The game penalises the successful and favours the failures! (w. proof)

[Pyrrhos]

I have long suspected that when a player or AI Civ is successful, the game penalises them in order to level the playing field. Now I've managed to get proof of it playing the same game - MP 3 Mesopotamia - at different levels and trying the same deal.

Warlord - I am easily top dog. This is how the AI Phoenicians react:

Spoiler :

Emperor - I am "forgotten" and,now the Phoenicians think this:

Spoiler :

Yes, I had researched Tribal Council for the one turn which obviously lowered the price but the result is unequivocal.

It's the same with combat results, promotions, natural disasters etc - it's the game's way to ensure entropy, a "level playing field" and a "challenging game" for the human player, otherwise levels such as Deity and Sid would indeed be impossible.

An inelegant solution...

 

[brennan]

This is a known factor I believe.

Plus the higher the level the less the AI asks from other AI for the same trade, IOW they trade easily between themselves while you get the hard sell.

 

[Padma]

The pics don't support your premise. They *do* support brennan's, though.

 

[Pyrrhos]

Sorry Padma, but they do. In this scenario, the cost for The Wheel is 4, Mysticism 3, Tribal Council 4 and Polytheism 5.

When the human player is successful, the AI says no to a trade its 4pt tech for a 5pt one at a lower level of difficulty. It's not even "We're close to a deal here" - it is "I doubt they will accept this proposal"! When not successful the AI gladly parts with a 4pt tech and 10 gold for a 3pt tech, albeit one pt of it had already been researched on a higher level of difficulty. In the first case, the AI would part with The Wheel for Polytheism and a contact, ie considers a 5pt tech plus a contact a fair price for a 4pt tech.

If my proof is not convincing, please state why. If you have proof to the contrary, please give them and explain. I find it rather disappointing in someone of your standing to resorts to platitudes instead of elucidation, reasoning and facts.

 

[vmxa]

I would have to look up the cost in beakers of each of those tech for that level and then know how many beakers they had, if any in that tech.

Then you know the true value of the tech, note the cost is affected by things like how many know it, that one knows.

It also seems to be affected by the inherited value the civs puts on a tech as they seem to prefer some tech for the units/gov/wonders they confer.

 

[vmxa]

Sorry Padma, but they do. In this scenario, the cost for The Wheel is 4, Mysticism 3, Tribal Council 4 and Polytheism 5.

When the human player is successful, the AI says no to a trade its 4pt tech for a 5pt one at a lower level of difficulty. It's not even "We're close to a deal here" - it is "I doubt they will accept this proposal"! When not successful the AI gladly parts with a 4pt tech and 10 gold for a 3pt tech, albeit one pt of it had already been researched on a higher level of difficulty. In the first case, the AI would part with The Wheel for Polytheism and a contact, ie considers a 5pt tech plus a contact a fair price for a 4pt tech.

If my proof is not convincing, please state why. If you have proof to the contrary, please give them and explain. I find it rather disappointing in someone of your standing to resorts to platitudes instead of elucidation, reasoning and facts.

You cannot compare the straight cost factor for the techs. That is just a multiplier. The level is another multiplier, but the map size is a large multiplier as well.

So we would need to have that data to see how much a tech is worth, without any other considerations. IOW how many already know them and how many beakers already gathered on the tech, if any.

I just have not made the same conclusion in all these years of playing many many games. In any event, even if correct, so what?

 

[Yoda Power]

The ai also values a tech after how many other civs have it. The more it is available, the lower the trading price.

 

[Pyrrhos]

Thx for the input vmxa & Yoda!

In the first case, I was the only one of all civs in the scenario who knew Polytheism and four of the AI civs knew The Wheel. Of those four, one asked for a straight deal - The Wheel for Polytheism - with three demanding Polytheism plus a contact in order to part with it.

In the second case, I was the only one who knew Mysticism and three of the four AI civs in contact knew Tribal Council. All three offered the identical deal.

To recap, when I was doing well the AI demanded a 5pt tech that I was the only one who knew + a contact in exchange for a 4pt tech that almost everyone else knew. When I was bottom of the pile, the AIs were willing to part with a 4pt tech + gold for a three point tech. This rather strengthens my case, no?

 

[qoou]

Perhaps the Phoenicians were 1 turn away from finishing Poly...

 

[Nergal]

It depends on whether its a monopoly tech or not I guess. The AI knws whats on offer and exactly how much its worth. And does get preferred rates dealing with each other. That devalues your contribution a lot. The one area where I do disagree with the mechanics, and it penalises success is luxuries. If you out settle the AI then they charge you ridiculous rates for you to buy, if they will trade at all. And offer pennies for your surplus. I'd prefer to see a situation where having a monopoly on a lux was at least rewarded with some bonus.

 

[Pyrrhos]

Luxes is the one area where I agree that it's logical, Nergal. If you buy furs for twenty cities and the AI buys dyes for its five, then you pay for 20 happy faces and the AI for five. That's alright by me.

Treaties, however can be really ridiculous. Once the Hittites with three or four remaining cities demanded some 625 gpt for a military alliance and rop vs Rome, a civ that had by then nearly wiped out the Hittites. His troops, of which he had few, were chariots, medinf and pikes. As Carthage, I had some 40+ cities and contributed masses of cannon, cavs, musketmen and the odd army or two. (It was clear who would bear the brunt of fighting and for the dastardly cheek of demanding - and going from polite to annoyed when I righteously refused - I removed him from the map, but that's another story). This again is proof of how the game strives to help the weak and useless. WTH should anyone in his right mind pay some 12500 gold in order to sacrifice his/her painstaikingly built armed forces (another 2.000-4.000 shields @ 4gp ea, sum >25.000 gold?) for a runt?

 

[TheOverseer714]

The AI wants an arm, a leg and your firstborn for a tech. Not exactly uncommon. The higher the difficulty level, the more likely that is the case. You want to talk punishing success, try watching the game crash just before you win and every time you reload, it crashes again. Start all over again was the only solution. Stuff happens. Anyway, to stop rambling, my point is that those things are meant to be more difficult, thus the higher skill level.

 

[Pyrrhos]

Perhaps the Phoenicians were 1 turn away from finishing Poly...

Nope, none of them could even have begun researching it as they soon had Horseback Riding on offer and I still could sell Polytheism at that point.

 

[Pyrrhos]

The AI wants an arm, a leg and your firstborn for a tech. Not exactly uncommon. The higher the difficulty level, the more likely that is the case. You want to talk punishing success, try watching the game crash just before you win and every time you reload, it crashes again. Start all over again was the only solution. Stuff happens. Anyway, to stop rambling, my point is that those things are meant to be more difficult, thus the higher skill level.

Sorry, you got that wrong! It was when I was ahead on the lower difficulty setting that the AI wanted the 5pt tech that I had a monopoly on + communication for its 4pt tech that four of them knew. On the higher difficulty setting, I was behind and got a 4pt tech + gold for my 3pt tech.

Ie, the worse you do (and the higher the difficulty setting), the better deals you get.

 

[Chamnix]

In the first case, I was the only one of all civs in the scenario who knew Polytheism

Are you sure about this? Phoenicia knows civs that you don't know...

People can continue offering other reasonable explanations for your observations until someone happens to guess the right answer, or you can post the save, and I'm sure someone will find the real explanation (or determine that you are right that the only possible explanation is the difficulty level).

A couple screenshots can never be proof of anything since there are way too many unknowns for the viewers. If anyone thinks he has discovered something new, please post saves, and the jury will properly be able to decide on a verdict.

 

[Pyrrhos]

Are you sure about this? Phoenicia knows civs that you don't know...

Yes.

I went back to the save, made sure I made contact with all the other civs and I was indeed the only one. Furthermore, as I pointed out above, I had exactly the same offer from all for civs who knew The Wheel (except one) and none of them were researching Polytheism.

 

[Pyrrhos]

People can continue offering other reasonable explanations for your observations until someone happens to guess the right answer, or you can post the save, and I'm sure someone will find the real explanation (or determine that you are right that the only possible explanation is the difficulty level).

The reasonable assumption is that the programmers actually made the game this way. If you get too far ahead, it's a doddle and the game would become too boring for those who aren't empire builders, those who love to war or interact their way to victory. If you lagged behind you would be doomed with almost no chance of a come-back. Levels above Emperor would be unwinnable as the AI Civs start ahead and would just disappear into the blue (or Alpha Centauri as the case may be).

Tomorrow I might post a save, not tonight as it's waaay past midnight and I'm too old for all-night gaming these days!

 

[vmxa]

Let me see if I can put it in simple terms.

Std map Warlord:
base cost for The Wheel is 80, base cost for Poly is 100. So they are worth about the same amount, ignoring the other small factors. So I do not see problem with it.

Std map emperor:

Tribal is 120 and Myst is 90, so they offered you more or less the same deal as the first one with the extra 10 gold.

Neither of these deals are way out of line, so you really do not have a case here. You must break down the values as I mentioned. First figure out the base cost and then you can make a good estimate of the offset.

By this I mean, what reduces the value such as how many know the tech and does anyone know the civs that know that tech.

 

[Pyrrhos]

What about the "known by x civs" factor then?

CivAssist II gives the values (std, warlord) as 89 The Wheel and 147 Polytheism. Contact with the Hittites turns out to be 24 gold. Going to (std, emperor), the values are quoted as 124 Tribal Council and 108 Mysticism. This gives the following:

Poly 147 + Contact 24 = 171 is a fair trade for the AI's The Wheel @ 89
A trading advantage of 2:1 in favour of the AI on Warlord with the human player in the lead

Mysticism 108 is a fair trade for Tribal Council 124 and 27 gold = 151.
A trading advantage 3:2 in favour of the human player on Emperor with the human player last.

In all, there's a difference of a factor of 3 (3:2x2:1) between warlord and emperor. As the latter supposedly is a higher level of difficulty it is surprising to find that the human player gets deals three times better than on the supposedly easier warlord...

Case proven - unless there's something I've overlooked or one chooses to discredit CivAssist II

http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/112507/Agamemnon_of_the_Mycenaeans_2_1950_BC.SAV

http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/112507/Agamemnon_of_the_Mycenaeans_2_2720_BC.SAV

 

[brennan]

The Wheel...Hittites

The Wheel gives the Hittites their UU. That makes it a priority buy for them. CivAssist won't be including that Civ-specific factor.