New Beta Version - 1-11 (1/11)

[civplayer33]

Personally I've never seen a reward this high, but I have seen something like 40 before, though, but only once I think...so maybe you were simply incredibly lucky.

 

[Stalker0]

I am seeing the AI make more attempts to do naval land invasions. Its still way too unguarded, but at least they now try to cross over water and hit me.

 

[civplayer33]

I guess it knew that you aren't too interested in building a navy (and said "welcome to the club!")

 

[crdvis16]

If the 60 xp is enough to make my units lvl 4, and there isn't a runaway 10 techs ahead, then yes, I *will* win. Pretending otherwise is silly. The AI cannot deal with the increased range from the lvl 4 upgrade. I would say that my win rate, on deity games in which I have 6+ ranged units with range and 6+ siege units with range is ~100%.

Can't you hit lv4 promotions on newly built units given a few beliefs, wonders, and/or policies? Even easier with certain civs like Assyria? Even if I'm pumping out units at will with lv4 upgrades I wouldn't call it an auto win. I'll win battles and take cities but that doesn't necessarily translate into auto wins. You might be too far behind a runaway on another continent that you can't reasonably invade militarily even with your whole army at lv4 promotions. Hell, just having a maxed out warmonger score is enough to largely negate an advantage like that. I can understand it being very powerful but calling it an auto win by itself is hyperbole.

 

[tothePAIN]

I mainly play Pangea, so unreachable runaways are a bit less of an issue. There have been continent games with runaways where yes, lvl 4 upgrades won't help me solve a runaway on another continent.

Sweden is a civ that has no bonuses to culture, science, or faith and is thus vulnerable to runaways but will, eventually, reach a critical mass of level 4 units. I'll do a Sweden Deity playthrough and we can discuss the extent to which it's hyperbole.

Brandenburg Gate, Orders, and Elite Forces are required for a non Assyria / Sweden / Zulu civilization to pump out lvl 4 units from the get go.

I'll even make it a continent's game if you'd like, although I do prefer Pangea as a warmonger. But for the sake of the challenge, and in the spirit of CrazyG, I'll do continents.

 

[Stalker0]

I'm starting to see that "constant war" some people have been complaining about. I have probably been at constant war with one nation or another for 150 turns....and generally the entire world is at war with me except for 1 country at a time (its like they like to tag out, one country declares peace, another declares war).

I am in the top score and building a number of wonders so I assume that's why. Fortunately while I always have war weariness its not TOO bad so I am holding my own.

 

[General_Drax]

@Stalker0: what Civ are you playing ?

In my current game as Attila I cannot remember more than 5 turns of peace. Siam declared on turn 280 and still i'm at war with them on turn 419. Not that I care: i'm enslaving the whole world anyway but still they have not a remote hope to make a dent in my navy/army.

 

[Stalker0]

@Stalker0: what Civ are you playing ?

In my current game as Attila I cannot remember more than 5 turns of peace. Siam declared on turn 280 and still i'm at war with them on turn 419. Not that I care: i'm enslaving the whole world anyway but still they have not a remote hope to make a dent in my navy/army.

Morocco.

 

[JamesNinelives]

Princess Bride.

I've just noticed increased xp rewards for conquering from city state quests and wanted to confirm.

OK, fair enough.

Im pretty sure it’s a Princess Bride reference.

I really should watch that at some point, I'm familiar with some of the references but others just go over my head.

 

[James Ryle]

Observation of workers and tile improvements on different difficulty settings

I just played a new play through on Deity/Epic/Huge and the workers for Venice and Sweden (My closet neighbors) were working very hard and smart. Sweden had a luxury monopoly bonus before me. Also, as importantly the AI were intelligently buying tiles which they did not seem to be doing on my Immortal playthrough of this newest update

On Deity, Sweden would settle a city then on the same turn would buy the horse resource tile closet to it's boarders. This happened at least 3 times with different cities buying tiles and after a few more turns a city would sometimes buy another prized tile.

So my question is... On my last game playing immortal where the workers from Austria and Sweden were doing nothing sometimes and the A1 never bought a tile to help with their luxury bonus... is that a difficulty setting issue (Balance may be a better word here)?

I thought on Deity the bonuses to the AI were just bigger all round bonuses BUT is Deity AI more optimized in it's decision making to improve and buy tiles?

OR on Deity does the AI just have more Gold? So after it spent the gold to hurrying a city building it still had Gold left over to buy a valuable tile?
Or is the AI optimized to buy the tile first then the building?

OR does it happen sometimes their is a glitch with an A1 Civ just not working it's tiles properly? Could this of happened to my two closest neighbors in my Immortal play through?

 

[JamesNinelives]

On Deity, Sweden would settle a city then on the same turn would buy the horse resource tile closet to it's boarders. This happened at least 3 times with different cities buying tiles and after a few more turns a city would sometimes buy another prized tile.

I've seen this happen on my King and Emperor level games. So it's hard to say if the difficulty level is what is affecting those decisions.

Something I have noticed change across difficulties is that the AI expands more aggressively/sooner. So it may be that this is creating competition for territory and resources more often?

 

[Stalker0]

Standard Immortal Fractal with Morocco. Game ended (gave up) on Turn 395.

This was a weird game. I honestly didn't feel like I was playing against 7 different AI....it felt like 1 hive mind.

The game started out exceptionally well. Spirit of the Desert kicked in well, got some key wonders, and was able to dominate religion spread with Council of Elders, eventually converting the majority of the world...even managed to get the World Religion. I found myself in top score by the mid game, which is very rare for me on Immortal. And then the bees started....

Starting from medieval onwards, I was at war with at least 4 civs for the entire game (and 80% of the time it was 6-7 civs). They would just rotate out, peace me with one, declare with the next on the next turn. Over and over and over again...and the first proposal I put in the WC was Global Peace Accords!. In the game, I did one war declaration early on (it was just a quick pillage war with my neighbor Brazil). I thought maybe my religious spread was the problem, but funny enough that was the one positive modifier I had with most of the civs. It seemed to be my world wonders and probably the fact I was in top score.

So I was at 35% war weariness for basically the entire game. The biggest hit was to my TRs as Morocco, but I was able to hold on and take territory. Though I swear the AIs were working together, I would attack with my navy, and the next AI would come in from behind and flank. If I ever moved my navy to attack one, the other would come crashing into my city. I would hold my own against one navy....just for a fresh navy from a different AI that would come in and crush my fleet, again and again.

The AIs all had defensive pacts, and there was even a 5 civ one. Late game, every AI except Mongolia went Order (I was Freedom, founded first, and I had the highest tourism). And then in the World Council, every single one of them ganged up on me. First sanction, then city state sanction, then decolonization, removed my world religion, took my neighboring city states as spheres or open doors, and dropped me as host. I had 3 times the votes of the next highest civ, but it doesn't matter when all 7 civs take you to the cleaners. So steadily I was kicked in the teeth, and dropped into 3rd place. Meanwhile, Assyria teched like a crazy person, and went from 1 tech behind me to 7 techs in front. Once he declared on me with modern armor vs my special forces, I figured it was time to call it.

This game was challenging, though I'll admit it wasn't that much fun. I get that the AIs saw me as a threat, but I never get that kind of cooperation when I am low in score against the leader, so I felt like I was just singled out for destruction for pretty much the entire game.

 

[Heinz_Guderian]

Don't want to quote the long post but Stalker's experience is exactly my experience lately as well. I love the early and mid game, but the last third of the game is just an infinite war, impossible (not hard, literally impossible) diplomacy, and the feeling of the AI treating you differently than they would another AI acting the exact same way. I know you can turn off the win-competing AI (or however u phrase it, the huge malus you get for doing well), and I probably will do that in the future, but for the sake of most people's enjoyment of this mod I think this should be seriously looked at. I am not against the game being hard, but this is just hard in an extremely unfun way.

In my game as portugal I was barely ahead of my neighbour Iriqouis, and slighlty ahead of a heavily warmongering Rome. After a while I got into a war with my neighbour which I won and captured a few cities, while Rome was conquering like 10-15+ cities from his neighbours and now controls half of the world. Sure, I am still slightly ahead of him (like 2000 to 1900 or something along those lines), but his warmongering is way more outrageous than mine, yet noone is declaring war on him but everyone hate me. It is literally impossible to stay at peace for the rest of the game.

 

[Basilius]

I think having the option, or sub-mod, to disable win-competition diplomacy is best. Sometimes I agree with Stalker and Heinz that getting too much hate is not fun. On the other hand, I've had games where the AI were fighting among themselves so much that I coasted to victory. I say that the default should be the former: you're literally trying to take over the world; having the rest of the world unite against you is fitting.

 

[JamesNinelives]

you're literally trying to take over the world; having the rest of the world unite against you is fitting

Not necessarily. Most of the game I'm not aiming for any particular victory condition, I just like building stuff, trading and seeing my nation thrive. I often go our of my way to support or liberate smaller nations against agressors. Certainly if you're on a conquest spree then it makes sense, but otherwise I'm not so sure. In particular I struggle to see how building a spaceship first is taking over the world.

 

[saamohod]

I guess it knew that you aren't too interested in building a navy (and said "welcome to the club!")

Basically, the story of my almost every game when AI brings me to a rude awakening to the fact that navy is important

 

[LifeOfBrian]

Two screenshots from a game on this version and represent something I've been seeing quite often -> the AI seemingly without purpose sending one or more of its units into certain death.

 

[Recursive]

Standard Immortal Fractal with Morocco. Game ended (gave up) on Turn 395.

This was a weird game. I honestly didn't feel like I was playing against 7 different AI....it felt like 1 hive mind.

The game started out exceptionally well. Spirit of the Desert kicked in well, got some key wonders, and was able to dominate religion spread with Council of Elders, eventually converting the majority of the world...even managed to get the World Religion. I found myself in top score by the mid game, which is very rare for me on Immortal. And then the bees started....

Starting from medieval onwards, I was at war with at least 4 civs for the entire game (and 80% of the time it was 6-7 civs). They would just rotate out, peace me with one, declare with the next on the next turn. Over and over and over again...and the first proposal I put in the WC was Global Peace Accords!. In the game, I did one war declaration early on (it was just a quick pillage war with my neighbor Brazil). I thought maybe my religious spread was the problem, but funny enough that was the one positive modifier I had with most of the civs. It seemed to be my world wonders and probably the fact I was in top score.

So I was at 35% war weariness for basically the entire game. The biggest hit was to my TRs as Morocco, but I was able to hold on and take territory. Though I swear the AIs were working together, I would attack with my navy, and the next AI would come in from behind and flank. If I ever moved my navy to attack one, the other would come crashing into my city. I would hold my own against one navy....just for a fresh navy from a different AI that would come in and crush my fleet, again and again.

The AIs all had defensive pacts, and there was even a 5 civ one. Late game, every AI except Mongolia went Order (I was Freedom, founded first, and I had the highest tourism). And then in the World Council, every single one of them ganged up on me. First sanction, then city state sanction, then decolonization, removed my world religion, took my neighboring city states as spheres or open doors, and dropped me as host. I had 3 times the votes of the next highest civ, but it doesn't matter when all 7 civs take you to the cleaners. So steadily I was kicked in the teeth, and dropped into 3rd place. Meanwhile, Assyria teched like a crazy person, and went from 1 tech behind me to 7 techs in front. Once he declared on me with modern armor vs my special forces, I figured it was time to call it.

This game was challenging, though I'll admit it wasn't that much fun. I get that the AIs saw me as a threat, but I never get that kind of cooperation when I am low in score against the leader, so I felt like I was just singled out for destruction for pretty much the entire game.

Don't want to quote the long post but Stalker's experience is exactly my experience lately as well. I love the early and mid game, but the last third of the game is just an infinite war, impossible (not hard, literally impossible) diplomacy, and the feeling of the AI treating you differently than they would another AI acting the exact same way. I know you can turn off the win-competing AI (or however u phrase it, the huge malus you get for doing well), and I probably will do that in the future, but for the sake of most people's enjoyment of this mod I think this should be seriously looked at. I am not against the game being hard, but this is just hard in an extremely unfun way.

In my game as portugal I was barely ahead of my neighbour Iriqouis, and slighlty ahead of a heavily warmongering Rome. After a while I got into a war with my neighbour which I won and captured a few cities, while Rome was conquering like 10-15+ cities from his neighbours and now controls half of the world. Sure, I am still slightly ahead of him (like 2000 to 1900 or something along those lines), but his warmongering is way more outrageous than mine, yet noone is declaring war on him but everyone hate me. It is literally impossible to stay at peace for the rest of the game.

Thank you for the feedback. While I'm sure it reflects well on the AI's ability to pose a challenge, they're supposed to be looking after their own interests, not forming a hive mind against the human.

I have some ideas as to what might be causing the problem. I'll be back in a few days and I'll take a look at it.

 

[Recursive]

Likely diplo changes once I return:

Reduced or removed per-era weight for certain diplo AI changes

Adjustments to AI logic for easy targets, peace evaluation

AI now able to recognize "phony wars" where nothing is happening and will seek to end them more quickly

Attempted to equalize certain diplo mods for AI and human players

 

[pineappledan]

I would like to report that I have cmpleted 3 city conquest quests in my current game: 37XP per unit, 22XP per unit, and 72XP per unit. So I have gotten 131xp from city state quests this game. My army is straight baller.