IGN: 2K Reveals Civilization Mobile Game, Moves to Calm Concern It May Impact Civilization 7

martindo said:
Playing Civ alone isn't like playing chess against a computer. There are multiple opponents (unless you choose Duel) and you want some "engaging" aspect that distinguishes one AI opponent from another. Personally, I thought the animated leaders speaking (supposedly) reconstructed languages in Civ 5 was way better than the cartoonish images in Civ 6.
Click to expand...
The leaders in Civ VI are also animated and also speak their native languages (or something similar, when the native language isn't possible).
 
Kwami said:
The leaders in Civ VI are also animated and also speak their native languages (or something similar, when the native language isn't possible).
Click to expand...
They look cartoonish, though. Bad choice of graphic artist team.
 
pokiehl said:
Furthermore, just because you yourself want AI that could mirror the skills of humans doesn’t mean that’s what the majority of players want, or even what the developers have ever intended. I certainly have no interest in playing a minmaxing AI that relies on exploits.

There’s a much more fundamental question here as to what the AI in civ should be: a competitive foil to the player that actually wants to win, or an immersive and engaging entity that makes the world feel lived in, or a mix of both?

Given that many players seem to want a more immersive and less “boardgamey” experience, I don’t think the former type of AI would be very fun for most of us.

That said, at the very least, I think we can all agree that the AI should at least be able to competently partake in all of the game’s systems. This is something that both Civ 5 and 6 have failed at.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm a bit of an outlier in that I'm a fan of Beyond Earth, w/ Rising Tide expansion. I frequently play for one of the affinity victory conditions, which requires building a wonder. If the human player refrains from invading some of the AI in the early game (before turn 150), I've observed the AI building their way to try to win. They are a mix of both, as @pokiehl puts it, which I find enjoyable. Most of the game, the BERT AI follow the dictum, "Survive, Thrive, then Win."

Over in the BE forums, experienced players have described strategies for winning by domination in less than 150 turns, or less than 200 turns. My experience confirms that -- the AI simply cannot organize an empire to win by Contact or affinity victory before that, nor are any of the AI ever a threat to conquer all of the original capitals.

More relevant to this audience, I've seen Civ6 AI spread their religion far and wide, contending for an RV, and I've seen multiple AI accumulate 15 or more DV points, albeit well after turn 250 or 300. I would contend that the AI are immersive, engaging, and trying to win by building up their empire.... slowly. The human players are easily able to disrupt that building up process, due to military action.
 
vorlon_mi said:
Yes, I'm a bit of an outlier in that I'm a fan of Beyond Earth, w/ Rising Tide expansion. I frequently play for one of the affinity victory conditions, which requires building a wonder. If the human player refrains from invading some of the AI in the early game (before turn 150), I've observed the AI building their way to try to win. They are a mix of both, as @pokiehl puts it, which I find enjoyable. Most of the game, the BERT AI follow the dictum, "Survive, Thrive, then Win."

Over in the BE forums, experienced players have described strategies for winning by domination in less than 150 turns, or less than 200 turns. My experience confirms that -- the AI simply cannot organize an empire to win by Contact or affinity victory before that, nor are any of the AI ever a threat to conquer all of the original capitals.

More relevant to this audience, I've seen Civ6 AI spread their religion far and wide, contending for an RV, and I've seen multiple AI accumulate 15 or more DV points, albeit well after turn 250 or 300. I would contend that the AI are immersive, engaging, and trying to win by building up their empire.... slowly. The human players are easily able to disrupt that building up process, due to military action.
Click to expand...
I've seen Civ VI AI come close to science and culture victories, too. As you said, they're usually later than a player would be and a player can easily disrupt them with military action.

The AI mostly doesn't do well with the military part of the game. And, they can't always use some of the systems at all. For a very long time, the AI basically never built aircraft. That sort of thing is poor.

Otherwise, I think the AI is actually pretty good. Of course, great players are always going to win, even on the highest difficulty level. But, most people can't even play at Emperor+ level. That's good enough AI for me.
 
vorlon_mi said:
More relevant to this audience, I've seen Civ6 AI spread their religion far and wide, contending for an RV, and I've seen multiple AI accumulate 15 or more DV points, albeit well after turn 250 or 300. I would contend that the AI are immersive, engaging, and trying to win by building up their empire.... slowly. The human players are easily able to disrupt that building up process, due to military action.
Click to expand...
Let me start by saying: I'm very much in the same camp as you, I don't want an overly competitive AI that plays like a human. If I want to play against something that plays like a human, I'd probably just play against a human.

I also agree 100 % with what Pokiehl said: We need an AI that meaningfully engages with the game system. And this brings me back to your point here: It is true that the AI will spread its religion, but it does not have the concept of how to do this to win. This is not necessarily a bad thing, because an AI that plays very obviously to win will feel gamey and kill immersion. But that AI in Civ6 strays very much to the passive side, to the extent that I feel that in 9/10 games it doesn't even try to push its religion on my if I have founded my own religion.
 
I noticed that two upcoming Civ competitors; Ara and Millenia, are both releasing in 2024.

Surely 2K Games wants Civilization to release in the same year so they dont steal the strategy spotlight?

In 2025 2K releases GTA VI which is likely that year's biggest game.
 
The_J said:
I'm guessing right now that it'll be something else. Like a remake of Civ2, or another kind of spin-off.

That said, I know absolutely nothing (and if I did, I'd not be allowed to say it here).
Click to expand...
Civ 7 Crowns will have the following features: England, Spain, Portugal, France, Netherlands, Sweden, and Russia. The game starts in 1492AD and goes till the player revolts from their King. Nations start on the eastern edge of the map in a ship with a settler and a soldier. They move west to discover land, and settle the new world they discover, all the while fighting native tribes and requests from their King. They build up their cities by bringing colonists from the King to the new cities, who can be trained as specialists in different careers. The King can make demands on the player, such as go to war with another nation, destroy native tribes, or demand more money from the player. Of course the player is able to reject the King's demands which leads closer to the King invading the player to put them in their place. If the player is ready, and the citizens are ready, the player can declare war on the King. Either way, winning the war against the King is how you win Civ 7 Crowns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MangoCheeseCakey
Latest news on the Civilization mobile game
Replies
19
Views
2K
Bonyduck Campersang
Bonyduck Campersang
The_J
April Fools': Firaxis announces Civilization 2K23
2 3
Replies
44
Views
4K
The_J
The_J
P
Beyond the play - Community MOD
2 3
Replies
47
Views
17K
P&nny
P
Top Bottom