Went for a little siesta and slept for hours,,,oh well back now
Drew--
If you actually ask him to try a more reasonable (1:1 ratio) of resources, will he go for it?
I've noticed that in tech trades, the AI will often ask for more, but will settle for a more reasonable trade if you ask.
Very good point, but no he wouldn't, and so here's me asking what Bull will give me for Horses (and yes he REALLY doesn't have any)...
So Dyes are now worth much more than Horses hmm? Those horses which allow you to build horse troops of all kinds, and by any sane rationale should be worth at least 2 petty resources? Total Spongebob SquareBollox....
I wonder if they accidentally released an internal beta build of the patch or something... It almost seems like it, with all the obvious problems. It just seems as if things like giant idle stacks, missing culture/espionage in tool tips, sync problems in multi player, strange trading behavior and spies getting kicked out of cities are too big and obvious for testers to miss.
I was thinking exactly the same thing..........
You realize you can and will get far more reasonable trades if you simply ask the AI for them? Just because the AI says it wants X for dye doesn't mean that you can't bargain them down.
Also, I don't see the above change as a bad thing. Frankly, it's pretty damn cheesy to rush into someone's territory and on the next turn, remove all their cultural defense so you can just waltz in and take the city.
The only thing that really concerns me in the patch is that Aggressive AI is rumored to be much less aggressive. Not sure if this is true.
No, the AI has stuck to its guns for 10 turns now. The going rate for dyes is apparently Horses, Stone and Pigs, which is 5/1, as Horses and Stone should count as 2 each, and normally do.
I haven't used spies at all yet, so can't comment...
Everyone returning to peacenick mentality, really worries me too. Agg ais should actually mean something. BUT again, I don't think we've tested enough to know either way on this aspect..
This is starting to feel like 3.03 all over again. In some ways it is even worse - at least the combat animation problem was cosmetic, and the civlopedia avoidable. The bug with AI resource trading is by far the most serious, since it essentially eliminates that part of the game, and seems to have secondary issues with trading multiple resources and inconsistency when negotiating deals. Unless Firaxis get a fix out in the next day or two, I think we're going to be asking Solver to do their job again.
Also confirmed we now have the spy/declare war bug - somewhat more minor, but still needs a fix, and the culture/espionage display bug - cosmetic. It might be a good idea to get a stickied and consolidated bug list specifically for 3.13 in the bug reports forum.
I have to be blunt on this as well - if anyone played a single test game with patch they issued they'd have spotted the culture display bug, and the serious resource trading bug. Conceivably they made last minute alterations and didn't test them - bad, and if they're going to release a poorly tested patch they might as well have done so a month ago. The alternative is that the patch wasn't tested - in light of the Alexman debacle (about 5 weeks this has supposed to have been in testing?), there is going to be anger about this possibility. Less than a day out, and its already clear another patch is essential.
One thing I am going to watch with interest is whether the "waiting for civs" loop is fixed. That was the one real gamebreaker Solver didn't seem able to fix. Currently than seems the only real argument for 3.13.
Well said
you summed up my feeling for me. Just to add, that will all respect to Solver, some said that they witnessed the trading anomaly/bug with his previous fix, so I don't really know what to think anymore....
