New Beta Version - April 17th (4-17)

[JamesNinelives]

Taken from next beta's patch notes:
All fighter pilots are permanently intoxicated, causing them to strafe anyone unfortunate enough to be close to their targets.

"Hmm, that destroyer that definitely isn't ours sure looks like an enemy airfield. Better put some missiles into it..."

I definitely find it an issue when something doesn't quite do what the tooltip says.

Spoiler :

View attachment 556751

The truth is that those fighter pilots know something you don't, and your ground units (all of them) are part of a 'deep state' conspiracy!

 

[dostillevi]

It's been almost a year since I last played, and I log in to find the next release is just around the corner. Very excited (and really glad to see the community is still vibrant!)

 

[Susanooo]

Can anything be done about AIs forward settling? Sometimes I choose to go for high pop capital and 2-3 wonders before building settlers and AI just skips like 40 tiles of perfect land that is easily defendable and has good resources juts so he can settle right next to me. This is the reason I restart the game 80% of the time. I'm talking about epic speed turn 100ish.

Non related question, when do you guys gets second merchant of Venice? First one is fine, but second one comes waaay too late (or i'm doing something wrong). IMO first 2 or 3 MoV should come a lot earlier than Great Merchant, and we can balance it out by making later ones require more GMP.

 

[Recursive]

Can anything be done about AIs forward settling? Sometimes I choose to go for high pop capital and 2-3 wonders before building settlers and AI just skips like 40 tiles of perfect land that is easily defendable and has good resources juts so he can settle right next to me. This is the reason I restart the game 80% of the time. I'm talking about epic speed turn 100ish.

I suggest making a bug report on Github.

https://github.com/LoneGazebo/Community-Patch-DLL/issues

 

[Casworon]

I have to admit. The forward settling makes me miss the Civ VI loyalty mechanic. But also I dont think the loyalty mechanic works that well since it makes all the empires the exact same 'blob' shape. So I'm no way encouraging bringing it over.

If I'm right the though only way to get cities is via warfare right? That or flips late game due to tourism.

 

[andersw]

Can anything be done about AIs forward settling? Sometimes I choose to go for high pop capital and 2-3 wonders before building settlers and AI just skips like 40 tiles of perfect land that is easily defendable and has good resources juts so he can settle right next to me. This is the reason I restart the game 80% of the time. I'm talking about epic speed turn 100ish.

Non related question, when do you guys gets second merchant of Venice? First one is fine, but second one comes waaay too late (or i'm doing something wrong). IMO first 2 or 3 MoV should come a lot earlier than Great Merchant, and we can balance it out by making later ones require more GMP.

What civs are fw settling you?
It could very well be that the AI acknowledge your amount of wonders and on purpose looks for a way to take those from you.
3 wonders before expand is a LOT.

I only see one civ really keen on forward settling, and its Askia, he likes to forward settle really agressive usually with a couple of cities in a line and follow that up with lots of madelkalu cav in your face.
Sometimes I see weird settles but that more common when a settler has to "run away" and in the meantime another AI settles his area.
Carthage and Polynesia strongly favours coasts which sometimes can result in forward settles.

 

[Susanooo]

What civs are fw settling you?
It could very well be that the AI acknowledge your amount of wonders and on purpose looks for a way to take those from you.
3 wonders before expand is a LOT.

I only see one civ really keen on forward settling, and its Askia, he likes to forward settle really agressive usually with a couple of cities in a line and follow that up with lots of madelkalu cav in your face.
Sometimes I see weird settles but that more common when a settler has to "run away" and in the meantime another AI settles his area.
Carthage and Polynesia strongly favours coasts which sometimes can result in forward settles.

Almost all civs forward settle me, warfare ones, expansion ones etc. The only civs that don't forward settle me are those that favour 2-3 tall cities until lategame. I don't think it's a wonder spam thing, I just made that as an example. Sometimes I play without them trying to start with 1 super advanced city. I like to explore possibilities and strategies, and I find somethings to be impossible. Game kinda forces you to play a certain way to ensure win otherwise it's just too random (like people already said sometimes cultural victory is simply not possible, sometimes getting your own religion is impossible etc). Anyway the thing that annoys me the most is no brain forward settling on bad tiles. AI seems to prioritize teritory adjacent to human player even if it's really far away from their other cities. I'm just sharing my experience. Does anyone else have this problem? Do you have trouble getting religion? I'd also like if you could share your favourite templates, i mostly play normal ones like pangea, continents, small islands etc.

 

[andersw]

Almost all civs forward settle me, warfare ones, expansion ones etc. The only civs that don't forward settle me are those that favour 2-3 tall cities until lategame. I don't think it's a wonder spam thing, I just made that as an example. Sometimes I play without them trying to start with 1 super advanced city. I like to explore possibilities and strategies, and I find somethings to be impossible. Game kinda forces you to play a certain way to ensure win otherwise it's just too random (like people already said sometimes cultural victory is simply not possible, sometimes getting your own religion is impossible etc). Anyway the thing that annoys me the most is no brain forward settling on bad tiles. AI seems to prioritize teritory adjacent to human player even if it's really far away from their other cities. I'm just sharing my experience. Does anyone else have this problem? Do you have trouble getting religion? I'd also like if you could share your favourite templates, i mostly play normal ones like pangea, continents, small islands etc.

I usually build stonehenge try to get 4 pop and then build 1-2 settlers (and probably granary inbetween) + getting the free authority settler for a total of 3-4 cities, and after getting a worker or two, maybe more warriors , if enough room build expand with new cities as much as possible.
(I play with low sea for a bit more room and less early tension, with regular settings there isnt that much room and you will get blocked by other cities pretty quick.)
I dont have a problem getting religion on emperor, but then I go shrine first in my new cities and take pantheons (open sky, protection, renewal, war etc) that provide easy faith without tile improvement.

 

[vyyt]

@Susanooo , what difficulty are you playing with? I think AIs should not be doing this very often as it is usually detrimental to them. If it happens in 80% cases as you say, then I think it should be looked into.

(It almost never happens to me, but it is probably because I play on more crowded maps. AIs expand towards me, but do not leave that much space between their new city and the capital.) I also set min distance between cities to 4, but I don't think it matters in this regard.

I always found a religion on emperor/18-22 civs, it is a priority for me.

 

[InkAxis]

It happens pretty often. In my latest game there was tundra with a deer and a fish, no river, and generally pretty bad and the ottomans settled it. Same with 1 tile islands. In most my games about 1/3 of the cities I settle aren't settled because they are good, but to stop the AI from settling nearby. I don't play on deity but it does happen often as that's what deity level YouTubers I've seen do. They have to settle sub optimal, often pretty bad, cities just so the AI won't take that land. Same thing with razing cities, I often want to but then realize the AI will just settle it again.

 

[Susanooo]

It happens pretty often. In my latest game there was tundra with a deer and a fish, no river, and generally pretty bad and the ottomans settled it. Same with 1 tile islands. In most my games about 1/3 of the cities I settle aren't settled because they are good, but to stop the AI from settling nearby. I don't play on deity but it does happen often as that's what deity level YouTubers I've seen do. They have to settle sub optimal, often pretty bad, cities just so the AI won't take that land. Same thing with razing cities, I often want to but then realize the AI will just settle it again.

Pretty much this. I play on deity, and I didn't say that it happens 80% of the time, I said that 80% of my restarts are because of that. It happens every game. I would understand if they started taking my land after all good spots around them are taken, but this just seems silly.

 

[Drakle]

From my own observation, the AI seems to stop wanting to settle during the medieval and Renaissance and then goes mad after, settling everything they can. Like one game, I settled a city halfway across the map to grab Mines of Solomon, 3 fish, and 2 mine luxuries (I needed for WLTKD) that was just north of England, which they had left all game. Then later in the game, they were settling 1 tile islands with everybody else.

Also, the AI has a habit of sending great engineers on long journeys to plant Maunfactories in newly settled cities. Doesn't really seem worth it, and I've killed a few AI GE when they were trying that.

 

[JamesNinelives]

Also, the AI has a habit of sending great engineers on long journies to plant Maunfactories in newly settled cities. Doesn't really seem worth it, and I've killed a few AI GE when they were trying that.

I assume it's an attempt to combat unhappiness in those poor city locations. I always keep my engineers for my capital, but I regularly do this with great Scientists - particularly if I have a coastal capital and all the land tiles it can work have GPTIs on them already.

That said, the AI are pretty good at escorting their settlers and diplomats when embarked. Maybe they don't register the engineers as a unit that should be protected.

 

[Recursive]

I assume it's an attempt to combat unhappiness in those poor city locations. I always keep my engineers for my capital, but I regularly do this with great Scientists - particularly if I have a coastal capital and all the land tiles it can work have GPTIs on them already.

That said, the AI are pretty good at escorting their settlers and diplomats when embarked. Maybe they don't register the engineers as a unit that should be protected.

There's a bug causing the AI not to protect their Settlers that will be fixed for the upcoming version.

Maybe it's also affecting GEs? I'd post a bug report if you continue to observe that.

 

[Deljade]

Some AIs have no concept of personal space, I had Shaka in one instance walk a settler THROUGH a city state's borders and make a city in a 4 tile wide area inbetween my other cities, right in the middle of my nation, he was also quite far away from me. I was planning to fill in that spot in the industrial waiting for strategics to reveal. Needless to say I declared one turn after the crappy city popped up. High expanionist leaders especially are really obnoxious and they get the bonuses for founding these dumb cities too. It feels really dumb to have to ruin diplomatic relations with 10 other civs to squish a crappy city in your face. But I will not hesitate, better early than when it gets to 100 defense. I'll also buy tiles or pop a citadel if I notice any of these shenanigans about to happen. The most baffling thing is that the AIs do not consider your military when they are about to settle in your face, they will just escort the settler with one unit, if that. I guess if it felt more like they were doing a military expedition to establish a stronghold near your lands it would feel much better, but swatting these awful cities in one turn just makes me facepalm hard as I get the feeling the AI considers that me not wanting to be meanie and declare war is sufficient enough defense.

/rant

 

[2506]

I guess if it felt more like they were doing a military expedition to establish a stronghold near your lands it would feel much better, but swatting these awful cities in one turn just makes me facepalm hard as I get the feeling the AI considers that me not wanting to be meanie and declare war is sufficient enough defense.

If you're playing at a competitive level, then it doesn't seem so dumb:

High expanionist leaders... get the bonuses for founding these dumb cities. It feels really dumb to have to ruin diplomatic relations with 10 other civs to squish a crappy city.

 

[Deljade]

I was talking about player experience for the most part. Is it a good "strategy"? Maybe, but if it is, it's not for the right reasons

 

[InkAxis]

If you're playing at a competitive level, then it doesn't seem so dumb

From the player's perspective it just isn't fun. Either the player has to ignore the AI taking their land, or they have to declare war, ruining all diplomacy. And when the player captures this city (because it is rarely defended well) the player can raze the city, but in that case the AI will just settle that crappy spot again repeating the cycle. So the player has to keep a terrible city. Overall, every decision the player can make are bad and unfun.

And this is also pretty bad from the AI's perspective. All it gets is a really bad city, that probably doesn't even offset the happiness/culture/etc. costs. At best they get some strategic resources. Then, their diplomacy falls apart. Overall very suboptimal and not a good decision. Yes, the AI get a bonus for setting cities. But, these are effectively "secret" bonuses, the AI doesn't plan on getting them, and I doubt that the bonus outweighs the cost of science, culture, diplomacy, etc. Also, the whole point of those bonuses was just to reward the AI for playing normally, not to encourage some strange strategy. In a perfect world, the AI would make the same decisions with or without the bonuses.

So, this is a bad decision for the AI, even factoring in the city settle bonus. It also generally makes gameplay unfun and forces a strategy of "settle this city so the AI won't", instead of actually settling good cities.

 

[Cool2002]

I felt same way using default number of opponents and city states I would just remove some ai opponents or city states so that you have more natural growing room. I do this in all my games now...

 

[JamesNinelives]

I felt same way using default number of opponents and city states I would just remove some ai opponents or city states so that you have more natural growing room. I do this in all my games now...

I have the standard number of players and city-states, but I play on Huge map size which gives similar results. Unfortunately I think it may be creating an imbalance in some areas - e.g. early-war civs like Assyria, the Aztecs do poorly. Still, I have obnoxious forward settles, and I end up with border tensions soon enough anyway, it just doesn't happen right at the start of the game.