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

Immortal - is it worth it?

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Juanholio, Jul 7, 2012.

  1. Juanholio

    Juanholio Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    166
    Hey,

    I've been playing vanilla CiV for a while now mostly on Emperor. When I moved up from King it seemed quite a challenge for my not so good skills. I looked at some Deity play on youtube, modified my tactics and now find Emperor mostly easy. I stepped up to Immortal, and with a few alterations, was keeping pace only to be bogged down by the sheer tedium of fighting the AIs' swelling armies.

    I bought G&K recently and have stepped up similarly after getting used to the new features; hoping improved AI will have done away with these endless hoards but no. I'm in a game now as the Dutch for the first time, have four cities with decent potential on a large continents map. I'm second lowest in score and Nebby is lowest. He's declared war and every 2-3 swords and 3-4 bowmen I kill another wave turns up. It's mind numbing!

    Now I enjoyed moving from King to Emperor and find lower difficulty level games unsatisfying. So my (rather subjective) question is this. Is immortal worth it? Is it about improving my strat further? Or is there a diminishing returns argument where the necessity of accuracy and planning means it loses some of its casual fun?

    I'm interested in your thoughts.
     
  2. JanghanHong

    JanghanHong Enrico Trololo

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    515
    Location:
    Kingston, Canada
    Emperor is a perfect difficulty for a challenging immersion game without rerolling. Immortal and Deity turns CIV into a tedious number-crunching and RA-looping mess of borefest, I don't know how people play it and call it fun.
     
  3. thadian

    thadian Kami of Awakened Dreamers

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    2,288
    Location:
    Indiana, USA
    Immortal? Maybe if i want to practice my kid-rush, if you build anything other than a bunch of units your dead.

    No, immortal won't push your "strat" further - immortal and diety are not fun game difficulties for me, emperor has a good level of immersion and while i wouldn't call emperor "hard" by any means, i would call emperor the last difficulty where you can "play to play" - in immortal you basicly need to look at the tiles around your settler and decide how your going to win the game and on what turn, math out what you need to win that way, and all of your "correct moves", "correct builds" are all decided for you - if you don't obey the system, you lose. So, if you like a game of "forced moves" then you would love it. i feel the whole point of immortal and diety is to avoid using any feature whatsoever and play a boring game of gruntrush.
     
  4. Brichals

    Brichals King

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Messages:
    775
    Location:
    Berlin, D
    Personally I enjoy Emperor more also, I feel like I need a perfect start in Immortal, actually it's a bit tense for me. Depends also on map size and type of course. I normally play Large Emperor.
     
  5. Denkt

    Denkt Reader

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    3,116
    Location:
    Not in a Civilization City Atleast
    Immortal is pretty easy then you know what to do. I useally rush them which useally wins me the game like this one which I just ended a 3 vs me war.

    If its worth on play on immortal you have to decide yourself.
     

    Attached Files:

  6. Slvynn

    Slvynn Duke Vector fon Pixel

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,073
    I find Emperor very easy and not enough challenging, while Immortal is perfect level to beat and play and struggle and to play with immersion.
     
  7. notadummy

    notadummy Emperor

    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    Messages:
    245
    I was at the same spot you were at a couple of weeks ago, pre g&k
    I found g&k emperor to be a little too easy, so I made the move up to immortal

    For me, the move was definitely worth it. I am winning about 50% of my games, and its really a great challenge.
    Many people say that if you survive the initial rush, you can easily win (I don't believe it though).
    It's up to you to decide what level you should play on. I still play on emperor occasionally, and a good way to practice moving up is to do something crazy on emperor. Maybe try a domination victory without writing (Tabarnak style!), or try to win a science victory without using research agreements, stuff like that really helped me.
     
  8. Olleus

    Olleus Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,478
    Location:
    England
    There is more than one way to win on Immortal (early rushes are far from necessary), but I agree with the general consensus. Emperor is more fun. The only problem for me is when I play emperor the game is incredibly boring (already won) by the time I reach late industrial, so I never really see the rest of the tech tree. Playing immortal is the best way I've found of forcing myself to play a game from start to finish.
     
  9. GhostSalsa

    GhostSalsa Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,010
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    G&K makes it a bit tougher to buzz down five invading units in a turn, because of the 100hp. It also Protects the AI from my boats by giving embarked units defense. Even though I haven't lost any wars yet, I find being overpowered less palatable now, and have been putting more prod into units.

    I've stuck with emperor; but I've also turned Science and Diplo victories off again to keep me from being 'done at Scientific Theory'.

    For more challenge you can just edit the other settings. I keep the map on Huge. I play weaker Civs. A note: One thing about the game is that even on King, certain Civs can turn into runaways by 1500, and punish you for not playing like you were on Emperor already.

    (Emperor can actually be a benefit because it's always nice to be attacked by your neighbor in Ancient or Classical era, wipe out a nine-unit army and gain some puppet territory or a lucrative peace treaty; it takes a lot longer to turn around an imbalance like that after Classical. I lose on King because I get too relaxed).

    My first game with G&K I played The Celts, on emperor: had a terrible seed squished next to Haiwatha, experimented with Piety tree (still sucks), took a warmonger diplo penalt for 100 turns because he flipped my cs ally before attacking and I had to conquer it, payed dearly for diddling in the bottom of the tech tree instead of beelining education -- and miraculously eaked out a diplo victory a few turns before Egypt launched into space. Felt scarred and glorious. Had fun.

    Emperor leaves a lot of stuff open, including difficulty, and I stick with it.
     
  10. Ghonasiflaids

    Ghonasiflaids Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    Messages:
    221
    Location:
    Florida.
    My funnest games have been on emperor, Immortal really is only worth it if you just warmonger. Diety is silly.
     
  11. Slvynn

    Slvynn Duke Vector fon Pixel

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,073
    Why warmonger... On Immortal I find science/diplo/culture victories much fun and still doable in 90% cases , conquest works as well.... On Emperor they are just too easy to achieve , you just get less distractions to do the right things...
    10% fall on cases i do mistakes/ do experiemental or gamble things and lose (going for early wonder, attacking Liz just before she gets great wall and then longbowmans)
     
  12. Lyoncet

    Lyoncet Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,676
    Location:
    Minnesota
    The difference between being able to beat Emperor and Immortal isn't always just about exploiting game mechanics and number-crunching. In my non-domination games, I generally play completely peacefully, don't exploit the AI (trading luxuries I know are about to get pillaged, for example), don't number crunch, and don't micromanage. I often play sub-optimally (OCC for the hell of it) or roleplay to my detriment. And I still maintain around an 80% win rate on Immortal – probably higher now, actually, since I'm 4 for 4 in G&K. So the claims that it's a number-crunching micromanaging always warring snoozefest are patently false.

    While those things can be what propels a player to winning on Immortal, the real make-or-break factor is more often than not game sense. Game sense is being able to look at your surroundings and make the right call – or at least a good enough call. So things like looking at your position on turn 20, and knowing if you should start beelining Ironworking, or slingshotting Civil Service, and which policy tree you should open with, and whether to build another warrior or a worker, and whether you can squeeze in a third city before National College, etc. None of those are boring or tedious. They just depend on being able to size up a situation and maximize what you can get out of it.

    For an example from another game, back when I was following the Korean Starcraft professional scene, my favorite player was Flash. Flash had tremendous game sense. He'd do things like scan a Zerg base, and then suddenly send some marines to the right side of the map because he knew based on what he just saw that his opponent was sneaking overlords up for a drop. Some commentators said that he'd "solved Starcraft," because he always knew in any situation what the right thing to do was. (Plus his macro was insane, but that doesn't translate well for this comparison.) So point of the example is that yes, things like insane micro and tedious nuts-and-bolts mastery can help – he was, as a pro, so obviously good at those too. But much more of it is just how well and how quickly you can find the optimal route.
     
  13. comatosedragon

    comatosedragon Emperor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,068
    Location:
    Rockingham VA {616}
    I don't have to say anything, because this guy said it all.
     
  14. Furycrab

    Furycrab King

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    898
    I disagree.

    I think Deity is perhaps a bit ridiculous at times because of the free Settler. (I play mostly immortal)

    There are certainly a lot of builds that no longer quite work on Immortal. I mean if you expect your games to start something like... GL--> NC--> builds six buildings and maybe pump an archer at turn 50... Than ya, you will restart a lot.

    However if you have solid fundamentals. You won't.
     
  15. Slvynn

    Slvynn Duke Vector fon Pixel

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,073
    I never crunching numbers at immortal, and i play not to win, but for immersion and joy. Winning is just result of proper decisions like Furycrab said
     
  16. smallfish

    smallfish Immortal

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Messages:
    2,968
    Playing on Immortal is a blast; the biggest problem is surviving the early game. It's not "must-be-perfect" number crunching, and even if you do fall way behind, you can always catch up way later.

    Like in the 2100AD or something.
     
  17. Marshall Thomas

    Marshall Thomas King

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    Messages:
    700
    I made a difficulty level that's right in between Emperor and Immortal. It's perfect for me.
     
  18. dexters

    dexters Gods & Emperors Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2003
    Messages:
    4,150
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    Play continents or Pangea, put Greece or Siam away from you, and pair them with weaker Civs.

    Regardless of skill level, it should give you a run for your skill level for the rest of the game as you have to watch out for their diplo win, fight against their high GPT income from all the CS buffs and just have fun. This is actually my fun set-up for anyone who wants to have a really challenging late game AI to fight against.

    I find the discussion purely on difficulty settings misses the point. Civ5, unlike previous Civs is very Civ dependent. The mix is important because each Civ don't play alike with one set AI flavour . So lots of warmongering AIs in one game actually makes it easier as they spend all their time fighting each other. A good mix of builders/warmongers is by far the toughest for me.

    Sometimes, the warmongers win and they become runaways. Sometimes the builders get so far ahead they eventually defeat the warmongers with better units.

    But yeah, generally agree that on emperor, once you overcome the early game I'm usually in a winning position by Industrial and just have to play through it.
     
  19. PhilBowles

    PhilBowles Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    5,020
    This is my impression as well, although admittedly I've only played Immortal twice and been rushed both times. I can still lose occasionally on Emperor (or often, depending on your definition of "lose" - I consider a loss a full game played where the AI beats me to victory, which has happened to me twice on Emperor, as opposed to the unfortunately common occurrence of being overrun by a civ that isn't even after domination victory when I don't build a large enough army).
     
  20. Adjuvant

    Adjuvant Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,474
    I agree with most that is said here. Emperor is a given win for me unless I try something ridiculous "just to see what happens". In that respect it is unforgiving, but any "sane" strategy is perfectly viable.

    I agree immortal has a "value of tedium", but during and after that tedium the AI keep pace with me, with a danger of ballooning more than I can. I really enjoy seeing the AI have "equal tier or higher" military as I have.

    I agree deity is just "silly". Without an "isolated start" you can't get "jack done" and you'll have riflemen and artillery up your behind when you're rather proud of your ,musketman/crossbow/knight front. It's like "reverse prince", but I can also tell you, if you're constructive about it, struggling against it can and will improve your game.
     

Share This Page