Realism Invictus

[AspiringScholar]

Arrgghh...

I was 60 turns away from a cultural victory when Inca Rosa achieved it first.

You should always check the victory board and keep a spare army to raze a legendary city. In my current game on the Large Earth map I had Indonesia going for Cultural Victory but before they could reach it, I had the time to conquer and raze their 3rd legendary city which extended the game for 100+ turns; then Greece became the closest to Cultural Victory and I'm about to do the same with their 3rd Legendary City and possibly repeating the same with Egypt, hopefully giving me enough time for a Space Victory. If you have a strong military, preventing a Cultural Victory shouldn't be too hard. On the other hand, if you were aiming for a Cultural Victory, perhaps your army wasn't strong enough for this kind of task.

This is why I actually increased the threshold for legendary by 25%. In almost all of my games, around the late 19th century era I always had to go raze someone's legendary city (sometimes my ally) just to prevent the game from ending. What's annoying about this is that most of the time it seems like legendary status is just passively acquired and if someone is close to winning culture, it's not because they were focusing on that. Things like the city square and art eras are pretty significant modifiers which are just functions of infrastructure that a large nation would have anyway. 25% seemed like a good number to keep culture victory within reach but not something that fires off every time the game reaches the late industrial era. That feels out of balance with space and diplomatic victories, both of which are modern era options. There was a previous poster a handful of pages back who mentioned doing this too.

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

This is why I actually increased the threshold for legendary by 25%. In almost all of my games, around the late 19th century era I always had to go raze someone's legendary city (sometimes my ally) just to prevent the game from ending. What's annoying about this is that most of the time it seems like legendary status is just passively acquired and if someone is close to winning culture, it's not because they were focusing on that. Things like the city square and art eras are pretty significant modifiers which are just functions of infrastructure that a large nation would have anyway. 25% seemed like a good number to keep culture victory within reach but not something that fires off every time the game reaches the late industrial era. That feels out of balance with space and diplomatic victories, both of which are modern era options. There was a previous poster a handful of pages back who mentioned doing this too.

Totally agree on the legendary threshold. Happened to me in most of the games I've tried and autoplayed for testing purposes.

 

[fnsnad]

I used the RI_Planet_Generator and went with whatever it generated.

How long do late game turns take for you? The time between turns, I mean

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

How long do late game turns take for you? The time between turns, I mean

I know you're not asking me but on the huge earth map with around 30 civs around, in modern era a turn is around 45-50s on my 3+ years old pc; I suppose it's more or less the same for every mapscript, if the map size is the same. Lenght of a turn for AI is anyway more dependant on number of civs still in game than on mapsize.

 

[fnsnad]

I know you're not asking me but on the huge earth map with around 30 civs around, in modern era a turn is around 45-50s on my 3+ years old pc; I suppose it's more or less the same for every mapscript, if the map size is the same. Lenght of a turn for AI is anyway more dependant on number of civs still in game than on mapsize.

Thanks, I'm probably going to give a huge map w a buttload of civs a go tonight, it's just I'm not looking forward to having long wait times.

 

[JohnCarterOfMars]

How long do late game turns take for you? The time between turns, I mean

I got into the habit of turning on the "show enemy moves" and "show friendly moves" so I can see everything. In the mid-game, it took at least 3 minutes.

In the late game where civs have been eliminated, it's probably down to 2 minutes.

I haven't clocked it, so maybe add a minute to the times for perception bias...

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

Yeah, obviously my turn times are with show friendly/enemy moves off, so that might speed up the turn significantly.

 

[AspiringScholar]

I got into the habit of turning on the "show enemy moves" and "show friendly moves" so I can see everything. In the mid-game, it took at least 3 minutes.

In the late game where civs have been eliminated, it's probably down to 2 minutes.

I haven't clocked it, so maybe add a minute to the times for perception bias...

Actually, would you mind doing me a favor since you haven't updated from 3.5 yet? I prefer the main menu music from Christopher Tin but since I've updated my SVN consecutively as updates were made and am now playing the official release, I don't have that mp3 file anymore. Could you post it here so I can put it back in?

 

[JohnCarterOfMars]

Here they are. If it's not legal, then I apologize and please remove the post.

 

[JohnCarterOfMars]

I guess they're not showing. Must be under review. I hope I don't get banned.

 

[fnsnad]

How do you guys feel about playing with the setting 'AI plays to win'? On the one hand, it seems great on paper, but I find that it just makes for unrelenting warmongers that do braindead attacks over and over. Moreover, does anyone know if it takes into account the leader's disposition? As in, are the Genghis Khan's of the world more likely to want to pursue a domination victory than say an Abraham Lincoln? Or is it just completely randomized.

 

[AspiringScholar]

Here they are. If it's not legal, then I apologize and please remove the post.

Thanks, though I don't think it's illegal. "I nor anyone on this thread own the intellectual property belonging to Christopher Tin in his critically acclaimed Calling All Dawns album." As long as you say that, I don't think there are any problems, though if you actually attached the file, unfortunately I don't see it.

How do you guys feel about playing with the setting 'AI plays to win'? On the one hand, it seems great on paper, but I find that it just makes for unrelenting warmongers that do braindead attacks over and over. Moreover, does anyone know if it takes into account the leader's disposition? As in, are the Genghis Khan's of the world more likely to want to pursue a domination victory than say an Abraham Lincoln? Or is it just completely randomized.

I hate that setting. It removes all personality from the AI leaders and they just psychopathically attack you constantly, even if they're likely to lose. I played one game all the way through with that and it made diplomacy worth zilch, because everyone was basically constantly at war. On the one hand it was kind of interesting with the kaleidoscopic balkanization of everything because the AI already couldn't deal with separatism under the old global WW modifier, but it pretty much destroyed any immersion you could have entertained from any leader personalities or diplomatic situations.

I turn it OFF every single game now. The crazy warmongers who are programmed to attack constantly are the ones I should expect that from, not literally everyone all the time.

 

[JohnCarterOfMars]

Actually, would you mind doing me a favor since you haven't updated from 3.5 yet? I prefer the main menu music from Christopher Tin but since I've updated my SVN consecutively as updates were made and am now playing the official release, I don't have that mp3 file anymore. Could you post it here so I can put it back in?

I did attach the files.

FYI...

These shouldn't have been affected by the RI upgrade.

Baba Yetu is in the main folder:

c:/Program Files (x86)/Fireaxis games/Sid Meier's Civilization 4/Assets/Sounds/Soundtrack/Openingmenu.mp3

It's also in the BTS subfolder:

c:/Program Files (x86)/Fireaxis games/Sid Meier's Civilization 4/Beyond The Sword/Assets/Sounds/Soundtrack/OpeningmenuCiv4.mp3

If you're looking for Mado Cara Miero, that one is in the RI folder:

c:/Program Files (x86)/Fireaxis games/Sid Meier's Civilization 4/Beyond The Sword/Mods/Realism Invictus/Assets/Sounds/Soundtrack/Openingmenu.mp3

I wasn't aware that the upgrade changed this tune.

 

[JohnCarterOfMars]

How do you guys feel about playing with the setting 'AI plays to win'? On the one hand, it seems great on paper, but I find that it just makes for unrelenting warmongers that do braindead attacks over and over. Moreover, does anyone know if it takes into account the leader's disposition? As in, are the Genghis Khan's of the world more likely to want to pursue a domination victory than say an Abraham Lincoln? Or is it just completely randomized.

I hadn't given it any thought since I'm still learning the mechanics of the game and have not ventured into the code to see what's really going on.

If I understood the description correctly, I thought this setting caused the AI to understand the different victory conditions. With this setting turned off, the AI plays to only maximize points.

Based on the description, I've been playing with it turned on. I haven't played it any other way, so I can't say what the different gameplay would be like.

 

[AspiringScholar]

I did attach the files.

FYI...

These shouldn't have been affected by the RI upgrade.

Baba Yetu is in the main folder:

c:/Program Files (x86)/Fireaxis games/Sid Meier's Civilization 4/Assets/Sounds/Soundtrack/Openingmenu.mp3

It's also in the BTS subfolder:

c:/Program Files (x86)/Fireaxis games/Sid Meier's Civilization 4/Beyond The Sword/Assets/Sounds/Soundtrack/OpeningmenuCiv4.mp3

If you're looking for Mado Cara Miero, that one is in the RI folder:

c:/Program Files (x86)/Fireaxis games/Sid Meier's Civilization 4/Beyond The Sword/Mods/Realism Invictus/Assets/Sounds/Soundtrack/Openingmenu.mp3

I wasn't aware that the upgrade changed this tune.

Well, I'm kind of to blame for that...

I suggested to Walter sometime last year that the main menu music be changed to some of Empire Earth's music (which I thought would fit the 4X "world empire" kind of theme) but he just immediately agreed with me that the song should be changed but without anything that wasn't already public domain, so what we got was honestly something kind of weird but without any legal controversy (since I guess the previous song was still technically something which wasn't freely distributable), but I honestly don't like it as much.

This seems like one of those deals where reality has way outpaced the existing laws on the books, since basically everything has become parodied or copied or freely accessible for personal entertainment today, even if it's still technically the IP of someone else.

 

[JohnCarterOfMars]

Thanks, though I don't think it's illegal. "I nor anyone on this thread own the intellectual property belonging to Christopher Tin in his critically acclaimed Calling All Dawns album." As long as you say that, I don't think there are any problems, though if you actually attached the file, unfortunately I don't see it.

I would think, technically, if you own the game discs then you have a license to possess those mp3 files. I doubt that the license extends to copying the mp3 onto your personal listening device to take with you anywhere, it probably licenses you to use the files only in the intended distribution, that is, within the game.

 

[fnsnad]

Thanks, though I don't think it's illegal. "I nor anyone on this thread own the intellectual property belonging to Christopher Tin in his critically acclaimed Calling All Dawns album." As long as you say that, I don't think there are any problems, though if you actually attached the file, unfortunately I don't see it.



I hate that setting. It removes all personality from the AI leaders and they just psychopathically attack you constantly, even if they're likely to lose. I played one game all the way through with that and it made diplomacy worth zilch, because everyone was basically constantly at war. On the one hand it was kind of interesting with the kaleidoscopic balkanization of everything because the AI already couldn't deal with separatism under the old global WW modifier, but it pretty much destroyed any immersion you could have entertained from any leader personalities or diplomatic situations.

I turn it OFF every single game now. The crazy warmongers who are programmed to attack constantly are the ones I should expect that from, not literally everyone all the time.

I had one amazing game with it on where I was being attacked by the ethiopians who were on friendly terms with me after they just beat up the rest of the subcontinent. I survived by the skin of my teeth because it came just in time when I got access to minutemen (as America), and that's when I found out that the minutemen in RI are ridiculously powerful. Other than that one game, I've not had great experiences with it either.

hadn't given it any thought since I'm still learning the mechanics of the game and have not ventured into the code to see what's really going on.

If I understood the description correctly, I thought this setting caused the AI to understand the different victory conditions. With this setting turned off, the AI plays to only maximize points.

Based on the description, I've been playing with it turned on. I haven't played it any other way, so I can't say what the different gameplay would be like.

On paper I'd love if it didn't turn out to be a war game cesspool, as I'd love a game with heightened stakes and drive. In practice however, it seems that, as AspiringScholar mentioned, it throws diplomacy out of the window.

 

[JohnCarterOfMars]

I had one amazing game with it on where I was being attacked by the ethiopians who were on friendly terms with me after they just beat up the rest of the subcontinent. I survived by the skin of my teeth because it came just in time when I got access to minutemen (as America), and that's when I found out that the minutemen in RI are ridiculously powerful. Other than that one game, I've not had great experiences with it either.

On paper I'd love if it didn't turn out to be a war game cesspool, as I'd love a game with heightened stakes and drive. In practice however, it seems that, as AspiringScholar mentioned, it throws diplomacy out of the window.

In the games that I've played, I've had AI civs make demands of tribute, offer resource trades, ask for open borders, ask to become a vassal, and withdraw from vassalage.

Isn't that diplomacy?

BTW...

I restored a prior savegame where my city killer stack fleet was returning home from conquering Ashoka. I diverted that fleet to attack Inca Rosa's third cultural city (it had 20 more turns before becoming legendary). I sacked the city and took control of it, thinking it might reach legendary before my own city would (it still had 65 turns to go). The other option was to raze it and let my city proceed.

I want to see how this plays out. The city went into revolt for 14 turns before I can take over (still 9 turns to go). Since this is a distant city on another continent, the cost to maintain it will be very high. I have to raze the nearby cities or else the near-legendary city would not have access to the farms in its zone. I don't want a near-legendary city that immediately begins to starve.

If it turns out that this city, in my control, is impossible to keep, I will revert to the save where I capture it and just raze it. I might keep the war with Inca Rosa going so my vassals can grab some territory.

 

[fnsnad]

In the games that I've played, I've had AI civs make demands of tribute, offer resource trades, ask for open borders, ask to become a vassal, and withdraw from vassalage.

Isn't that diplomacy?

To be fair, it is a mild exaggeration. However, having the option on makes it so that its not sensible to befriend any warring civ as they can not be trusted to be an ally, as they'll probably eventually turn on you - even if you're on friendly terms with them. Now to be fair, not everyone is a war hungry demon with the setting on; if I were to give a guess, probably like 1/6 of all the AIs will be fuelled to win by domination. However, 1/6 is a lot of civs if you think about it to all be going for world domination.

I'd personally love it if that setting made war hungry civs even more cut-throat later in the game, as late game warfare is such a treat compared to pre renaissance warfare. Plus, it gives the warring civs a chance to actually grow and become a real threat, as I find that leaders like Genghis Khan and Adolf Hitler with natural warring dispositions get eliminated fairly early and pose no threat at all as they fall behind because they do constant wars, heeding no attention to anything else.

 

[JohnCarterOfMars]

To be fair, it is a mild exaggeration. However, having the option on makes it so that its not sensible to befriend any warring civ as they can not be trusted to be an ally, as they'll probably eventually turn on you - even if you're on friendly terms with them. Now to be fair, not everyone is a war hungry demon with the setting on; if I were to give a guess, probably like 1/6 of all the AIs will be fuelled to win by domination. However, 1/6 is a lot of civs if you think about it to all be going for world domination.

I'd personally love it if that setting made war hungry civs even more cut-throat later in the game, as late game warfare is such a treat compared to pre renaissance warfare. Plus, it gives the warring civs a chance to actually grow and become a real threat, as I find that leaders like Genghis Khan and Adolf Hitler with natural warring dispositions get eliminated fairly early and pose no threat at all as they fall behind because they do constant wars, heeding no attention to anything else.

I do believe the game docs state this, that even friendly civs can turn on you if you show weakness. In my games, I learned to be strong enough to resist. Also, the diplomacy that I spoke of upthread with many civs on a huge map creates a vassal bloc that also deters the warlike civs from attacking lest a half-dozen civs attack back.

That said, do you consider the traits of the AI civs? I look at the cruel, dictator, warmonger, deceitful traits and make sure to set up proper defenses if they are on my border. If an attacking civ has one of those traits, I don't consider this a problem with this game option.

Still, I'd have to play a game without it to have a proper perspective.