As far as I can tell, Ideology is only necessary if you really need the AI to hate your guts for some reason. It virtually guarantees bad relations with an AI that picks another Ideology from yours, and is not even necessary to win a military 'victory', so why bother?
if you're not going military victory to even pick an ideology. Even for military victory it's not necessary.
Speed. One point vs two/three points. Not significant, but you do get free units. More significant, you get leader attribute points. Unless I'm wiping everyone off the planet, I want my ideology at some point.
It seems it all comes down to the AI not actually being good at playing the game. Which is a big shame, and it's incredible that after over 30 years, they still can't make a smart AI. I can recall the AI being better in previous games, so how do they manage to regress on this?!
It all boils down to the fact that the AI is bad at playing the game.
Sure, the AI is bad (for some, not everyone plays on Diety and plays it well), but the devs were really ambitious with this version. With ages, diplomacy, different civs, just to name a few, there's a lot to account for. There was zero chance that this AI was going to be great from the start, but frankly, given the circumstances, the AI is probably better than expected.
I recall an early video by PotatoMcWhiskey who got surrounded by AI the entirety of the antiquity age. He was only able to progress once exploration age began. My most recent game, I actually got a lot of resistance from Xeres. I don't know where he was pulling his units from, but they seemed never-ending. Oh, there was also another game I played where Pachacuti had astronomical stats compared to anyone else (he might have been my ally the entire game
). I had to actively make sure he didn't win the game first. So, the AI does have its moments, but hopefully, there will be improvements in the future (especially when it comes to victory in the modern age). It does seem like they do have plenty to work on before they get to this aspect. After all, what's the point of improving AI, changing the game, and then finding out now that the game has changed, the AI has gotten worse?
I think the reason for this is that lately I'm always building the Gate of all nations wonder, which gives +2 war support. I also chase the first bonus on the Military attribute tree, which gives a further +1 war support.
The AI doesn't prioritize it so you don't have to beeline, and I think your starting war support may discourage attacks.
I genuinely believe this is not the case. I've had way too many instances of the AI declaring war on me, doing absolutely nothing, and then offering me a settlement in a peace deal. AND then they'll do it all over again!!!! Based on this, I have zero faith that AI takes war support into consideration at all. Strangely enough, they are fully aware when you are Trung Trac. The game I played with her, the AI REFUSED to let me declare war on them.... One time, I denounced someone, so I can declare war on them without the support penalty. The leader turned instantly hostile and automatically declared war on me (I can't explain how furious this made me). Has anyone else had an experience like this? This is the only instance in any of my games where the AI acted while it was my turn.
I've been thinking about this for a few days, what is it about the way I play that doesn't get the ridiculous forward settles or attacks on me early game?
I think it's just RNG. If you have an AI or two pretty much spawn on top of you, you're gonna get forward settled. Sure, friendly greetings help, and in the same regard, any other kind of diplo spent towards the AI (endeavors, trade routes, etc.). Maybe you've just been lucky, and accidently appeased to all of the AI's agendas.
I've played quite a few games focused on IPs, where I always do neutral greetings and always accept (instead of support) any endeavour. And still I very rarely get into early wars.
Also, I almost never build military units unless I'm in a war (or planning an invasion), but I make sure I have enough gold in the bank to buy a slinger in case barbarians show up or someone declares on me. And enough gold to buy 2 units if I see I have strong neighbours.
Hmmmm, now this is interesting. I would guess that, in this case, maybe the city-states have something to do with it. From what I know about you (lol), I assume you get that first city-state pretty quickly, and it most likely is deterring AI from declaring war on you.
EDIT2: I notice almost my city-states don't actually attack the enemy, they just stack up in their city center and 'wait'. Maybe it's a bug, I don't know.
Nah, City-State AI is abysmal. I need to actively protect my city-states in times of war, or they go bye-bye.
Wow... I guess you don't want to hear it, but why can't this happen to me?!
I would love a game with early proper struggles like you experience!
I second this!!
To
@jaegermeister and
@Boris Gudenuf, my advice to you two would be to get discipline as soon as possible and take that free army commander with some units (2 warriors and 2 slingers should suffice) and destroy the nearest hostile IP you feel is a threat, and then continue on to any other hostile IPs. Once you're done with that, I'd even consider taking out any friendly IPs in the area if you don't plan on turning them into city-states. Honestly, for one game, you should just try avoiding using diplo on IP's entirely. I suspect you might not be too experienced with the non-city-state aspects of diplomacy. A city-state strategy is strong, but the whole idea of "I can't have it, so neither can you", at the minimum, puts you on equal grounds. Those one-time bonuses from taking out the IP's can give you an early boost as well. Oh, and make sure you disperse the IP as soon as possible, before taking out the remaining units. After one IP, your commander should have a promotion, and you should be able to snowball that into more military conquests.
- Never do friendly greeting (I always go neutral).
- Never build any wonders until and unless they are buildable in 10-12 turns. Spending 25 turns on a wonder in antiquity is just insane to me. I could create a lot of units in the mean time and go for conquest instead.
- Steal city-states using influence or wipe them out before AI gets hold on any around me. (this pisses of some leaders big time)
- Create military units to match with AI (I have a mod that shows military power of everyone, so that I know if some AI has massive army) or at least I try to have 50% of his military power to defend my territory.
- If I am declared war on, I always use stacked influence to buy warscore in the war screen so that my units always have the upper hand in combat.
- Go beyond my city limits (+2 or +3 depending on my happiness. I also have a mod that allows me to see how many settlements AI has. So I make sure I am never below them)
- Espionage to hinder hostile AI progress.
So far I could list these as my default strategy. Do you do these too?
Hmmm, based on this, I would say I don't think you necessarily need to build that many units, and especially if you don't have a second army commander yet. For one army commander, I would say I have at most 8 units. After that, you should be building a second commander before getting any more units (defending settlements that's away from your army commander is an obvious exception).
By stealing, do you mean an AI is actively converting an IP and you out-diplo them? If that's the case, I feel like this is a waste of diplo. When the IP is hostile, I already question the benefit of converting it. A friendly IP will convert in 15 turns for 170 diplo. A hostile IP takes 30 turns. I'd have to more than double the diplo spent on a hostile IP, just to convert it in the same time as a friendly IP. In an age where the diplo currency is already scarce, this seems like a waste.
Spending diplo on war support isn't bad, but from my experience, in battle, there's not a very noticeable difference between +3 support and 0 support. Their stats do definitely take a hit though. The problem to me is, you can gain war support more efficiently by a military leader attribute point and/or building the gate of nations without using diplo. Instead, use your diplo on endeavors and increasing trade. Pay attention to other leaders relationships with other leaders. The player is more than capable of manipulating the AI in their favor in diplomacy. Unless you're Harriet Tubman and/or have a severe excess of diplo, I would mostly stay away from espionage.
Lastly, please don't go over the settlement limit. At most, I go +2, but that's usually after I took out another civ. Unless you got extra happiness from playing someone like Maurya India, in antiquity age, it's best to stay within the limit.
Oh, and on topic lol I've mentioned this in another thread, but the science victory is inherently boring because it's about how well your science and production are doing. So to me, the fun isn't in getting the victory, it's the planning in the beginning of the modern age and how fast you're able to reach the victory. My turn 39 science victory was definitely not boring!
).
