[NFP] November Update Analysis

[Archon_Wing]

I've literally never encountered it. It's definitely something you need to seek out to do.

I really don't care if you don't encounter it or if Lily always encounters it. It seems like you and others are insisting on shooting the messenger.
Moderator Action: Please engage with posts and ideas not other posters --NZ

Are bugs ok as long as you don't encounter them? What if the game crashes if you build Stonehenge? Most people don't build it, so it's not an issue?

Just avoid doing it until they fix it, and the game isn't ruined! It's like magic!

You can avoid this discussion too. If it's not a big deal, then you don't have to spend so much effort convincing people it's not a big issue. You don't get to decide how anyone approaches the game.What if it does affect their playstyle? Screw them i guess?

And I have never abused it (probably don't even have the opportunity to), so this advice doesn't really mean anything to me.

 

[Victoria]

I am unconvinced with the “just ignore it aspect” with something like peace cities because I typically only take 1-2 cities then sue a civ for peace. And this is right in my way.
Another example would be tracking over water. I cannot count the amount of times my units jump onto land because I did not move them tile by tile. Now I can avoid the bug by moving tile by tile but the bug gets in my way.

Bringing up bugs is good regardless of motive.

 

[Fluphen Azine]

I am unconvinced with the “just ignore it aspect” with something like peace cities because I typically only take 1-2 cities then sue a civ for peace. And this is right in my way.
Another example would be tracking over water. I cannot count the amount of times my units jump onto land because I did not move them tile by tile. Now I can avoid the bug by moving tile by tile but the bug gets in my way.

Bringing up bugs is good regardless of motive.

Recently I played a game as Gran Columbia and put Babylon as the AI.
Along with Korea and a bunch of Warmongering Civs.
I was crushing Genghis by around turn 80 and was about to take his last city.
Somehow he snuck a settler around some CS's and had a new city to the far NE.
So I took a peace deal with him because why bother.
Not sure what point I am trying to make here lol.
I guess sometimes you just have to make peace in this game.

 

[Victoria]

Not sure what point I am trying to make here lol.
I guess sometimes you just have to make peace in this game.

I just quite like taking cities and still trading and having allies... sort of like, history, you know.
The ownership feeling of crushing now makes me feel like the game is using me rather than the other way around.

 

[iammaxhailme]

To be honest, I've never even encountered the peace cities trade deal bug/exploit/whatever personally, so I'm not even sure how it's triggered or how severe it is. Maybe I should start warmongering more...

 

[pokiehl]

Snip

Calm down pal No one is attacking anyone or shooting messengers and I'm very sorry you've got to feeling that way. I think you've misunderstood my entire point here because I'm not talk about anything other than suggesting a common sense workaround to someone for a game ruining bug . Yes I'm poking a bit of fun at Lily because he makes it seem like he has no other option than to cheese the AI when he's actually one of the most hardcore serious civ players here and certainly doesn't need any help for the AI.

I'm certainly not saying people shouldn't talk about bugs! I am fairly active on the bug reports subforum myself and the first thing I always look at in the patch notes is bug fixes

I am unconvinced with the “just ignore it aspect” with something like peace cities because I typically only take 1-2 cities then sue a civ for peace. And this is right in my way.
Another example would be tracking over water. I cannot count the amount of times my units jump onto land because I did not move them tile by tile. Now I can avoid the bug by moving tile by tile but the bug gets in my way.

Bringing up bugs is good regardless of motive.

The pathing bug can be really frustrating. This one is inconsequential but I also wish they'd fix some of the clipping in buildings. Like the water mill clips into walls and it can look ugly. And the ends of city center canals clip into cliff rocks which drives me crazy

I guess we all have our hangups

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Don't meme on Lily; he's just doing bug and play testing for them that they never did.

Certainly better than realizing a problem and pretending it doesn't exist. The fact that we have an old flaw (AI surrendering all cities) coming back and not being dealt with is pretty sad. Though it seems to be NFP specific since I can't repeat it on GS (though I haven't tried either)

It's reintroduced since Octobor patch.

Calm down pal it seem like he has no other option than to cheese the AI

Well, yes. As this bug exists you actually don't know what is the "real supposed value" for a peace deal, or in fact, for any tradable items, when AI offers you an amount, you don't know whether the item worth the amount, or it is just bugs. So as long as you trade with AI you're "having no other option than to cheese the AI".

Eventually you have to ban trading at all in order to avoid those value bugs, which definitely alters the game to somewhere which it is not designed for.

 

[pokiehl]

Well, yes. As this bug exists you actually don't know what is the "real supposed value" for a peace deal, or in fact, for any tradable items, when AI offers you an amount, you don't know whether the item worth the amount, or it is just bugs. So as long as you trade with AI you're "having no other option than to cheese the AI".

Eventually you have to ban trading at all in order to avoid those value bugs, which definitely alters the game to somewhere which it is not designed for.

I hear what you're saying but I've honestly never come across any of these bugs. Taking advantage of tradable items typically requires some impetus from the player to purposefully alter the deal or make multiple deals to get the biggest possible take from the AI. In the case of peace offerings, their initial peace offerings are fair, at least in the sense of being consistent with peace deals they've given in prior patches. So for someone to encounter this bug is to purposefully try to extract more and more favorable terms from the AI. I don't do that. The game is easy enough and I'm not interested in getting victory as fast possible or doing Deity challenges or anything.

We both have extremely different approaches to playing the game obviously so I'm sure that factors into our different experiences here. But we can agree on this point - the bug (all bugs really) should ideally be fixed. Because even if you take my suggestion and can avoid abusing the bug, that doesn't mean people playing multiplayer aren't going to come across bad actors who abuse it to get ahead.

 

[lotrmith]

"Just don't do it" is fine when it's something that's binary whether you're exploiting or not, like the pantheon glitch or tricking the AI into trading you all their cities. But what about things like the fact the AI trades you an absurd amount of gold for diplomatic favor (yes, they still do, despite patches)? It's not like it's really exploiting to trade DF. Should you just... ask for less gold? The "just don't do it" doesn't really apply to a lot of cases (and I'd argue more cases are ambigious like this vs binary choices) so I do think firaxis really needs to step up the bug fixing and balance testing.

Yeah, I know an AI flaw is different than an obvious exploit, but the fact they're both there says a lot about how they really need to increase their QC efforts. I hate saying that becuase I know they put a lot of work into the game and I don't want to sound entitled or anything, but there are some big flaws that I'm surprised have not been ironed out at all

I haven't been able to get more than 7 or 8 gold per favor. Average is probably 4 and the mode seems to be 2.

 

[RealHuhn]

I haven't been able to get more than 7 or 8 gold per favor. Average is probably 4 and the mode seems to be 2.

The problem is that the AI basically gives you diplo favor for free in the early game and a few turns later you can sell everything for a quite impactful amount of money. It's bad balancing. Of course, I can choose to ignore the cheap prices in early game but I like to have at least 30 diplo favor as early as possible to be able to ask for promises. I have to actively ristrict myself which isn't fun.

I hear what you're saying but I've honestly never come across any of these bugs. .... [snip ]

Do you ever ask the AI to declare a joint war? More often than not the AI offers me all of their gold, resources and great works. How am I supposed to know the real value? I usually just take some gold, like 200 or so, but it's annoying to deal with and it ruins immersion in that moment. Fixing these bugs is important.

 

[Pistol90]

Seems like any intention of making a fair and balanced Civilization game has gone forever. Hero units destroying future era super weapons, pike and shot units in the 1000s BC, zombies and vampires running amok... This series is no longer about building a civilization to stand the test of time.

I was saying this when vampires were annnounced, but others were like 'it will be fine, this is just small distraction'.

4 game modes and none is what I expected, I only love them because I hope modders will found way to make them better, or for something entirely different from what they were designed

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Seems like any intention of making a fair and balanced Civilization game has gone forever.

You can play without any of the modes enabled ....

 

[Pistol90]

You can play without any of the modes enabled ....

How long before that become "You can play without any expansion", and after that "You can play some historical game, not civ"

 

[8housesofelixir]

How long before that become "You can play without any expansion", and after that "You can play some historical game, not civ"

To be fair, if you do want to play a historical game, civ will not be your choice, at least not your immediate choice. The same goes for Civ I, II, III, IV, and V as well, you are asking for something the series cannot 100% offer.

 

[AntSou]

How long before that become "You can play without any expansion", and after that "You can play some historical game, not civ"

When that happens you can complain about it. It seems rather silly to get offended in advance about stuff that only exists in your own imagination.

Besides, that's just a typical gateway argument: "If you let your son listen to rock and roll, how long until he becomes a Satan worshiping murderer?"

 

[pokiehl]

Fixing these bugs is important.

I will repeat again: nowhere in this thread or on CFC in general have I suggested that fixing bugs isn't important or that Firaxis should not fix bugs.

 

[Josephias]

I hear what you're saying but I've honestly never come across any of these bugs. Taking advantage of tradable items typically requires some impetus from the player to purposefully alter the deal or make multiple deals to get the biggest possible take from the AI. In the case of peace offerings, their initial peace offerings are fair, at least in the sense of being consistent with peace deals they've given in prior patches. So for someone to encounter this bug is to purposefully try to extract more and more favorable terms from the AI. I don't do that. The game is easy enough and I'm not interested in getting victory as fast possible or doing Deity challenges or anything.

I've to say I am with Lily in this one. I'm not exploiting trades, and because of that, this bug is annoying as hell (even if you encounter it only seldom).

Situation is: you might want to end a war early, because it's just annoying to keep focusing on units and be distracted from everithing else (be it religion, building or expanding in a different direction), but you want as well to get from the war some cities that for you have certain strategic meaning (empire continuity, access to a specific sea, access to certain resources, etc...).

Normally, the AI offering peace should be an opportunity: they want to make peace because you're superior, so let's make a deal: I'll get some cities in exchange for the peace. Of course cities will not be part of the initial trade deal, but why not?
Before october, I was able to get a "fair" trade for some cities that were not strategic for the AI (small cities whit duplicate resources -for them-, mainly). And by "fair" I mean paying around 100 gpt. in example. (It's ok, my treasury can handle it, and if I get less focus on war and the economy running that is just peanuts).
But with the bug that Lily mentions, asking for a city immediately gets you peace, and the city at no cost (and you can ask for all cities). Asking for all cities would be an exploit, of course, but being denied a "fair" land for money deal because of this just means you need to keep warring (or exploit the bug) if you want those cities. Not fun.

So, maybe it's not a gamebreaking but indeed a bug that impacts gameplay and should be considered.

Edit: (added just in order to not double-post)
Now that we are at bugs: ¿Anyone noticed if Gilgabro can make alliances whith Heroes & Legends mode enabled?. He is in my current game and it looks like alliances are not available for him. ¿Maybe it is a secondary effect for his ability change?

 

[God of Kings]

It would be great if there were a list of relics left behind by the heroes such as Hercules' club and the Girdle of Hippolyta.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

How long before that become "You can play without any expansion", and after that "You can play some historical game, not civ"

I mean the expansions have always been optional and scenarios with magic and sci-fi have existed since Civ 2.

 

[AntSou]

I mean the expansions have always been optional and scenarios with magic and sci-fi have existed since Civ 2.

I don't think everyone got the memo.

But I understand people who don't like this and would rather not have it at all in Civ, optional or not (it does consume resources and time after all).

It's the people who keep making the "make Civ great again" argument, wishing back for a past that has never existed, that are starting to get repetitive. They just need to argue "I would rather Civ games had no fantasy at all" and that would be fine.