So, what difficulty are you playing at?

[Jaroth]

Not for bragging rights or anything... I'm just curious to see how everybody's doing with this new version of the game that introduces many different game mechanics we're not accustomed to yet. I remember Civ 4 kicking my butt on Prince when I first played it.

My first game with Civ 5 was to simply toy around and explore the interface. I didn't complete it since I wanted to jump into a competitive game and felt I was ready enough.

So my "real" first game was as Rome on Prince... everything standard and on continents. Obtained a Domination victory (it even said I played like Augustus, lol) during the Industrial era. I also probably could've obtained a Diplo Victory since I was allied with almost all city-states and was building the UN. Had that as a backup plan.

My warmongering appetite was satisfied for now so I wanted to play more of a peaceful game. I chose India and put the difficulty on King. I was planning for a cultural victory and also planned on building only a small number of huge cities. Somehow, thru politics and drama, I eventually found myself conquering the whole continent as I did in my other game. I was also allied with most of the city-states and proceeded to build the UN as a backup plan. Well, the UN finished and the votes were cast before I could grab my last 4 cultural policies. Diplo victory... again ranked Augustus.

My current game is on Emperor as England now. It's only the Classical era, but things are going really well. I declared war on Songhai along with Persia who requested me. Askia isn't putting up much of a fight at all. Though, before I could take my first city from him, Alexander comes out of nowhere and sends a force at me - nice! I retreated to my territory nearby and crushed his warriors and archers with my spears and archers. Um, where's your hoplites, Alex? I now plan on retaliating and taking Alexander's capital which is the first city I'll approach since he expanded in the other direction away from me.

With Regards to the AI...

In my first game, Hiawatha and Alexander should've been heavily guarding their capitals since the three of us were the last ones there. Both didn't. Hiawatha was also a monster earlier than I was and could've invaded my continent and took me out. He never sent any kind of navy at me at all... and I had none for a long time up until the end.

The second game, again, Bismarck was a monster on another small continent of his own. He was also at war with me for a very long time and wouldn't agree to peace! Washington dogpiled and declared on me as well but I eventually crushed him since his big buddy, Bismarck, was nowhere to be seen. Bizzy was militarily superior but...

NOT ONE GERMAN SOLDIER SET FOOT ON MY TERRITORY.

His land mass wasn't even that far away. The only thing he did was send a handful of frigates to harrass my allied city-state in the South. Though, they didn't accomplish anything and one by one they were sunk to the city bombardment.

I was bracing myself for a huge invasion... but nothing ever came.

In my experiences, the AI does not fight as well on land yet... but also, the AI does not know how to use a navy or how to make amphibious assaults at all! And doing so seems even easier in this game than in previous versions! Ugh...

Another thing I've noticed (as far as I know) is that they don't take advantage of the city-states or ally with them. Aren't they supposed to be doing that as well? All I ever see is that they "pledge" to protect them (something I've never tried out yet, lol) or they attack them. Both games I've played, I was allied with almsot all the city-states... and I believe because of that, the difficulty was decreased even further.

What are your experiences? How did you go about earning your victories? Where is the AI lacking?

 

[Mango Elephant]

My first game was settler, and I was so bored I didn't finish it. My recent games have been prince, probably going to move up soon.

 

[Generals3]

First game: prince , was too easy and stopped halfway
Second game : King , ended up with me having Mech infantry vs enemies with riflemen . So i stopped it as well

And now i'm at my third in King as well but with a mod. My forth game will most likely be in emperor

 

[ChristofferC]

I'm playing my first ever immortal game and it looks like I'm going to win by a landslide. It's not even close. I'm already highest in score on turn 95...

 

[JoeHollywood]

Playing at Diety at the moment ( AI is SOOOO broken with war ) and trying to move my way up to being able to win on a huge map at Diety.

 

[The Boz]

My latest was on prince, and I will likely ramp it up. My "ally" at one point had no military units for about 60 turns or so, confident that I would be protecting it (which I was). I'll see if it happens again on a higher difficulty.

 

[Malecite]

Diety as well, anything else is now boring. Diety is just stupid, but stupid is at least semi playable. But mainly I dont bother with the game anymore. You have to play Diety on large maps though, as the alternative is facing computer units that you slaughter, its a bit harder when you have to slaughter more advanced units.

 

[Stormfather]

My first few games were purely exploratory, seeing how the game had changed and grabbing a few Steam achievements to boot (Bad habit from the Xbox, I suppose).

Then I played a few games on Prince. Now I can consistently reach the modern era while my enemies are in the renaissance, so I jumped up to King. The biggest difference I've seen between Prince and King is that the King AI gets an empire up and running a lot faster, and the AI's are much more willing to ally themselves against a common foe. It can be intimidating when multiple AI's declare war on you all at once, but I've learned that not all of them actually commit to the war- sometimes they declare just cause that's what all the cool kids are doing. However, I tech up, expand, etc. at about the same rate as the King AIs.

I've also noticed that the AIs are more fluid on higher difficulties. I've seen Montezuma build Stonehenge, the Hanging Gardens, and the Sistine Chapel, and neglect his army (Jaguars running around in the late Middle Ages!). I've also seen Gandhi launch a world war, just because he'd teched up to Riflemen and everyone else had fallen behind.

Even at King, the AIs still struggle with warfare. It seems that they don't bring enough ordnance to bombard cities and fortified units, preferring a massive infantry charge. The pace of their invasions is haphazard at best, they'll rush forward as fast as they can, ignoring casualties, and then stop and bunker down when they've overextended themselves. Even if you're on the ropes, they'll sustain enough casualties in an all out attack that you can rip them to shreds with a cavalry counter-attack. If the AI used artillery more, didn't send valuable troops on seemingly random 'suicide forays', used cavalry for headhunting damaged units and pillaging improvements, tried to get flanking/discipline bonuses etc. I think I'd be forced back down to Prince.

 

[sleepingbear]

I've found that if I go into advanced settings and add 2-3 additional AI players the games get a little more challenging. Playing th cradle of civ - Asia map I add three additional civs and we where no where close enough to warrant a conflict. Even though Siam and America declared war on me they never sent an army after me, though one American scout did wander by a captured city-state of mine and was promptly dispatched. After 20 turns of 'war' they both made peace.

So generally now for a challenge I add 2-3 Civs, 3-6 CS's and turn on raging barbs. That makes the games interesting enough to play out =)