PolyCast Episode 129: "The Letters T and Eh?"

[Tabarnak]

What is the point to play a game if you can decide what is going on for the next 100 turns? Seriously?

Well thats the hole point about diplomacy know I know the AI will backstabb me and declare on me when I have a lower military not much of a suprise more predictable...
And every AI does this not just certain types...

Not really a good game design...

The probabilities are higher, but it's not impossible to see no backstab at all. It's in fact pretty complicated right now to make good decision and not be attacked. Only a few players have done that. The diplo system is much complicated and adaptation is harder. If a weaker civ attacks you, get their cities and make gold by selling them or puppeting them. For sure you have high chances to be backstabbed if you stay low in military. At least the AI acts like it should in that case. Be a man and stay strong

Like LeRoiSoleil said, in mankind history, no leaders would have let their civ with no military, sit down and pray to not be attacked. Finally we have something more realistic.

AIs are your ennemies, not your friends.

 

[DanQ]

Something I meant to acknowledge earlier...

Thanks again to Dan for having me on the show.

You're welcome -- thank you for being on it.

 

[AlphaShard]

I remember using Ironclads in Civ 1 and 2.

 

[DanQ]

I remember using Ironclads in Civ 1 and 2.

Same here, and to a greater extent than later Civ titles, but even then not that much.

 

[qemist]

It's in fact pretty complicated right now to make good decision and not be attacked. Only a few players have done that.

Long-term friendships are certainly possible. In my current (epic, immortal) game I've been friends with Wu for over 300 turns. Mind you she did attack me early. Once I raped her she gave me everything she had, and she was as gentle as a lamb thereafter.

Like LeRoiSoleil said, in mankind history, no leaders would have let their civ with no military, sit down and pray to not be attacked.

Some people seem to think that if you say the right things diplomatically you should be able to do this. I don't think that is realistic. Diplomacy is the velvet glove on the iron fist. No-one respects an empty glove.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

You can write all the essays you want on realpolitk and game theory, but the real world doesn't work that way, and it's not an accurate model of human interactions.

I don't think any essays on game theory would support the AI behavior in any civ game made, V or otherwise.

It needs to be a bit unpredictable. It should not be predictable. For myself, i prefer the AI in civ5 more than civ4. Diplo is one of the least problems to cure right now. If you play your cards right, you can reduce this backstab factor. But you should never be immune to that. Never.

Civ V's top problems remain

- UI that isn't streamlined to quickly do what you want (a travesty in games made in the last 5-10 years)
- Much of play strategy depends on abusing the AI stupidity directly via in-game trades to fleece its gold
- However, if you want competent opposition, MP is still not working 100%. I hear this multiple weekends as some of us play civ IV and others V on the same call. Strictly speaking I'm amazed the V crowd is still willing to attempt games with more than 2 people, because the success rate of that reaching a conclusion w/o being mired in technical issues is well under 50%.
- The game itself runs comically slowly. I can out-command input my 3 ghz processor. Why? Because they want shiny supergraphics that lag the gameplay to hell
- Strategic balance. This game needs more different things to be viable...and for all VC other than time to be consistently viable in MP.

To be fair, the only points civ IV does better are that it is older and therefore runs slightly faster and that its MP works better. I would argue its diplo is about a wash and that its tech trade model is even worse than RA (neither should be standard as on in civ games).