Some questions regarding improvements

[slinkysi]

So I gave up on the game shortly after release, partly because my laptop was under powered but mainly because, let's face it, the game wasn't finished.

I have a few questions for the community regarding the state of the game now after all the patches as I have a new laptop so am going to fire up the game again to see how it's progressed.

1. Is the economy more balanced now? I found it difficult to maintain a decent army and happiness etc.

2. Does the AI actually build and use an airforce, I never saw one enemy aircraft in 100 hours of play.

3. Can the AI fight effectively, ie ranged at the rear mele at the front etc.

4. Will the AI colonise other land masses?

5. Do long time Alies suddenly declare war for no apparent reason.

I guess I'm generally asking, have the patches made a significant improvemnet, answers need not be limited to the above topics, I just want to know what everyone thinks of the game now as last september, there was a lot of hate!

Appreciate any input!

 

[starrywisdom]

1. Is the economy more balanced now? I found it difficult to maintain a decent army and happiness etc.

There's never really been an issue with this. No offense intended but maybe you didn't properly do all that you could in order to maintain happiness? There have been a lot of 'tweaks' to happiness since the game came out, your best bet is to just give it a go and to make sure your doing what you can to maintain happy(multiple threads on this).

2. Does the AI actually build and use an airforce, I never saw one enemy aircraft in 100 hours of play.

The AI has always built AF in games that last sufficiently long enough. Some civs build more then others. 100 hours of play isn't indicative of much because you can play 50 games of only 2 hours each and only reach renissance era

3. Can the AI fight effectively, ie ranged at the rear mele at the front etc.

4. Will the AI colonise other land masses?

Yes, and they always have. They don't do naval combat well, but they have always sent settlers to other continents.

5. Do long time Alies suddenly declare war for no apparent reason.

'For no apparent reason'? No. For possibly silly reasons? Yes.

 

[Sonereal]

1. Is the economy more balanced now? I found it difficult to maintain a decent army and happiness etc.

The economy has always been balanced for the most part, you just weren't playing the game right.

2. Does the AI actually build and use an airforce, I never saw one enemy aircraft in 100 hours of play.

They do now...sorta.

3. Can the AI fight effectively, ie ranged at the rear mele at the front etc.

No. The AI fights better but you'll still see ranged units on the front every once in a while.

4. Will the AI colonise other land masses?

They always have.

5. Do long time Alies suddenly declare war for no apparent reason.

Oh, they have a reason. The reasons just aren't apparent and are usual stupid reasons.

 

[slinkysi]

There's never really been an issue with this. No offense intended but maybe you didn't properly do all that you could in order to maintain happiness? There have been a lot of 'tweaks' to happiness since the game came out, your best bet is to just give it a go and to make sure your doing what you can to maintain happy(multiple threads on this).



The AI has always built AF in games that last sufficiently long enough. Some civs build more then others. 100 hours of play isn't indicative of much because you can play 50 games of only 2 hours each and only reach renissance era




Yes, and they always have. They don't do naval combat well, but they have always sent settlers to other continents.


'For no apparent reason'? No. For possibly silly reasons? Yes.

Thanks for your reply, just for the record I'm a long time Civ vet, I don't do 2 hour games!! I think my happiness issues were due to my desire for larger empires at the expense of my enimies' lands! I'm sure I'll adjust just fine to Civ 5

 

[ShahJahanII]

The game has changed drastically between release and July 2011. Luxury resources are now 4 instead of 5. The Colosseum now gives 2 instead of 5. the3 AI is now a lot more aggressive. Every social policy tree now has a hapiness modifier. The AI seems to now use aircraft more often than normal. You might see this if you increase the difficulty level. What level are you playing on now? While you could once clear a continent with 4 horsemen on diety, it is now much harder than that even on warlord. If you find the game too hard, start on settler again and move up one level for every win, and down one level for every loss.

Best of luck,
ShahJahanII

 

[slinkysi]

The economy has always been balanced for the most part, you just weren't playing the game right.



They do now...sorta.



No. The AI fights better but you'll still see ranged units on the front every once in a while.


They always have.


Oh, they have a reason. The reasons just aren't apparent and are usual stupid reasons.

You are just unnecessarily rude. Why so many tweaks to the economy if it was balanced to begin with?

 

[slinkysi]

The game has changed drastically between release and July 2011. Luxury resources are now 4 instead of 5. The Colosseum now gives 2 instead of 5. the3 AI is now a lot more aggressive. Every social policy tree now has a hapiness modifier. The AI seems to now use aircraft more often than normal. You might see this if you increase the difficulty level. What level are you playing on now? While you could once clear a continent with 4 horsemen on diety, it is now much harder than that even on warlord. If you find the game too hard, start on settler again and move up one level for every win, and down one level for every loss.

Best of luck,
ShahJahanII

Thanks for your reply ShahJahanII, that's what I was hoping, having read all the patch notes I was hoping things would be better! I am playing a game on Prince and seem to be sluightly teching ahead of the AI, so it looks as though I'm not too rusty! thanks again

 

[Sonereal]

No idea, since I'm finding that my armies are smaller as opposed to larger now. As opposed to having an issue raising an army before.

 

[Deggial]

1. Yes. If you play smart. It may be not easy, but it's possible. (Excatly as it should be!)

2. Yes, definitely. But it could use it more wisely.

3. Yes, at least in my regard. I judge CiV's present combat AI as one of the best in TBS (with not premade -and therefore scriptable) terrain. Really, what I've seen in other games is far, far worse! To expect humanlike behaviour and keenness is simply absurd. (Sorry for challenging half the cifvanatics-forum...). But I admit that it can be improved. There is *always* a possibility to improve!

4. Yes. But it will not overextend. So don't be surprised to see uninhabitated isles.

5. Yes. Apart from *having* good reasons! All the lament about "broken" diplo-AI is based on missing knowledge, if its about me. There are backstabbers, there are opportunistes. But I managed to stay friends for very long time with an AI - just to the moment *I* backstabbed them. Sorry, this sort of behaviour *is* very humanlike and I think they have done a *good* job in adopting it in CiV! (But then, if you want to have simple sacrificial lambs, you might be annoyed...)
But to becalm you: there are positive modifiers now (which *where* needed, as I admit), so you can befriend an AI for some time (and sometimes for a *very* long time).

So YES, the patches *made* significant improvement.

---

Far, far to slow... I started this post without any replys submitted. It's not so easy, writing in foreign language...

 

[Sonereal]

Are we playing the same game, Deggial, when it comes to diplomacy?

Everything except diplomacy has improved greatly. Or do you think the suicidal permanent wars are a sign of a healthy diplomacy? If you want to see the CivV Diplomacy AI the way it was supposed to be, look no farther than the Ruthless AI option in A New Dawn for Civilization IV.

 

[slinkysi]

1. Yes. If you play smart. It may be not easy, but it's possible. (Excatly as it should be!)

2. Yes, definitely. But it could use it more wisely.

3. Yes, at least in my regard. I judge CiV's present combat AI as one of the best in TBS (with not premade -and therefore scriptable) terrain. Really, what I've seen in other games is far, far worse! To expect humanlike behaviour and keenness is simply absurd. (Sorry for challenging half the cifvanatics-forum...). But I admit that it can be improved. There is *always* a possibility to improve!

4. Yes. But it will not overextend. So don't be surprised to see uninhabitated isles.

5. Yes. Apart from *having* good reasons! All the lament about "broken" diplo-AI is based on missing knowledge, if its about me. There are backstabbers, there are opportunistes. But I managed to stay friends for very long time with an AI - just to the moment *I* backstabbed them. Sorry, this sort of behaviour *is* very humanlike and I think they have done a *good* job in adopting it in CiV! (But then, if you want to have simple sacrificial lambs, you might be annoyed...)
But to becalm you: there are positive modifiers now (which *where* needed, as I admit), so you can befriend an AI for some time (and sometimes for a *very* long time).

So YES, the patches *made* significant improvement.

I totally agree it is human nature to backstab for your own bennefit, it just seemed so arbitary before, but I agree it's no small feat to program AI even moderately capable in a game like Civ so hats off to Firaxis.

 

[Sonereal]

It's one thing to backstab. It's a completely different thing to backstab when you have to chance of pulling it off. The AI greatly undervalues your military force because the game doesn't take into account that the human just might be able to handle his army the third of the size of the AI's army more effectively. If the AI is going to backstab you to take you down a peg, that's good. Now if only it was smart enough to get allies before the war.

 

[Deggial]

Or do you think the suicidal permanent wars are a sign of a healthy diplomacy? If you want to see the CivV Diplomacy AI the way it was supposed to be, look no farther than the Ruthless AI option in A New Dawn for Civilization IV.

Well, the fact, that they are suicidal is caused by the tactic AI capabilities. They *are* decent for a computer game - but unfortunately can *not* compete with the HI.

But then: don't you fight early wars for territory and ressources? Don't you take advantage of Civs with few military (maybe because of an other ongoing war)? I even asked my allies to attack another Civ - only to weaken and backstab them.
In my current game, Napoleon witnessed my constant conquering of the world, staying happy and trading ressources with me till the end. I backstabbed him.

And: do you know any other game, where an AI is aware of amassed troops at their frontier? And reacts accordingly?

I really think, all of this is not *so* bad!

Ah, and unfortunately, I dont't know your mentioned mod for Civ 4. But then, I found Civ4's diplomacy way more predictable (due to numbers) and... well... AI-like. In CiV, AI acts way more human (at least in *my* regard).

--

Edit: To late (again) and therefore outdated. Sorry.
Regarding the unbalance AI/HI, we seem to concur.

But don't you think, some of the "unintended DoW" are exactly this: Foreign Civs, bought to attack you? As I did write, this is what I do. And I believe (but maybe this is just false hope), that the AI does it, too.

 

[Sonereal]

1. Yes I do fight early wars for territory and resources. I do so successful.
2. Yes, I do take advantage of the Civ's with small militaries. I step it up further by stating that I take advantage of the AI's inability to fight which is so bad it affects diplomacy.

3. This is where things get weird. The AI is aware of amassed troops on the border, true. And?

The point is is that the AI can't backstab effectively and when it does, it is often doing it to spite you for getting close to winning. If it actually does smart things like form alliances to team up against a larger power, that would be wonderful, but it doesn't. The AI are like town guards in Assassin's Creed, they attack one at a time so you can use your counterattack and kill them one by one. Diplomacy in CivV is predictable in the sense that I know that eventually, I'm going to have to kill every single person around me or at least beat the crap out of them.

Oh, and how about the AI coveting lands you own in 3900 BC on Huge Maps? Or the AI declaring war without placing troops on the border first? The Diplomacy AI isn't human, it is acting like a human to cover up the fact the thing is an idiot.

 

[starrywisdom]

Everything except diplomacy has improved greatly.

Improved, yes. Greatly, no.

 

[Sonereal]

I don't deny that the diplomacy has improved. At release, there was no diplomacy. None of the diplomacy options meant anything and you better had been prepared to sucker punch everything within 200 miles of your borders.

 

[Deggial]

Sorry, not much time left to answer.

3. At least, it is asking you for clarification. And if you lie (and invade), you will get a diplo-hit with other nations.

Attacking due to winning: I can very well live with this. If you try to win by culture or science, there is not so much to do lategame. Isn't a last war better than just hitting "next turn"? And again: if you see an other Civ close to victory, don't you try to stop them? Often by war? Of course, this is very subjective, but *I* prever this over a pure "roleplaying" AI.

Ganging up against a leading player is something that may happen due to block-building by DOF. If you manage to avoid this - well played! Isn't this, what is the purpose of a strategy game?

Yes, there *are* issues regarding early goal evaluation. I never claimed, that there are no issues. In early game, everything is unsettled and your winning-path is all but obvious. Maybe the AI should abstain from evaluating the relations for - say - 30 turns.

 

[Sonereal]

The problem is that doing something stupid, like starting a war against a guy with 4x your military and nuclear weapons just because he's about to "win" is stupid. I try to stop them but my first reaction isn't a suicidal DoW unless I got backup. The AI isn't smart enough to coordinate war declarations, something which even the AI in Ruthless AI can do effectively.

 

[bcaiko]

Sorry, slinkysi, that the first couple of answers you got were unnecessarily snarky ("you're not playing the game right" is never a constructive answer, folks!). My humble opinion is that:

1. Is the economy more balanced now? I found it difficult to maintain a decent army and happiness etc.

This can still be difficult if you're not used to balancing your options. I find gold to be a struggle until I can get to currency, for instance. It's all about picking the right buildings and policies. It may be challenging, but I do think it's balanced.

2. Does the AI actually build and use an airforce, I never saw one enemy aircraft in 100 hours of play.

The AI does generally a very good job of building an airforce, at least in my games. And they're making a balanced set of units, using things like Tanks (which are much improved!).

3. Can the AI fight effectively, ie ranged at the rear mele at the front etc.

This can still be a challenge for the AI. I think they've improved, but it's still noticible that you're not playing against a human being.

4. Will the AI colonise other land masses?

I think I've noticed since the latest major patch that they don't do this as often (though I wish they would). A step backwards since the last patch, IMHO. Hopefully it will be fixed.

5. Do long time Alies suddenly declare war for no apparent reason.

The game does a better job of explaining why certain AI personalities backstab you now, and makes clear that the AI knows it's backstabbing you and planned to do so. Never trust Montezuma!

 

[Sonereal]

Never trust Montezuma!

Or any of the other AIs because they all hate you.