Tactics, or exploit?

[connorsmith236]

Hey guys, I'm wondering your opinion on a way that I sometimes play cultural victories especially on the higher difficulties. Do you think that my method is considered an exploit to the game mechanics, or instead good tactics?

I will turn on raging barbarians and build a small army of archers and warriors. Once I find an encampment, I will surround the encampment with my archers and kill all the barbs that spawn (usually one every couple of turns with raging) and soak up the cultural bonus with the Honor Tree opening.

I'll build another scout and find the next nearby encampment, and do the same thing. After a while, I'll have most camps surrounded and will be collecting hundreds of culture very early on in the game. When my units need upgrading, I'll send them back one by one to keep the culture coming.

Also, I will declare war on a nearby city state as soon as I find them, and keep units around the perimeter. I never actually capture the city, I simply keep killing its units and hitting the city for the XP. Unlike barbarians, city states have no limit to how much experience you can gain - and very quickly you will have an extremely experienced force on your hands.

Do you consider these methods exploits, or simply tactics to win the game at any cost?

 

[hobbsyoyo]

These are solid tactics. An exploit involves minimal effort to game a mechanic in you favor. What you described does NOT require minimal effort. If anything you are using out of the box strategic thinking to win, especially at the higher difficulties where the AI doesn't play better but has rediculous advantages.

 

[TheHanzou]

No thats fair game.

The only thing i would consider an exploit is attacking the city state then make peace, next turn attack it again make peace again, repeat till you have free super units and great generals. It is very unfortunate that this works because it didnt work prior to G&K since CS were in a state of 'always war' if you declared on them twice.

In G&K this limitation is gone.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

No thats fair game.

The only thing i would consider an exploit is attacking the city state then make peace, next turn attack it again make peace again, repeat till you have free super units and great generals. It is very unfortunate that this works because it didnt work prior to G&K since CS were in a state of 'always war' if you declared on them twice.

In G&K this limitation is gone.

But he never claimed to attack then peace, he just non-stop attacks. I don't see that as an exploit, just a very aggressive neighbor

 

[thadian]

i don't want to be your neighbor but it is not cheating. an exploit is when you circumvent the system, or the intended effects of an action - disturbing the game-state if you will.

this does not circumvent the games rules, it does not disrepair the game-state and therefore - not an exploit.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

I think there should be diplomatic consequences for sharpening your sword on a City State. The first one doesn't seem to go against the spirit of the game though.

 

[thadian]

declaring war on a city state gives you a game-long penalty.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Yes, but what about continuing it for hundreds of years?

 

[Jakexbox10]

But he never claimed to attack then peace, he just non-stop attacks. I don't see that as an exploit, just a very aggressive neighbor

Hobby like music I see From Ur Sig

 

[Jakexbox10]

Yes, but what about continuing it for hundreds of years?

Well this may not float ur boat but we need other things fixed than we need improved right now and diplo. upgrades may have to wait for civ6

 

[King_Course]

It's blatant cheating, but in a single player game, who cares?

You'll probably grow tired of the game quicker than if you had not chosen to do these things.

 

[Uncle Reeno]

I've done this too, to exponentially increase the effectiveness of this do the barb camp trick next to a cultural city state under attack. I got my rep up around 200+ with two neary by cultural cities but I wasn't running honor so I was only collecting the CS bonus, but I got it on like the twentieth turn and didn't lose it ever.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

It's blatant cheating, but in a single player game, who cares?

How is it cheating? Care to elaborate.

Yes, but what about continuing it for hundreds of years?

I don't think you get a worse penalty for continuing the war indefinately as long as you don't stop the war, restart, stop, restart. And as long as you don't attack other CS's.

I don't see why this is a problem though.

Hobby like music I see From Ur Sig

Yup Ever seen the movie Immortal Beloved, by chance?

 

[headcase]

1) Farming Barbs for culture bonus: tactic.
- Raging Barbs is "cooking the settings", but not garishly so. Besides, the AI has bonuses against barbs, so it's a two-edged sword where you come out ahead only because you play better than the AI. So Raging Barbs is pretty much fair to use I would say.

2) Warring on a City State: tactic. Ideally, peace-loving AI should hate you more for killing more innocent* units (instead of the one-time "declared war" penalty), but they don't and it's not an exploit to take advantage of that imo. Also an XP ceiling of 60 on CS attacks might make sense, but it's still fair to take advantage of the fact that there isn't a ceiling.

* innocent meaning they didn't ask for the war.

I don't really do any of this (besides attacking non-raging barbs for culture), but might have to try these next game.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

1) Farming Barbs for culture bonus: tactic.
- Raging Barbs is "cooking the settings", but not garishly so. Besides, the AI has bonuses against barbs, so it's a two-edged sword where you come out ahead only because you play better than the AI. So Raging Barbs is pretty much fair to use I would say.

Plus, there is the 30 XP limit that makes barb farming become useless if doing it solely for XP

 

[gozpel]

I do it all the time, find an annoying CS close and target them.

Same with barbs, keep the camp alive, so they spawn again.

Nothing wrong with this!

 

[Kwami]

I'd like to see the following two changes patched into the game:

- The Culture bonus from the Honor opening and the Faith bonus from Pictish Warriors only work on enemies that grant XP.
- Some form of penalty for never-ending wars.

Civ IV had a war weariness mechanic (or was that a mod?), but I'm not sure how useful that would be in Civ V since happiness is so easy to get. Perhaps diplomatic hits would be better.

 

[awesome]

civ 4 had war weariness, yes, or at least bts did.

 

[Lantarh]

- The Culture bonus from the Honor opening and the Faith bonus from Pictish Warriors only work on enemies that grant XP.

IMO, also the way XP is handled should be modified.

Really doesn't make sense to continually gain XP from killing the same type of unit on the same terrain for hundreds of times.
As it doesn't make sense that you can only gain 30 XP from barbarians, even if in late game you encounter a new unit type you never fought (let's say a barb destroyer).

You should be able to gain XP only for "n" times (by diminishing returns) for each type of unit fought (independently if barb or regular), maybe considering also terrain.

 

[Hammer Rabbi]

i dont think it's really an exploit, but it goes against an immersive reason to play the game, imo. its just breaking the game down into the numbers and function without a desire to simulate a lifelong evolution of a civilization in more realistic terms. the Honor opener is great but maintaining a long 1000s of years war against a CS doesnt make much sense if you play that way.

i know not everyone wants to play a slightly roleplaying kind of game, but i like to think and act as though I were running a real civilization. the vanilla tactics that were used were interesting and powerful but many of them have been coded out now because they weren't used as intended.

but, actually, now that I think about it, any reason to encourage more people to value Honor is still okay to me. I think it's the forgotten stepchild of the intro Social trees.