"Fair" Civ IV? I think not.

[Zello]

Spearman vs tank can work for you as well - given enough of a crisis, you may see your one remaining non-promoted longbowman hold up an enemy stack long enough for you to reinforce the city
(or maybe I just pick too many fights I can't win )

In my most recent noble game, I lost a LOT of experienced maces and knights in battles with win % above 80 (lost a level 5 knight against a damaged CAT!!! % 99.6!!!! ). I did, however, also managed to wipe out half a dozen or so pillaging Keshiks using a single axe, never fighting with odds better than 25%. And of course, every now and then we all experience the joy of watching our suicide cats win at <1% odds

Normally, I would want to fight with better than 75% odds. If I can't get that, I bring in my kamikaze Cats, more units and just hope that when the smoke clears I still have enough units left to move onto the next battle.


As noted in other spear v tank threads, civ is a strategy game, not a simulation. It's not spears vs tanks, its units of strength x vs units of strength y.

 

[wioneo]

In real life, 3 guys with spears could probably run around a tank before the barrel turned, climb on top, pry open the hatch, and bake a pie. It probably wouldn't be a good pie, but pie is pie.

 

[wioneo]

Also, 1 in 100, happens every 100 times. Or 10 times in a row every 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times. And yes, that is actually correct(I think). You can imagine how bored I must be to have counted all of that out...

 

[winddbourne]

But the AI doesn't cheat with the combat. You just don't know what you're doing. I've seen barb archers fortified in cities on hills with walls with level 3 city garrison. You attack 3 archers like that with your 8, you are dreaming. As has been said, get some better units. Go down a difficulty level or 3 until you know what you are doing, before you try to say the computer is cheating.

Thank you! I keep hearing how various players went from civ III right to Civ IV noble, and it blows my mind. With the changes to terrain bonus', the addition of stack killing catapaults, the addition of promotions, and especially them getting rid of all the different attack and defense values . . . you have to think about it as if you were learning a totally new game, because the combat, beneath the surface, IS totally different.

I went all the way back to settler to begin getting a grip on it, and I just got back up to noble. I'm about ready to move up a level again, after I win another game or two. Some of the things I did on "settler" though . . . I can see now that if I'd done them on "Noble" the AI would have wiped the floor with me, because I was still thinking like I was playing civ III with better graphics. Then i'd be frustrated to, and wondering if the AI was cheating again.

 

[DrewBledsoe]

Recent game as Mali, I had no copper, beelined for IW, and only Iron was owned by a suddenly popped barb city...3 archers on a hill...I reckoned 12 (drill I) skirmishers...I was lucky it took 10...

Utterly and completely sick for it to take my whole nations army to take a city that mysteriously appeared overnight, but thats Civ IV's complete overkill on it being so, so much easier to defend than attack...

Enough said

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Also, 1 in 100, happens every 100 times. Or 10 times in a row every 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times. And yes, that is actually correct(I think). You can imagine how bored I must be to have counted all of that out...

Actually it is Incorrect, for 1 in 100 to happen 10 times in a row is one per every
100^10 or 10^20

which is
100,000,000,000,000,000,000


(and just becasue the chances are 1 in 100 doesn't mean it will happen once every 100 times... it might happen four times, no times or 100 times in any given set of 100)

 

[Older than Dirt]

Has math changed that much?

 

[dwarrior]

In real life, 3 guys with spears could probably run around a tank before the barrel turned, climb on top, pry open the hatch, and bake a pie. It probably wouldn't be a good pie, but pie is pie.

tanks have a machine gunner on it too.. and that hatch isnt exactly easy to pry open with a wooden stick. The best bet to knock out a tank with that tech, would be to dig a big hole, cover it with leaves and hope the tank drives itself into it!

 

[Alphidius]

Actually the game's battle is all about using the different types of units to your advantage.
A city fortified with only Archers has a decent chance to be taken down with a couple of Horse Archers.
A city fortified with only Axemen or Spearmen has a decent chance to be taken down with a couple of Swordsmen or Axemen with the right promotions.
It is when the defenders are coupled with mixed units that makes them hard to take down. Archers, Axemen, Spearmen and Cats all within the city makes it one very messy ancient combined arms battle...

Let's hope with Warlords, a Great General will do so good on the battlefield.
My 2 cents

 

[gettingfat]

Stop using the term "cheating", "unfair" unless you know what they mean and provide solid evidence.

AI Cheating = AIs use a different set of rules that they can gain advantage on human players and the game designer does not inform you.

In Civ 4, the bonuses gained by AIs at higher levels are explicitely stated. Does it mean that human players cheat the AIs at lower difficulty levels?

The AIs use the same combat-odd system human players use. My archers fortified in cities are also able to kill a stack of AI archers who try to take my city. Geez, by the way who even thinks 8 archers can take out 3 archers hiding behind a city wall in the first place? Not in the game, not even in reality.

So where is the cheating? If a couple explicitly agree between them that each of them can go out to get other sex partners, you may show disgust because you don't like their rules of marriage, but you simply can't say they are "cheating" each other.

Don't like the barbarians? turn them off. Mod the game. Mind you, the barbarians also attack the AIs. Turn on the World Builder and you'll see.

To be honest and blunt, the original post is like the whining from a typical generation Z kid. Whenever something goes wrong they will yell "that's not fair", instead of accepting their incompetence and seeking self-improvement.

 

[wioneo]

Actually it is Incorrect, for 1 in 100 to happen 10 times in a row is one per every
100^10 or 10^20

which is
100,000,000,000,000,000,000


(and just becasue the chances are 1 in 100 doesn't mean it will happen once every 100 times... it might happen four times, no times or 100 times in any given set of 100)

Man.... I thought that it would be 100*100*10,000*100,000,000 etc. Oh well. I added an extra 0 on the end, too...

 

[NT_Jedi]

The big seller for me about Civ IV is that is was supposed to fix many of the classic problems with the older games. These problems include but are not limited to:
The AI Cheating

I seriously doubt we'll be seeing smart AIs within our lifetime for computer strategy games as complex as Civilization or AgeofWonders:SM or Dominions_2. This is especially true since many developers and publishers are so very focused on graphics... for some reason they believe this is the main feature needed for a great game. Unfortunately we just have to wait for them to grow out of this phase.

The other half of this rant is the barbarians. They are so overpowered, and they take so much advantage of the broken combat engine. I sent a squad of 8 (eight) archers against a barbarian city which contained three archers.

I would never send only archers for taking a city... even against just barbarians.

 

[naterator]

AI Cheating = AIs use a different set of rules that they can gain advantage on human players and the game designer does not inform you.

In Civ 4, the bonuses gained by AIs at higher levels are explicitely stated. Does it mean that human players cheat the AIs at lower difficulty levels?

but there are hidden AI bonuses even on settler that no one goes out of their way to point out to you, like massive reductions to troop upgrade costs and the AI starting with 10 hammers in the build queue. these aren't really cheats. even the diplomatic thing is more a game imbalance than a cheat, but the effect is to feel cheated.

 

[wolfigor]

But in an average game, when you play with say a dozen other civs on a huge map, it doesnt...for this reason:-

Whoever you trade with will have a "worst enemy", and and these differ widely. If I trade with Persia, this will cause negative modifiers with China, if I trade with China it will cause negs with Russia.....the list goes on..

The point is that someone will almost always ask you to cancel these deals, and then when you refuse, it starts the downward diplo spiral with that nation. Even if they aren't "someone's else's worst enemy", but still not particularly liked, you will still get asked, and if a war starts somewhere (anywhere it doesn't matter) you will get asked.

You got a point... (and I also agree that 1000AD is a very simple example, but it was chosen properly for its simplicity).
I would say it depends on the pattern of diplomacy between AI CIVs.
From what I see you try to stay in the middle and, like modern neutral states, commerce with everybody without diplomatic consequences.
CIVIV doesn't allow this "Swedish" model (it's even written in the manual somewhere): you have to choose your side at a certain point.
Shall I drop my commerce with X to don't spoil my relations with Y?
Triangle diplomacy works if you care to draw down all the interconnected relationships and choose the most likely "allies".

Honestly, I don't want to brag about skills, but with a bit of practise it's (almost) everytime possible to pull together a triangle diplomacy ... even if it means you'll have high chances to be in bad relations or unable to trade with the other 15 CIVs on the planet.
As I said it's a trade-off.

You can help your two allies to grow in power, help them in war, and refuse to give any help to their enemies.
In one of the games I'm playing now I did exactly that... me (Victoria) and my best friends Hatty and Izzy (respectively 1st, 2nd, 3rd in power rank).
I helped the two chicks in becoming the big girls they are and now I can easily pick any of the two for permanent alliance (and world domination).

You can't pull together a triangle diplomacy if you want to be in optimal relations and trade with 15 CIVs (in a 18 CIVs match).

 

[DrewBledsoe]

You got a point... (and I also agree that 1000AD is a very simple example, but it was chosen properly for its simplicity).
I would say it depends on the pattern of diplomacy between AI CIVs.
From what I see you try to stay in the middle and, like modern neutral states, commerce with everybody without diplomatic consequences.
CIVIV doesn't allow this "Swedish" model (it's even written in the manual somewhere): you have to choose your side at a certain point.
Shall I drop my commerce with X to don't spoil my relations with Y?
Triangle diplomacy works if you care to draw down all the interconnected relationships and choose the most likely "allies".

Honestly, I don't want to brag about skills, but with a bit of practise it's (almost) everytime possible to pull together a triangle diplomacy ... even if it means you'll have high chances to be in bad relations or unable to trade with the other 15 CIVs on the planet.
As I said it's a trade-off.

You can help your two allies to grow in power, help them in war, and refuse to give any help to their enemies.
In one of the games I'm playing now I did exactly that... me (Victoria) and my best friends Hatty and Izzy (respectively 1st, 2nd, 3rd in power rank).
I helped the two chicks in becoming the big girls they are and now I can easily pick any of the two for permanent alliance (and world domination).

You can't pull together a triangle diplomacy if you want to be in optimal relations and trade with 15 CIVs (in a 18 CIVs match).

Ok so you're friends with 2 and virtual enemies of 15, but the AIs are then probs friends with 3 or 4, enemies with 1 or 2 and "no comment" but still trading with the rest"...the problem is besides this, that more often than not the ones who are quite near you geographically early on, will fall under the same religion as you and are thus more likely to be friends..

But for the same reason, those near you are unlikely to have many (or even any) differing resources from you, so when you meet a better potential trade partner, do you just disregard your former friends, and start trading with the "new kid on the block", not knowing what problems this will cause longterm?

(btw I always play huge maps / monarch or above / aggresiive AIs and marathon settings)

I don't know if its the settings, but 2 trading ptnrs on a huge map is next to useless, you may as well be running mercantilism all late game..with 18 civs you need at least "pentagon, or hexagon diplomacy".

Anyways, if you can manage huge maps, with lots of civs, and only 2 trading ptnrs who have ALL the resources you need, then my hats off to you, and your also very lucky...otherwise every game is about eventual domination...

 

[Zebra 9]

Ok Here is that thread I told you about. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=174380

Originally Posted by naterator
whether there's ways around it or not, the fact remains that the AI doesn't ask other AI for techs, embargos, or war help unless success is guaranteed. this makes it so the AI can get bonuses for helping each other, and doesn't ever get the negatives for saying no.

See the AI is smart. It knows when to & when not to do certain deals.

Originally Posted by dwarrior
So a unit that only has technology to melt a little metal to the end of a stick is now making bombs?

No. The Unit that has the tech to melt a little metal to the end of a stick is using your technology against you.

Civ IV was designed to force players to have to have different units to counter other units.

Where did you find out that the AI gets bonuses that no one knows about naterator. I mean like the AI starting with 10 hammers in the build queue. You prove it I'll belive it. And Don't tell me that I've got to have a special MOD to see it.

 

[MrCynical]

Where did you find out that the AI gets bonuses that no one knows about naterator. I mean like the AI starting with 10 hammers in the build queue. You prove it I'll belive it. And Don't tell me that I've got to have a special MOD to see it.

The 10 hammer bonus was first noticed by examination of Ai capitals on the first turn they were founded, using worldbuilder, and you can see it very easily for yourself in the same way. Start up a game, end turn once so the cities get built, and then inspect the AI cities. Each one has 10 hammers more than they should. You can also confirm this in the global defines XML file, where the bonus is listed, and can be modified. All other AI bonuses at any level can be found in the Civ4HandicapInfo XML file, which you can open up perfectly well with any web browser, no mods necessary.

These AI bonuses have been well known practically since the game came out.

 

[Truronian]

tanks have a machine gunner on it too.. and that hatch isnt exactly easy to pry open with a wooden stick. The best bet to knock out a tank with that tech, would be to dig a big hole, cover it with leaves and hope the tank drives itself into it!

Nah, stick the spear down the barrel and hope it jams. Maybe pretend to be a tribesman and lure the tank drivers out to rescue your cat from a tree?

 

[dh_epic]

The other half of this rant is the barbarians. They are so overpowered, and they take so much advantage of the broken combat engine. I sent a squad of 8 (eight) archers against a barbarian city which contained three archers. My men fell like flies, they didnt do hardly any damage to these invincible barbarians. A few turns later, these same super barbs are knocking on my doorstep with macemen, while I have archers and warriors defending my cities( the best I can get)!

You need to refine your strategy. Trying to outdo the enemy with mere numbers isn't smart. Trying to outdo them with a technological advantage isn't always enough either. You need to think about your enemy's specific weakness and target it. There's TONS of strategy articles around. You'll find that barbarians are there to limit the kinds of huge expansion you saw in Civilization 3, but not there to make your life impossible.

 

[andrewlt]

You need to refine your strategy. Trying to outdo the enemy with mere numbers isn't smart. Trying to outdo them with a technological advantage isn't always enough either. You need to think about your enemy's specific weakness and target it. There's TONS of strategy articles around. You'll find that barbarians are there to limit the kinds of huge expansion you saw in Civilization 3, but not there to make your life impossible.

Not entirely true. I had a game once on Noble difficulty where the barbarians had axemen while the most advanced civs in the game were just starting their 3rd city. I was one of the most advanced civs but I just built my 3rd city near copper and haven't connected my other 2 cities to it yet. All my 3 cities are pretty close, too, with only 5 tiles needed to connect at most. Needless to say, I had barbarians simultaneously attack 2 of my cities, one from 2 directions. I couldn't do anything since I was just beginning to build a city and a trade route to the nearest copper to me. The barbarian axeman just pillaged everything and I couldn't connect. Sometimes, you just aren't lucky with copper and iron and the barbarians wtfpwn you before you even get some.

Also, I have the same complaints about the diplomacy. The AIs are rarely at war with each other. Even after a war, they immediately become really good friends again and lose their negative modifiers very quickly. They're rarely displeased with each other. At most, 1 AI will only have 1-2 other AI displeased with them. I usually play with around 7-10 AI and I can only have 2-3 max that are not displeased with me, and that's after I basically become their catamite for the entire game, even if I'm the more powerful civ.