I'm having a hard time playing all the way through a game.

And I'm not sure why.

I'm really into the game during the ancient/middle ages, every decision seems so important, where to move that worker, which improvments to build, which buildings when, and timing it all to coincide with tech discoveries. But by the time I hit the classical age, I've got my 7-10 cities in place, have improved every tile, and find none of the techs seem worth persuing. Each turn seem uneventful. Unless I go out and start a war, I usualy lose interest completly and exit out to the main menu to start a new game - only to repeat the process all over again.

Help?

 

Ha ha, yes. Sometimes this happens to me too. I did the same thing with Colonization and Rails. I think it's just because the beginning of the game is so exciting, you are forging destiny!

 

well prehaps if a mod was made where the units of later ages had such a high cost that you would have to upgrade improvments (say gun powder gives a newer type of mine, producing more hammers, because of explosives)

 

Yeah I think the AI's don't go to war often enough with the standard settings. I haven't tried checking the aggressive box when creating the game, though.

 

I've been doing the same thing for the past couple days.. trying out different land masses etc. The later stages of the game seem to be a dissappointment again but thats just how it goes i guess. You strive so hard at the beginning to be the best and then once you are whats the point of continuing lol. I am going to start playing Multiplayer... hopefully the answer lies there for you and me my friend... maybe we will even meet there... and then both quit half way through because of bordom lol!

 

Try a higher difficulty.

The struggle to survive is often quite fun

 

It seems to vary a lot. I just played a "noble" game where the AI went to war all the time -- mostly with each other, and sometimes against me. This is just with the normal setting without the "aggressive" option. I've had other games where there was very little war going on, though.

 

Yep- same here on the noble setting on normal size map-8 civs- terra.
5 cities is the largest any civ is so farand its 300 ad- tensions are high and the ai is fighting amongst themselves- im keeping them off my back by trading- im trying to make my way to new lands but my sea going vessels cant hit deep water yet..
anyway- I like it this way- all too many times on civ 3- the ai would have already ganged up on me by now. I really like the fact that you can get two ai to fight agains each other-then supply the weaker side with units to keep em even-

 

Heh, I've been doing the same thing since Civilization 2... I just really like the ancient period. Tanks are boring . I'm hoping for a new and improved TAM mod.

 

Multi player makes for good games.
I like playing longer games myself. When everyone is a player that doesnt mind spending time on a longer game it is great later on.
Alot of people shout 'HIT ENTER RETARD' alot tho Because they just want to rush play in the BCs and never plan on building a library. Set it to blazing, pangea, small. and play a 20 min game. Pointless as far as the game potential goes IMO.

If you enjoy longer games, (no time limit or longer time limits) and in depth play I am Sir_Flevance on the server. just go to add buddy and type me in and it will send a request. I am going to scout around here a bit and then going to see who I can find online.

 

go for a culture victory that always lengthens intrest
or on the other hand turns into a snore fest....

is anyone planning a mod to make the AI more agressive?

 

I think you people who enjoy the early game especially the ancients period are going to really love "Slitherines Legion II" when it comes out next year. It's going to focus on a civilization type game of that period only and real time battles, though not an rts clickfest. More of a command decision type game. You setup your army, the AI or human theirs and then give them some basic orders and let the battle begin. It's no different really than watching these little icons slam into each other and waiting for a victorious outcome, but, in Slitherines game, if you are good at managing terrain and tactics from a command and strategic view, even a smaller army can win the battle. That will make it even more fun and challenging I think.

If you want a semi idea of how this works get Slitherines "Spartan/Gates of Troy". To me it's like Civilization takes a time stop in the ancients period of Greece and Rome and Persia. Legion II is going to be more "graphically" improved along with more choices and commands in the battle engine and of course more RTW like graphics as well. The diplomatic feature has over 50 choices alone and the AI is pretty aggressive on the higher difficulties, in fact they had to patch the game to make the AI EASIER because the whinnines complained that it was too hard. lol Can you imagine that.

 

I think the problem are less the available units or techs but a situation in which my civ has become too strong to keep the game interesting - perfectly developed land with towns, libraries in every city in which they are of use, I pump a new tech out every 4 turns on epic, etc... etc...
I think I'll try a later start next time and see how that works out for me...

 

I always play on tiny or duel maps with 8+ civs. A lot of diplomacy and a constant threat of agressive civs, even when you're ahead. And because the map allows like 4 or 5 cities, you need to balance stuff out. Each city needs culture, because all enemy capitols are generating culture and eventually get to your border-cities. I play on noble and always have a nice race in the end. After rocketry (to begin space race), I shoot for Robotics to complete the space elevator. Rushing for these techs while keeping your eyes open for threats makes this installment of Civ4 a lot better than the other versions. Every era has its appeal for me, lovin' it to death!

 

I agree that the mid-game can be boring; it's hard to get fired up about "Drama" and "Guilds." Generally, I spice things up by starting a war of aggression for no apparent reason. I remember a mystery writer (I think it was Raymond Chandler) said in an interview that whenever he didn't know how to continue a story, he had a guy walk in with a gun. Same idea.

 

Every game I've played so far on Civ IV, I've abandoned in the middle and a lot of the time I was winning. There's a lot to learn and I like to see what I did or did not do right and then build off of that without waiting around to finish up what I'm doing first.

Also, the different leader traits are fun to play around with. I'm sure I'll stick around to complete a game eventually, but the Ancient era is just so much more fun that I prefer to just go back to it.

 

Me too! I had to FORCE myself to finish my most recent game (out of several) for the first time last night. And, I DID go to war to make it interesting!

 

The trick is really to play smaller maps and the right difficulty. (If you have improved every tile for ten cities by the classical age: Too Easy!) When I'm clearly winning / agonizingly losing it will always be boring, no matter what great ideas are thrown at the late game.
If my civilization gets too large or there are too many opponents out there, it results in too many tedious tasks to do and the game loses its plot, so to speak.

 

I agree. The game offers such a wealth of options for customization so that everyone should be able to find the "right settings" for their taste. For instance, I had quite a bit of fun with the "lake" maps, and I rarely ever see anyone mentioning them. Civ4's flexibility is one of its biggest pluses.