as fast as possible, ignore techs you don't need. Sort of the opposite of 'immersive' play. Civ 5 was also like this to some extent (see bottom vs top half of the tech trees). But by BNW you also had a lot more techs/gaps filled in by the end - which I wonder if they are doing with this to some degree (i.e. they paced it for their perceived future tech tree state instead of current state.)

Honestly, so many people prefer 'immersive' play, I think it would behoove them to role out something like 'game modes': they already have the whole 'rulesets' functionality, they could just do some tweaks (change tech vs prod times, make the tech tree less beeline-like) save it under a new ruleset ('Expanded Empires' or something), and advertise new 'multiple game modes'. Heck, 80% of the work would just be asking to use some existing mods. While they are at it, they could create a stripped-down, warmonger penalty-lite and extra aggro AI ruleset and call it 'Warmonger' or something, for those who a want a simplified domination game.

I really feel like a lot of complaints about this game could be rectified by adding a number of more 'options' for people to tweak the game more to their liking (instead of leaving it entirely to Mods). The fact that they have added a None > Mild > Standard> Raging drop down for barbs (instead of just all or nothing) is one such example.

 

[Karpius]

I really feel like a lot of complaints about this game could be rectified by adding a number of more 'options' for people to tweak the game more to their liking (instead of leaving it entirely to Mods).

More options would certainly be welcome!

Personally, I would rather production cost be much lower and research take much longer (more turns - the date doesn't matter to me personally) so that my units would be relevant for longer periods of time. However, I wonder if this might not affect game balance. Also, I am sure some people might find it tedious to be stuck overlong in an era and I imagine there would be complaints from people who found themselves just clicking "next" until they got that next tech.

Its obvious there are several different styles of play and I think the game does a fair job of accommodating most people. However, addition options would allow people greater versatility in tuning the game to their personal tastes...as @bbbt mentioned above.

 

[Takfloyd]

I've said this before, but I think a lot of it less undertuning (though I think the year to turn mapping is definitely off) and a divide with how people pay the game. The game design is more for 'competitive' play: i.e. beeline to particular techs to complete your victory type as fast as possible, ignore techs you don't need. Sort of the opposite of 'immersive' play. Civ 5 was also like this to some extent (see bottom vs top half of the tech trees). But by BNW you also had a lot more techs/gaps filled in by the end - which I wonder if they are doing with this to some degree (i.e. they paced it for their perceived future tech tree state instead of current state.)

It has nothing to do with beelining. You'll be finished with ALL the techs in the tree by around 1500 AD regardless of which order you get them in. Techs are just too cheap compared to everything else, plain and simple. Production is slow as molasses in comparison, when it should be the opposite.

If people want a fast and competitive game, then just play on Online speed, where the techs still come fast even with research changed to be slower.

 

[Japper007]

I actually like being "ahead of time", after all, my civ didn't spend almost a thousand years doing the historical equivalent of blowing spitbubbles between 300 and 1200 AD (i.e most of Western Europe) nor did it stop pursuing a promosing Science Victory lead to pursue a hopeless Religious Victory (i.e. the Islamic World).

 

[oedali]

Ignore the year counter - it's irrelevant. Only pay attention to the turn counter. Wish there was a way to just hide the year counter, or display the era like someone else suggested.