No Huts

[averagejoe]

Is the gameplay better without huts?
You may not get free gold or tech but neither does the AI.
Is it realistic that a civilization would just be given gold from a hut?
Wouldnt they more likely have to take it by force or trade something?
I think with huts you are getting something for nothing. If you make a good
strategic decision you should get something but not for just being in the right area. I especially dont like huts given tech. If they had some of the higher techs i think they would at least be a town.


Maybe im wrong but i tried 2 practice games and checked the world builder.
In the one without huts the AI seemed to be a little bit more ahead in citys.
Without huts it was more even at 3 a piece. Of course it wasnt in depth and i didnt check buildings or units. I really wouldnt know what to look for to make an informed opinion at this point so thats why i thought i might get some feedback from the forum. I guess i kinda lean toward no huts cause i dont think the game should just give you or the AI something for free.

 

[Gliese 581]

Look at it this way: Your warriors enter a village and get something, after they leave, the village is gone. Now remember these were savage times.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Look at it this way: Your warriors enter a village and get something, after they leave, the village is gone. Now remember these were savage times.

That doesn't explains scouts . Of course, the people might just be assimilated into your empire or whatever, etc etc. No real need for a reason in a game where someone can turn Gandhi into the most bloodthirsty genocide-loving monster ever.

 

[averagejoe]

Yeah but do you find that it helps you or the AI more? Or is it truly random?
Does the AI have a better idea where the huts are or is it as blind as we are to
unexplored territory? It seems like it would make it a little more even and harder
because you have to earn your gold & tech. You cant hope for a free one from hut. To me huts are like a bad lottery in that you know your usually going to get something. Where in a lottery you usually end up with nothing. Although my luck changes in tonights lottery drawing.

 

[Joshua368]

The AI doesn't know where the huts are, they have to stumble around blindly just like you.

On earlier difficulty levels its an even field, you just hope you aren't incredibly unlucky. On later difficulties (emperor+) the AI starts with multiple scouts and archers all running around in difficult directions so you are certainly at a disadvantage and turning off the huts will probably help you.

 

[averagejoe]

The AI doesn't know where the huts are, they have to stumble around blindly just like you.

On earlier difficulty levels its an even field, you just hope you aren't incredibly unlucky. On later difficulties (emperor+) the AI starts with multiple scouts and archers all running around in difficult directions so you are certainly at a disadvantage and turning off the huts will probably help you.

So if im understanding you correctly the AI has to find the huts just like i do but the difference is in how many units he has for scouting to start with.
So from that perspective it shouldnt make much difference on the lower levels.
But on the higher levels it should give the AI less chance of finding a hut first.
Kinda like the NBA lottery i suppose. I will probably have to just try each one and see which one i like.

 

[bestje]

I think on the lower levels huts favour you as the AI has the same probability of getting things as if they were playing at noble, IE they would get no settlers or workers, whilst a human might

 

[averagejoe]

I think on the lower levels huts favour you as the AI has the same probability of getting things as if they were playing at noble, IE they would get no settlers or workers, whilst a human might

I didnt think about getting settlers. I was just thinking techs, warriors and such.
I dont know if its a good thing for either me or the AI to get free settlers. One more city built imo is better in the long run. Wish you could decide what huts would give you & the AI or maybe even for each. Say i could get scouts but no warriors and the AI could get the reversed. So if i stumble upon a hut that has something im not allowed to get from a hut it would just say the hut is empty.
Then again maybe its just a dumb idea.

 

[Gliese 581]

I didnt think about getting settlers. I was just thinking techs, warriors and such.
I dont know if its a good thing for either me or the AI to get free settlers. One more city built imo is better in the long run. Wish you could decide what huts would give you & the AI or maybe even for each. Say i could get scouts but no warriors and the AI could get the reversed. So if i stumble upon a hut that has something im not allowed to get from a hut it would just say the hut is empty.
Then again maybe its just a dumb idea.

I would say it's a good thing to get a free settler.

 

[bestbrian]

I turn them off. I don't like having BW, IW, Alphabet, and Writing before 2000 BC and I don't want to face the AI that does, either.

 

[Gliese 581]

I turn them off. I don't like having BW, IW, Alphabet, and Writing before 2000 BC and I don't want to face the AI that does, either.

It can happen without huts.

 

[cabert]

alpahbet before 2000BC means you're playing marathon

 

[averagejoe]

It can happen without huts.

True. But your not getting a free pass in getting the tech as you are with huts.
Either free gold or free unit helps you. I guess im just not in favor of reward with little or no risk.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

alpahbet before 2000BC means you're playing marathon

And you happen to have 2-3 riverside grassland gems.

 

[Gliese 581]

I was thinking more it can happen to the AI, but I guess a player could pull it off as well under the right circumstances.

 

[Bleys]

If you think about it, the AI has a MUCH better return on huts than the human at the higher levels. As a player, I see techs like Hunting, Archery, The Wheel, etc all the time, but the AIs start with those on some levels, making it more possible to get even bigger techs from huts like Writing, Alphabet, etc.

 

[Gliese 581]

That doesn't explains scouts . Of course, the people might just be assimilated into your empire or whatever, etc etc. No real need for a reason in a game where someone can turn Gandhi into the most bloodthirsty genocide-loving monster ever.

Well the scouts are armed with tomahawks aren't they? They certainly look like warriors, in fact they look like they could kick the ass of any warrior in a forrested terrain although they don't.
I imagine the villagers they encounter are very docile. Or perhaps they're simply assimilated as someone suggested.

 

[averagejoe]

Well the scouts are armed with tomahawks aren't they? They certainly look like warriors, in fact they look like they could kick the ass of any warrior in a forrested terrain although they don't.
I imagine the villagers they encounter are very docile. Or perhaps they're simply assimilated as someone suggested.

The borg are in civ 4?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Well the scouts are armed with tomahawks aren't they? They certainly look like warriors, in fact they look like they could kick the ass of any warrior in a forrested terrain although they don't.
I imagine the villagers they encounter are very docile. Or perhaps they're simply assimilated as someone suggested.

Bears/lions/panthers > Scouts + warriors > villagers.

Very logical.

I really hug the coast with scouting units when barbs are on.

 

[Divaythsarmour]

I've never thought of playing without huts. Clearly they're part of the chance aspect of the game. IMO it wouldn't be as fun or intersting without that aspect.

I think Great People are similar. It's possible (in a series of really good luck) to generate just the right great people at just the right time to put you hundreds of years ahead of the AI (bulbing) when it really matters.

Of course just like huts, the AI can and does benifit similarly.