Poll:Is the AI capable of defending itself properly/Should Defensive Pacts be more common?

[merill]

A long time ago, i've done a modmod for CP which add a combat handicap option (AI units more resilient or/and powerful vs human units).
With it, we can trade some "ai has more units" to a bit of "ai units are more powerful vs human units".
At the time, there was no demand for my mod. I can update it, what do you think?

 

[ashendashin]

A long time ago, i've done a modmod for CP which add a combat handicap option (AI units more resilient or/and powerful vs human units).
With it, we can trade some "ai has more units" to a bit of "ai units are more powerful vs human units".
At the time, there was no demand for my mod. I can update it, what do you think?

It's...Interesting. Dunno. Sounds like it would make dealing with bigger civs a much bigger pain than it already is. The purpose of this thread is to make the lesser civs less vulnerable to not only the player, but each other.

 

[Txurce]

In my current game, Babylon was leading, and threatening to become a runaway. My Indonesians beat the Aztecs in a long war that eventually destroyed the Aztec army. Not long after, the Aztecs DoW'd Babylon. Surprise, surprise: the Aztecs now have one city.

This happens all the time. The more aggressive AI giving in to their natures strikes me as a bigger problem in terms of competitiveness than not taking on the leader at all. I have no idea what calculation the Aztecs could have made that told them decalring war vs Babylon was a good idea. Was it Babylon being at war elsewhere? Maybe... but they really had no chance.

 

[Gazebo]

In my current game, Babylon was leading, and threatening to become a runaway. My Indonesians beat the Aztecs in a long war that eventually destroyed the Aztec army. Not long after, the Aztecs DoW'd Babylon. Surprise, surprise: the Aztecs now have one city.

This happens all the time. The more aggressive AI giving in to their natures strikes me as a bigger problem in terms of competitiveness than not taking on the leader at all. I have no idea what calculation the Aztecs could have made that told them decalring war vs Babylon was a good idea. Was it Babylon being at war elsewhere? Maybe... but they really had no chance.

They probably got bribed with a lot of money.

G

 

[civfnaticfan]

After playing many VPs games, i find that for early game before medieval era, the AI is not capable at all to defend itself due to the nerf to city bombardment range and lack of indirect fire of the city. Should we increase the city strength to make up for this ?

 

[ashendashin]

After playing many VPs games, i find that for early game before medieval era, the AI is not capable at all to defend itself due to the nerf to city bombardment range and lack of indirect fire of the city. Should we increase the city strength to make up for this ?

I can't really take your word for anything. Very little of your experiences match anything anyone else has had. The AI is perfectly capable of using city bombardment. And your other thread devolved to even more nonsensical talk about how the AI continues to perform horribly, even with absolutely massive boosts.
I'm thinking you're either running on the wrong copy of civ, or you're just looking to screw around.

 

[ElliotS]

After playing many VPs games, i find that for early game before medieval era, the AI is not capable at all to defend itself due to the nerf to city bombardment range and lack of indirect fire of the city. Should we increase the city strength to make up for this ?

Yeah, I'm kinda with ashendashin here. Multiple people requested some screenshots or preferably gameplay videos on your thread where you claimed Deity is too easy.

You're the only person I've seen on here complain about most of the stuff you complain about, so either you're playing CIV on a level above that of mere mortals or something's wrong. Smart money is on the latter, but I'd honestly love to be proven wrong. Even without talking or anything, just use fraps to record a video of your VP deity play and let us see for ourselves.

 

[merill]

maybe he just love playing inca.

 

[Gazebo]

Yeah, I'm kinda with ashendashin here. Multiple people requested some screenshots or preferably gameplay videos on your thread where you claimed Deity is too easy.

You're the only person I've seen on here complain about most of the stuff you complain about, so either you're playing CIV on a level above that of mere mortals or something's wrong. Smart money is on the latter, but I'd honestly love to be proven wrong. Even without talking or anything, just use fraps to record a video of your VP deity play and let us see for ourselves.

I can't really take your word for anything. Very little of your experiences match anything anyone else has had. The AI is perfectly capable of using city bombardment. And your other thread devolved to even more nonsensical talk about how the AI continues to perform horribly, even with absolutely massive boosts.
I'm thinking you're either running on the wrong copy of civ, or you're just looking to screw around.

NOTE: You are not at war.

 

[Enginseer]

maybe he just love playing inca.

playing inca against the AI feels abusive. I love just attacking with my ranged units and retreating back to my mountains when the cavalry comes and can't reach me.

 

[pandasnail]

If CFF plays Marathon speed, its possibly realistic what she's saying I feel like. I don't think of myself as all that great at the game, and there was a small period where I could win Deity Marathon about 50%, assuming you don't count occasional ten turn in rerolls. Now, that was in part because I absolutely crushed the AI on the high seas esp once Frigates came along, which is no longer possible (at least for me). But still, there's at least some gap between Marathon Deity and Standard Deity, and anyone who complains about the AI not being to defend its cities before Gunpowder, I would guess has a lot of turns before Gunpowder to notice, and believe me, there are a lot of turns to attack pre-Gunpowder on Marathon. Also, from some logreading I've done, it seems the bigger the map, the more likely the AI is to pursue Diplomacy, which means sprinting to Printing Press, which means even more turns before Gunpowder. Don't know if that's still the case.

More on topic, if I ever get back to the highest levels, the pledge to protect and tribute change will be an absolute delight!

 

[civfnaticfan]

I really have to thank lord Gazebo and the modders behind the Cp core mod , it really makes me a better player . For most of my threads, i have always been praising how good the AI is for CP and VP, just that for VP, i feel that some of the new functionalities seems to nerf the difficulty directly(including the new happiness mechanics unfortunately). But with merrill's help on increasing the difficulty level by some modding, i am really very contented and will continue to test limits with VP since its really more fun than CP core.

I strategizes every move i take because 1 single wrong move gets you in a very bad spot with CP core deity. I urged ppl to try the CP core only without CBP , you will definitely find VP a breeze after you have tried CP core only.

CP core is possibly harder because firstly, AI have two settlers, and they tech faster and that is exacerbated with 6 free techs at the start only for the AI. 2ndly , their cities defence have two range and ignores obstacles(indirect fire), making it relatively harder to capture.

I have actually posted quite a few screenshots of CP core, but not particularly VP's , might wanna post some more screenshots for VP too .

@ashendashin and @ElliotS, what are your usual starting build orders for units and buildings in VP? Research?

 

[ElliotS]

I have actually posted quite a few screenshots of CP core, but not particularly VP's , might wanna post some more screenshots for VP too .

@ashendashin and @ElliotS, what are your usual starting build orders for units and buildings in VP? Research?

I'm a skeptical person with some paranoia, but I'll assume you're telling the truth for now.

I also love improving at everything I do, and thus I would be extremely interested in seeing your Deity play. If you're going to play today and don't mind, PM me with your steam name and let me stream your game. Otherwise video or screenshots would still be appreciated.

As I currently play on Deity (though not the overclocked deity you play on.) I obviously change my starting builds/techs to suit the civ/plan/situation.

With that said my two most common opening tech choices are:

1- iron -> bronze working for early tribute and dominance.

2- Pottery -> Trapping -> Markets for a defensive expansive game.

My build order is generally shrine first, monument second and then either units or other buildings if I'm feeling greedy. This changes a lot too, for example as Aztecs I'll just build a bunch of jaguars and kill barbs+go to war with the first person I meet for a fast religion.

I like domination victories the best. Launching a spaceship or passing a vote is much less satisfying than shoving a sword into Maria Theresa's fat back-stabbing chest. (Still a little salty from one of my first VP games. )

 

[ashendashin]

This is getting somewhat off topic. @civfnaticfan I advise that you start giving some finer details and screenshots before you go asking others to do so on your thread. I certainly can't be bothered to use CP alone as the base game is frustrating and boring.

 

[Txurce]

@civfnaticfan I advise that you start giving some finer details and screenshots before you go asking others to do so on your thread.

I'm a skeptical person with some paranoia, but I'll assume you're telling the truth for now.

What the hell is wrong with you two? If you don't want to engage with civfnaticfan, then don't. But this site doesn't need your crappy attitudes.

 

[ashendashin]

What the hell is wrong with you two? If you don't want to engage with civfnaticfan, then don't. But this site doesn't need your crappy attitudes.

That wasn't really intended to be taking so seriously. I'll try to be more mindful of that in the future. Simple fact is that fan continuously asks for our plays while she provides little information for her amazing plays. I'll just go back to simply not saying anything in regards to how trustworthy her views on the game are.

Edit:
I mean, crappy attitudes? The first time sure. But this really was starting to derail the topic(though I suppose it may be kinda irrelevant with the new update. Gotta play some more).

Elliot made a genuine response and besides the fact that he asked her to provide her view of the game that she herself said she could easily provide on the start of her thread, I see no potential rudeness.

 

[ElliotS]

What the hell is wrong with you two? If you don't want to engage with civfnaticfan, then don't. But this site doesn't need your crappy attitudes.

You're incredibly naive if you believe there's a zero percent chance that she's trolling. I don't know civfnaticfan, so I can only go by my experience with the internet and what I see. As someone who's trolled people for a long time (In other places. I like this forum.) there's a couple red flags that COULD indicate trolling. Let's look at it logically, with no regards for personal bias or feelings.

1. Complaining about the hardest difficulty being too easy. If there were many people doing so, I wouldn't have a problem. I'm not saying it's impossible that she's so much better than me that Deity is easy to her, (because I remember a time where Emperor was my go-to difficulty.) I'm just saying it's not a bad angle to take to troll people. People who're proud of their Deity accomplishments are likely to be offended by these complaints about the difficulty and take it as a personal slight, despite how illogical that sounds.
2. She's got a public gender, and it's female. Look, I'm a gamer. I love the gaming scene, and realize it has a problem getting women into it. A large portion of it is the fact that sexism is real and a hundred times more prevalent than IRL. The absolute last thing I would ever do is discourage a girl from gaming, or even recommend she hide her gender to avoid harassment. However most female gamers hide their gender to avoid harassment and discrimination. Having a public gender of female may mean she's the type of woman I respect, (one that has thick skin and knows to ignore idiots and bigots) or that she's a he trying to mess with people. If you're trolling, especially from the "I'm so much better than you" angle the fake girl aspect makes perfect sense. There's a stereotype that girls are worse at games than men, so the idiots who would get insulted by someone being better than them are also likely to be extra triggered if it's a girl.
3. Unless I missed something or it was a long time ago, I haven't seen any screenshots or other proof of her accomplishments. She's said she can get some multiple times in this and the Deity thread she started, but I haven't seen any. I think the whole 'pics or didn't happen' thing is applicable when it's only one person claiming something.
4. Finally she's asked what starting builds and techs people go multiple times. Having a set 'starting build order' and 'starting tech path' is a concept exclusive to low-level players. (Unless I'm missing some super-OP path that works in every scenario and no one else has noticed.) If she's testing to see if someone is a noob, trying to get generalizations or a path like that actually exists, it's understandable. However if she's trolling then it stands to reason they might be a much lower-level player that thinks a set order is how you're supposed to do things.

So the way I see it there are two scenarios. 1- civfnaticfan is an amazingly talented and practiced women that doesn't really care about the recognition or insults of others, or 2- civfnaticfan is a pathetic likely male and likely low-level troll.

If you asked me statistically which is more likely then I would answer 2 in a heartbeat, because it's true and I'm no PC pussy and I don't care who I offend with the truth.

However I won't discount the possibility of the former, and I genuinely hope that it is the case.

So I hope this explains my motivations and reasoning for how I act here. Rest assured that I'm not among the sexist, racist or self-conscious and easily offended crowds. I'm simply cynical from years of being a gamer and growing up on the internet.

Also people remember that when I say **** in the future, it likely has this much thought put into it as well. I'm the type of person who means EXACTLY what he says, and so when I say that someone could be a troll it's different from when I say some is probably a troll, which is different from saying that someone is a troll. (In this case I would say probably based purely on the reasons layed out above and statistics, if you're curious.)

Moderator Action: To call someone a troll is trolling on this site. Also, please review the rules on language use as we try to maintain a family friendly environment so all can participate. Our standard is civility in discussion, please try to help us maintain this standard. leif
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Txurce]

Elliot, no one called you a "PC pussy." But CFC is not *****. It's against our rules to speculate on whether anyone on this site is a troll.

 

[ashendashin]

Txurce is right. I decided it would be best to just not make a big deal out of this because my last response was to prevent derailing this thread. It makes sense to be skeptical on the proper thread, but it's best to keep the skepticism contained and prevent long posts such as yours from causing trouble.

 

[tu_79]

I must be an anti-troll, for I'm playing this game now for more than a year and still got beaten in King. Even more, I'm not a woman.