[GS] Make 'Advanced AI Settings' easily accessible in the menus

[AntSou]

How many of us have downloaded mods, or messed around with the handicap values in the files? How many people here want to play Emperor or above but without the extra Settler bonus to the AI? Why not give the player the ability to customise and create a custom difficulty configuration, rather than being stuck with the presets?

Consider the graphical settings. They come with different presets, from low to ultra. However, you have the option to open the Advanced Settings and customise the graphical options.

A customisable difficulty option might include a bunch of sliders, such as:
AI Science / Culture / Faith Bonus: (0% to 50%)
AI Production / Gold Bonus: (0% to 100%)
AI Combat Bonus: (-1 to +5)
Player Combat Bonus: (+5 to 0)
AI Combat XP: (0% to 50%)
Player XP: (50% to 0%)
AI Free Tech/Civic Boost: (0 to 5)
AI Starting Settlers: (1 to 3)
AI Starting Warriors: (1 to 5)
AI Starting Builders: (0 to 2)
Barbarian Camp Gold: (50 to 20)
Boost from Eureka / Inspiration (20% to 50%)
Era Gates (Change Cost of Researching techs/civics from future eras. E.g. 20% to 100%)


Plus other Yes/No stuff which we had in previous titles, such as:
Blind Research (from Alpha Centauri. Would work great in Civ 6 due to boosts)
Raging Barbarians
One City Challenge
Aggressive AI
All Civs always at war
No Barbarians (I think this exists already?)

This is stuff that so many of us actually use and always need to find some work around :/.

Edit: This obviously wouldn't cancel the preset options. It's just extra stuff for people who want a bit more customisation.

 

[Einiweini7]

Yep, never going to happen. It is a bragging rights thing. If you can alter the presets and still claim to have beaten the game at the higher level by removing the things that trouble you most.... well you haven't really beaten the higher level and you are ranked with players that have. Already the quick speed gives player advantage and it really pisses me off that players on Quick speed consider their game the same as those on Standard. Unit costs are halved for both player and AI but I can do a lot more with 3 units than the AI can do with 10. Production time is halved but I can do a lot more with that as a player than the AI. Field movement remains constant and production time is halved, this means that when attacked you can field twice as many units in defence against the initial attack, form a blitzkrieg army and counter attack against a bumbling AI. Upon attack I can intuitively determine potential loss and send reinforcements before I even make contact with a city wall (actually up to four times the speed if my gold output is high) than I can on standard speed.

Better I think that players be ranked clearly by the parameters they change and then we can talk about modifying the AI advantages. The player that can win Immortal at standard speed is clearly the better tactical player than the player that does it at Quick speed when you compare oranges to oranges.

 

[AntSou]

Yep, never going to happen. It is a bragging rights thing. If you can alter the presets and still claim to have beaten the game at the higher level by removing the things that trouble you most.... well you haven't really beaten the higher level and you are ranked with players that have.

All it requires for that not to happen is for it to show up as 'Custom'. Custom wins either show up as custom in the ranking, or not at all.

I couldn't care less about the ranking and I don't think I'm the only one. I never go beyond Emperor anyway. I like to play for immersion and need to be able to pick less than optimal choices. So what I need is to be able to adapt difficulty where I feel the AI is lacking in my games.

 

[Einiweini7]

What you or I want as individuals is worth as much as the muck you wipe off you boot before walking in the door. Any change needs to be accepted by the community as a whole. Most players would accept a list ranking based upon map size for instance. Not as many would be as keen on diminishing their achievement based upon displaying their set parameters. This game is after all a business and the idea of players thinking they are the best because they alter the parameters without being called out on it is part of the business model. If you make those parameters too vast and discoverable then you alienate much of that base.

What you are asking for is not wrong, it is just something that would take more thinking than a minor game tweak. It would fundamentally change the way a player feels about the accomplishment of completion and that is a dangerous business move

All it requires for that not to happen is for it to show up as 'Custom'. Custom wins either show up as custom in the ranking, or not at all.

I couldn't care less about the ranking and I don't think I'm the only one. I never go beyond Emperor anyway. I like to play for immersion and need to be able to pick less than optimal choices. So what I need is to be able to adapt difficulty where I feel the AI is lacking in my games.

 

[AntSou]

What you or I want as individuals is worth as much as the muck you wipe off you boot before walking in the door. Any change needs to be accepted by the community as a whole.

Civ - Ideas & Suggestions. Ideas to improve civilization.

Any change needs to be accepted by the community as a whole.

Which is the entire point of giving suggestions.

It would fundamentally change the way a player feels about the accomplishment of completion

It would change nothing. I don't understand why you would reply as if I had not already answered it.

1. There's an entire community of people in Civ who both create mods and play mods that fundamentally change the game, making rankings and comparisons between such players nearly worthless.

2. If rankings matter to you, you can play with the preset difficulties and compare yourself with other players, AS IT DOES NOW. It changes nothing because it would be an option. PEOPLE ALREADY DO THIS, and they have been doing it for decades. You can't compare a player playing Civ V vanilla England with one playing an adjusted version of Elizabeth. Clearly hordes of players don't really care seeing how big modding is in this game.

Most players would accept a list ranking based upon map size for instance. Not as many would be as keen on diminishing their achievement based upon displaying their set parameters.

Sure, just gather the data and come up to me with the numbers. Why waste time with unverifiable claims? First you say that any changes must be accepted by the community as a whole, then you proceed to present guesses (concocted by you) as to what that community wants as truth.
---
---

There are reasons this is very unlikely to see the light of day, but you haven't even grazed upon them. One of the issues is that it would make it harder for devs to make adjustments to the AI since player input would become less reliable.

I am more than open to criticism, but if your argument is that 'it will make my cheese sandwich taste funny', I'm in the right not to give it much consideration. Your arguments are weak and with more holes than the aforementioned cheese, which makes it seem as if you're arguing for the sake of it.