Reminded of Why I Stopped Playing

[ShadeSigma]

I haven't played Civ 5 in a while so I thought to fire it up again to get my strategy game fix. I was quickly reminded why I was turned off to playing in the first place: the difficulty levels. I cannot--for the life of me, find a balance between having a dumb AI and having a good challenge. Deity and Immortal is like you have to always play aggressive you can never adhere to a style you want because of the starting bonuses the AI gets.
It's like playing catch-up. Not all the time I'd like to be an aggressive Civ but on the higher levels it seems like a must.

Then when I play on lower levels, wars a rarely triggered. Like you can go 300 turns without a drop of bloodshed--other than the barbs.
By strokes of luck, playing on Emperor can get interesting sometimes. The civs will DW on each other and such.

Honestly I'd have to say the most fun I had on the game is when it was on Emperor and things randomly got hectic.

 

[mikeburnfire]

This mod removes one of their bonuses. Maybe that will help.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=82133277

 

[ShadeSigma]

There's no doubt I believe there are mods that can fix what I have complained of; I can even use the editor to grant myself the techs and units the AI starts with. But I have this sense in playing a mod-free game. But I actually never tried adjusting the gameplay from that, maybe I'll try the editor. Only thing it will effect is the achievements I suppose.

 

[Acken]

Could I suggest you give my mod (signature) a try if you don't like AI passivity at Emperor ? You'll certainly find Emperor more challenging. Another user, noto2, was also dissatisfied by the base game challenge and seem to enjoy the harder challenge using the mod.

If you don't want to use mods for your issue, you're bound to be disappointed I'm afraid.
You can even continue to earn achievements if you use the workaround of packing mods into a DLC like for multiplayer.

 

[ShadeSigma]

I'd give your mod a tryout. And yeah I agree, if I am looking to be successful without mods I will be disappointed obviously. Lol

 

[noto2]

Shade I have been playing Civ since 2, although I was a kid so we can say 3. Thing is, with a game like this, where I spent over a thousand hours on each version, I start to notice the bugs and imbalances that break the game and they become extremely irritating. I actually made my own mod of Civ3 and it was a lot of fun. In Civ4 I played with Kmod and now in 5 I'm playing with Acken's mod. I had the exact same complaint. Acken's mod has gone a long way to addressing the issue. It seems to me like the AI actually tries to win.

Take my last game, for example. On Emperor difficulty I wiped out the 3 civs on my continent, playing as Rome, by the end of the middle ages. I thought I had the game in the bag. When I discovered the other continent, America and Siam had both conquered half of it, and were in a big war with each other. I though I could sit back and develop. Siam started winning the war and took over most of the continent, despite my sending America some support. I teched to frigates and prepared to attack, but Siam already had ironclads. I then used every trick in the book and sped up my tech using faith to buy scientists and bulb them, etc. Siam was inching towards a cultural victory. I built a large force and sailed it over, I was buying artists and writers with faith, trying to stop the Siamese culture overflow. I assaulted their coastal capital, the turns were ticking down, they were about to win culture, I had to take the capital ASAP. Just as I was finally winning and about to take their capital, they won by culture.

That kind of thing never happened in the unmodded game. In the unmodded game it was either 1 of 2 things:

1) I sit on my butt and happily spam wonders and tech and no one bothers me and I win by culture or space, or
2) I get surprise DoW'd by two civs at the same time in the early game on a high difficulty level, and spend centuries fighting off AI hoards. Even if I did survive, it just knocked me too far behind to ever catch up.

I like that the AI in Acken's mod doesn't appear to just sit there as an obstruction to my victory. It actually pursues its own. Especially culture. Wow. The amount of tourism the AI pumps out is really impressive. And conquest. You won't find an entire game going by where everyone still has their capital unless you take it yourself. No, the AI will go on a rampage and conquer other civs and become a juggernaut that YOU have to stop.

 

[meatpardle]

I feel the same as the OP, I've no real interest in playing super aggressive, with every turn being critical and re-starting if I don't get the right starting location or find any workers to steal. I'm happy to play on King or Emperor as that allows be to be a lazy Civ player but does come with periods of just clicking to cycle through turns.

On the subject I just finished a really good game, playing as Babylon (I always randomise my civ) so decided to go for the science victory. Russia was the most powerful civ and coming into the modern era started wiping out other civs - they were a neighbour of mine but fortunately we were long-standing friends and shared the same ideology. They'd spammed wonders and their tourism output was crazy, three times mine, and the only civ they weren't close to be influential over was Spain and they beaten them down to their last city. I sold my soul in a deal with the Russians to get them to make peace with Spain and then it became a race between my science victory and however long it would take them to decide they wanted Spain's last city and then gain influence over everyone else. I was re-jigging my cities, building relationships and bulbing like mad and eventually won, but I think it as only 15-20 turns away from Russia being influential over everyone bar Spain. Dare I say that it was quite an exciting and tense end to the game, which doesn't often happen.

 

[meatpardle]

But yeah, the AI still does make frustratingly daft decisions so I'll give Ackens's mod a go

 

[beetle]

OP, I think you might very much like Acken’s mod at King or Emperor.

I cannot--for the life of me, find a balance between having a dumb AI and having a good challenge.

Based on my experience, I would like to encourage you to hone your skills enough that you are at least 50/50 with Deity play. For the best players on this forum, winning (at Deity) is hardly ever in doubt, only how fast. For me, Deity is a struggle every game, so that keeps it interesting! From your OP, I have to question, how reliably can you win when playing Deity?

About a year I ago, I moved up from Emperor to Immortal. I was still being frustrated at Immortal, but gave Deity a try anyway. It is tough! But with that experience now, when I play at Immortal, I very much enjoy the game. Even at Deity I always utilize the UU/UB/UA, but at Immortal the room for exploration is so much wider. And I can absolutely lose an Immortal game if I do not pay enough attention.

I agree with you that Emperor is not usually enough of a challenge to be very interesting. But, based on my own experience which I infer to be similar to yours, Immortal is a good balance. The dumb AI gets enough of an advantage that it is a good challenge. But the advantages are not so steep that you cannot play a reasonably relaxed game. Even with my Deity play, it is rare for me to steals workers from a CS and I still cannot be bothered to micro-manage city screens. When I drop down to Immortal, I can even consider opening Piety! And at Immortal, one still has to worry about an AI winning by CV or SV, so that helps keep the game compelling!

 

[Puhi]

While I am laughably bad at deity, I can assure you that you can play peaceful games on immortal (as long as you don't start next to, say, shaka or attila).

I've won plenty of immortal games without being aggressive. That said, I plan for my next game to use Acken's mod.

 

[noto2]

I was winning above 50% of the time on Emperor unmodded. After I switched to Acken's mod I won a couple King games and moved back up to Emperor. Right now I'm sitting at 1/3, as in, 1 win, 2 losses, so it definitely does increase the difficulty.

The AI tech times on King with the mod were faster than on Emperor unmodded, because the AI manages its economy better. You'll also notice the AI's tourism output is...just...astounding. I don't know why, did the unmodded AI not understand theming bonuses or something?

 

[Acken]

I don't know why, did the unmodded AI not understand theming bonuses or something?

There are three parts:
-The AI pursue tourism more strongly when going for a tourism victory. I added a FLAVOR_TOURISM flavor to make it easier for the AI to recognize what increases tourism and what increases culture and the relevant techs/buildings use it. For example in the base game, Refrigeration and Radar have no culture flavor while they increase tourism. This make the AI not very likely to beeline those key techs if it is pursuing a culture victory. Another change helping is that in general, regardless of its goal, the AI is more likely to fill guilds and make culture buildings.
-The aesthetics change gives a large amount of extra tourism. More sites, tourism bonus on culture buildings.
-Finally, the tourism and culture output is modified, you get more culture out of the buildings and great works but also more tourism especially when finishing aesthetics.

 

[noto2]

^^ I see. Good work, because it made a huge difference. On unmodded emperor, the AI only ever beat me by culture at the very end of the game, like the end of the tech tree, and that only happened once as far as I can remember. Also, before trying your mod I never recall ever having to switch ideologies due to cultural pressure. Now I've had to force myself to pay much more attention to culture and tourism because the AI can go nuts with it even by the renaissance.

 

[Athenaeum]

Yeah that's the problem with the AI, harder difficulties do not make the AI smarter. You're basically fighting against a with a machine gun.

 

[ShadeSigma]

I appreciate all the replies! Really.

@Beetle I would say I am fairly good at Deity. Really it's the manipulating that gets me on top. The times I lose on Deity is if I am next to 3 aggressive Civs it seems like. Also, if I play Deity on anything other than Continents or Pangea, I get in trouble because in higher levels if you let certain Civs sit, it can get out of hand.

Civs like: India, Ethopia, Siam--you don't want them not being pushed. And being isolated doesn't help me.

When I play on Deity and Immortal, I am heavily focused on military. I rarely have time to plan how I want to win a game because my mindset is on: defend, defend, defend, then attack.

The only time I actually won how I planned it, was with India and Venice. Because they don't require much responsibility and their areas are tougher to take with them not having multiple cities.

And with the Ancient and Classical wonders you mind as well forget it. I recently played a game as Japan and I was shocked when I pulled off getting the Hanging Gardens. But I did have a great start location.

But out of nowhere the Zulu and Huns DW'd me and I'm like WTF. They had a carpet of units. I had a decent army but the GPT suffered. Nobody and I mean nobody wanted to be my friend after I ended the Danish. But if I didn't do something about the Danish they would've gotten me first I am sure of it.

So I couldn't make any trades. Empire was Unhappy. I even tried to sell a luxury to a civ with -10 GPT and they STILL denied me. So it's like, if you want to be aggressive early (which you'll need to), you won't make many trading partners.

The games on Emperor get so peaceful that I purposefully put aggressive civs in the game just to shake things up.

But it's like noto2 said

You will fight centuries fighting these Civs and so many Hammers are used on units you won't be able to develop your cities beyond what your Workers will do. But while you are constantly fighting they are Wonder spamming and before you know it your Longswordsman is fighting a carpet of Musketmen.

But let's say you make peace? What next? Ohh that's right, you have to play catchup. Because the AI already started off with: 2 Workers, 2 Warriors, 1 Scout and a plethora of other bonuses, not to mention the free techs.

I haven't gotten the mod yet.. What I did do is use the IGE to set myself 2 Workers, 2 Warriors, and a Scout, and the free tech. I played as Ethiopia. And yes, the game is difficult but still fun. Danish were located on the SW side of me. Shaka was in the north.
He DW'd Bluetooth. Shaka drug his units (and Impi) ALLL the way from the north squeezing through the borders of Rome and Brussels, trucking through the Jungles, and Bluetooth let him take every city he had except the capital.

I was like, how the hell you let him do that!? If it were me, they wouldn't even have made it past the Jungle.

I will try the mod when I get the chance.
I mean, it's not like Immortal and Deity is impossible, but I think there should be an option between: having a game where the AI gets insane bonuses, or a game where everyone is even but the AI is more challenging. They have an option to randomize leader personalities, so why not?

 

[beetle]

@Beetle I would say I am fairly good at Deity. Really it's the manipulating that gets me on top. The times I lose on Deity is if I am next to 3 aggressive Civs it seems like. Also, if I play Deity on anything other than Continents or Pangea, I get in trouble because in higher levels if you let certain Civs sit, it can get out of hand.

Okay, then I have to encourage you to try the DCL maps found in the Strategy & Tips forum. You have 40+ games there with people winning a variety of ways. Dealing with a faraway runaway comes up a bit. There are a good number of descriptions where player plan how they want to win a game, and you can see how they make that work out.

...or a game where everyone is even but the AI is more challenging. They have an option to randomize leader personalities, so why not?

Um, because randomizing leader personalities is nothing like programing an actual AI?

 

[noto2]

random personalities doesn't make the game harder. I used to use random personalities in civ4 because 90% of playing immortal/deity in 4 was knowing how to manipulate and avoid DoW's, based on certain xml properties. I've found, however, that NOT ticking random personalities works much better in civ5 because Shaka and Ghengis will use their military power and go on a rampage, for example. When you randomize, the AI ends up even more clueless.

 

[Sclb]

Correct, random personality means AI can do random VC not suitable to their UA etc. Weakens most AI. Cultural Shaka anyone?

 

[Amask]

It weakens you more than them, because you can't rely on knowing that Gandhi won't DOW you 90% of the time regardless of your military strength, so you have to have more than one archer per city.

And a cultural shaka is a contrived example. Most civs have generic bonuses.

And even if you disagree with that, there will be a civ whose random personality matches what that civ is strong at.

You are still weakened by not being able to manipulate the game as easily - like knowing who to befriend and who to avoid because they'll go war crazy and get denounced and pull you down with them. You don't know who you can forward settle and who you can't. Etc etc.

But that one civ who got the right personality is as strong as ever. All it takes is one civ to beat you, but you need to beat all seven.

 

[ShadeSigma]

You are right about that, only taking one Civ to beat you. Like it happens a lot with the Mongols I notice. They always attack CS. And if the Mongols aren't stopped early, they will snowball nearly everyone.