1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Forward settling is out of control

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by PlayAsPericles, Apr 6, 2017.

  1. nzcamel

    nzcamel Nahtanoj the Magnificent

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,896
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    This feels like what a lot of us were doing in IV. Then in playing V we adjusted to not being able to do that anymore without completely crippling our economy (I mean in IV it was costly too, but that cost could be paid off eventually). I think many people are yet to adjust their strategies back to being able to settle a few more cities early... I don't think I have yet lol
     
    KumaChan and whyidie like this.
  2. oedali

    oedali King

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    898
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Yes you need to turn in into an opportunity instead of being pissed off that your borders are so close. I find that it does not happen in every game which is good; means the AI will do it in certain circumstances. There are so many different ways I personally deal with it, when the AI pops a city super close to me:

    1. If I have the military means, I prepare for war and do a surprise attack to grab the city
    2. If I don't have the military means, I build up an army
    3. If the AI is friendly, I do a DoF and expand in other directions. When it's a convenient time in the future, I attack
    4. If we end up becoming allies and taking their city isn't in line with the victory I am pursuing (e.g. better use resources to gang up on another neighbor), in some games I let it be

    Of course a huge factor in this is how good a city it is. Sometimes the AI plops a worthless city w/ no nearby strategic or luxury resources. Whereas if they build districts or wonders then I am almost certain to try to take it unless staying allies with that AI is super important to my end goal
     
    KumaChan and nzcamel like this.
  3. Leyrann

    Leyrann Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2015
    Messages:
    4,016
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Though I played Civ II when I was young, I always consider myself to have started with Civ V, yet I never bowed to the demand of "don't build too many cities". I'm just like, expanding forever is the only option.
     
    KumaChan likes this.
  4. Photi

    Photi Governor

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2002
    Messages:
    700
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Washington
    Will the AI build a new settler before its current settler has found a city? In my current game (6OTM 12) I kept corralling one of Teddy's settlers who never did find a place to settle. In the meantime I was able to settle all the land that really should've been his.
     
    KumaChan likes this.
  5. Kyro

    Kyro Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2014
    Messages:
    599
    Well the point isn't about whether you can or not; which is why I added that last line. It is about whether it is an efficient/competitive strategy to do so.

    The choice to play peacefully is just an illusion because building your own cities and districts cannot compare with taking them in the same timespan. The comparison is what determines what strategies/builds etc are prefered and what aren't. If you're aiming for fastest completion time some doable but inefficient strategies are automatically eliminated.

    It's doable even on Deity I know. It's just not as efficient as conquering your nearest neighbours, especially when you have to prepare for inevitable wars against multiple opponents simultaneously.

    I have heard warmongers calling Religion useless. That's how redundant warmongering makes every other strategy.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2017
    KumaChan, ZubieMaster and Jarms48 like this.
  6. NN23

    NN23 Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2014
    Messages:
    115
    I'm not asking the AI to be helpful to my plans. I'm asking it to act with a little bit of common sense. The AI, in my experience, is not trying to win the game (expect when an AI is alone on an isolated continent/island and it is pretty much forced to go after any victory condition other than domination) but rather has the approach of "how can i annoy and mess with the Human player". I wan't the AI to act like a true competitor, not like a fly that buzzes around you when you're about to go to sleep.

    Secondly, the AI usually settles on terrible spots (look at my photo above and look at how many resources the city is missing out on to the south and east) when it is forward settling and you have to torch the city.
     
    KumaChan, qadams and nzcamel like this.
  7. Leyrann

    Leyrann Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2015
    Messages:
    4,016
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Do I have it right that you're playing not just to play and win the game, but to win it as efficiently as possible?

    If so, I assume that you're doing it to challenge yourself. So I say: Challenge yourself in another way - do not declare a war or take a city after the Medieval Era.

    Also, there's people calling Entertainment Districts useless. Doesn't mean they're actually redundant.
     
  8. Kyro

    Kyro Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2014
    Messages:
    599
    @Leyrann
    On the contrary I dun aim for speed in games but maximum potential and superiority in all aspects. Efficiency is definitely required that way but it is only a means to an end. I'm not a warmonger either, I play all my games almost exclusively peaceful even on Deity; I just detest how crippling it feels to play that way.

    I'm not evaluating anything based on personal preference. I'm stating what the Devs have in mind based on their design choices. What the Devs have in mind is how the game is supposed to be played. What they favor automatically bleeds into their design choices and the most efficient strategies usually reflect that bias. I'm just saying they have a very severe war bias in Civ 6 and that adversely affects the power of non-war biased strategies.

    All things in game are measured relatively. So is redundancy. Religion/Entertainment Districts aren't redundant because they don't provide a benefit. They are redundant because there are mutually exclusive choices that are far more powerful in the game to utilize. The opportunity cost for using something determines its power in game and whether it is redundant or not.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2017
  9. LuckyAC

    LuckyAC Immortal

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    569
    Given my own egregious forward settling, I can't begrudge them too much.
     
  10. Siptah

    Siptah Eternal Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2016
    Messages:
    5,150
    Location:
    Lucerne
    That's very much the thing. When I'm playing a peaceful builder game, I forward settle the AI a lot since I need space and won't conquer cities.
     
    KumaChan and nzcamel like this.
  11. Gort

    Gort Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,518
    I feel like the whole "You're settling in MY LANDS!" diplomatic mechanics need an overhaul. At the moment, AIs can get annoyed at you for forward settling, but there's no real indication of what they'll consider to be forward settling, and what they'll not consider to be forward settling. It would be good if the settler lens would show you areas where you could settle without annoying AIs, and who'd be annoyed at you if you did it in a particular location.

    It would also be nice to be able to designate "expansion areas" for yourself, and the AI would know to avoid those areas if they wanted to keep on your good side.
     
  12. Leyrann

    Leyrann Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2015
    Messages:
    4,016
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Netherlands
    And of course that could also allow for disputes if you and an AI have the same "expansion area".
     
    KumaChan and agonistes like this.
  13. PlayAsPericles

    PlayAsPericles Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2012
    Messages:
    34
    Yup. And that takes away a bit of what i loved about the civ series. All the great replies about ways to deal with it are much appreciated but at the same time it seems they are purposely trying to make this WAYYYYY more war focused of a game which IMHO is a shame as war mongers don't need any more excuses for war. If it was an occasional thing it wouldn't be so bad but it is EVERY SINGLE GAME after the recent patch.
     
    KumaChan likes this.
  14. psyde

    psyde Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2017
    Messages:
    16
    Gender:
    Male
    it is out of control. i get the idea of 'cutting you off', or 'antagonizing you', but the ai's forward settling should be the same idea of what we do as humans. settle in the direction of the opponent, but don't be ridiculous about it and skip 15 tiles in order to do so - just settle in the player's direction.
     
    KumaChan and ZubieMaster like this.
  15. Leyrann

    Leyrann Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2015
    Messages:
    4,016
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Netherlands
    On the other hand though, how many real world nations became powerful without warfare?
     
  16. Phoenix1595

    Phoenix1595 Lord of the Two Lands

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,012

    I agree. I don't understand why the AI forward settles soooooo far away from it's main territory, usually bypassing closer quality sites in favor of subpar locations next to me or another civ. Often, I see the AI forward settle towards me and other civs located on one side of a continent while leaving large swaths of quality land open on the other side of a continent for AN ENTIRE GAME. I get that the concept of forward settling is suppose to rile human players to war, I really do, but I would much rather play a game where the AI maximizes city location sites' quality rather than to antagonize me. A stronger AI, resource wise, is a better competitor to me than a merely annoying one.
     
    KumaChan and ZubieMaster like this.
  17. MyOtherName

    MyOtherName Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,526
    Humans are ridiculous about it, often tending to claim as much territory as they think they can get away with.
     
  18. nzcamel

    nzcamel Nahtanoj the Magnificent

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,896
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Like human players don't do that lol :rolleyes:
     
    Atlas627 likes this.
  19. psyde

    psyde Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2017
    Messages:
    16
    Gender:
    Male
    yeah, okay. but do you get my point? i mean, the ai can't adjust the way a human can with extreme forward settling, and imo should be toned down for the sake of the ai's survival and in turn the player's experience.
     
    nzcamel and EgonSpengler like this.
  20. EgonSpengler

    EgonSpengler Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2014
    Messages:
    6,240
    Gender:
    Male
    That's a valid point. I play at Emperor, and the AI is so poor that a city settled too close to me is just the part of my empire my tax collectors haven't reached yet. In general, I don't think the problem with the AI is that it's too aggressive, but right now it just throws Settlers away.
     
    KumaChan and nzcamel like this.

Share This Page