1. Firaxis celebrates the "Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month", and offers a give-away of a Civ6 anthology copy (5 in total)! For all the details, please check the thread here. .
    Dismiss Notice
  2. We have selected the winners of the Old World random draw and competition. For the winning entries, please check this thread.
    Dismiss Notice

They need to hotfix AI agression now

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by godman85, Jul 11, 2013.

  1. ColdFever

    ColdFever blue

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2001
    Messages:
    478
    Location:
    Luebeck, Germany, civilized.de
    There also is no diplomacy. Without gold, people just have to farm for an hour to get the basic things going until finally BNW begins to shine. I really like how the late game now works, the tedium there seems to be gone, great! But now there is early game tedium, because it takes much too long to get enough gold to get the ball rolling, especially for the AI.
     
  2. apocalypse105

    apocalypse105 Deity

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    Really you can secure borders with someone you both trade with eachother and start conquering other people.
     
  3. SamBC

    SamBC Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,052
    Location:
    Lancaster
    You want early wars? You can start them yourselves.

    But really, how many games have any of you played yet? Perhaps need a slightly bigger sample size? It would explain why some people aren't seeing a problem, some are seeing a slight change, some are seeing a big change. We all played loads of G&K, so we know what it's like on average. No one of us can see what BNW is like on average yet.
     
  4. mosin

    mosin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2013
    Messages:
    6
    I have to join in and say the AIs are indeed too passive.
    I am already accustomed to having 2 ~ 3 warriors or archers hunting barbs, and I straight teching until turn 150~200 without any invasion worries.
     
  5. Bridger

    Bridger Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    315
    If they capture your cities and take on all the extra building maintenance when they already have a problem with money....how does that benefit them?
     
  6. Bisqit

    Bisqit Warlord

    Joined:
    May 12, 2012
    Messages:
    140
    Location:
    U.S.
    As I've said in a previous post, I personally haven't had this experience at all. I was playing on prince and Indonesia backstabbed me twice and Shaka conquered Brazil and the Shoshone before i could even meet them on continents plus. I've been in war with Shaka as well. I am just not seeing this "passiveness" at all.
     
  7. Ulthwithian

    Ulthwithian King

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    733
    Perhaps the issue is one of increased diplomatic sensitivity, and the AI has been 'taught' to recognize this.

    Which means that if most people are playing on Pangaea (where everyone meets everyone fairly quickly), then the AI knows that if they DoW on someone, they're likely to eat 2-3 DoWs themselves and/or cripple their economy through denouncements etc.

    Whereas with more dispersed play, the AI 'sees' fewer other Civs early, and can make a better decision on whether or not to try to eliminate the rivals on their continent before heading overseas.

    'Venice? I don't quite recall... oh, well, yes, there was a city-state by that name here about 500 years ago, but we call it South Petersburg.' </Catherine>
     
  8. jaldaen

    jaldaen Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Messages:
    467
    Another thing that might be happening is that more civs are aiming for Diplo and Culture wins in BNW than before and so they are avoiding warmongering. But as others have said, the sample size is a bit too low right now. Plus, there are so many variables to maps, distribution of civs, etc. that it may take a long time to see a true trend. Only those who playtested the game long term might have insights into whether the AI is too passive, just right, or too aggressive.
     
  9. bpower

    bpower Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2011
    Messages:
    53
    They cant just up the aggression on it own. It would cause civ to Dec in unfavorable circumstances. They'd need to change the amount of gold civs can get after losing some trade routes. Until they do that extra aggression would hurt the ai,turning early wars into all or nothing gambles.

    But i do agree the early game is a bit too easy going.
     
  10. Securion

    Securion Civ Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    747
    Location:
    Earth (mostly..)
    It really depends on what civs you pick as opponents. Learn to pick opponents. Its not very hard. And if you really wanna be surprised, pick three or four warmongers and leave the rest on Random.

    Also, early game lack of gold is also a factor now for the AI. It usually fixes itself as soon as a few trade routes comes up.
     
  11. DrZero

    DrZero Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    14
    if its lack of gold, how about having tiles next to rivers give +1 gold again?
     
  12. Securion

    Securion Civ Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    747
    Location:
    Earth (mostly..)
    There is already too much gold in the game after the classical era.
     
  13. IAmOzymandias

    IAmOzymandias Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    207
    Location:
    United States
    >>play 1 game of BNW
    >>Form opinion of entire expansion based on 1 game.
    >>needs patch nao
     
  14. Botswana

    Botswana Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    55
    My biggest problem is that the AI doesn't EXPAND. It just sits there, never placing cities even when there is large amounts of land ripe for the taking right next to them.
     
  15. Ashbery76

    Ashbery76 Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2002
    Messages:
    224
    Location:
    England
    A reckless A.I in not a good A.I.
     
  16. chrisjwmartin

    chrisjwmartin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2013
    Messages:
    53
    Location:
    UK
    Go and play Call of Duty if you want a grindcore killfest. Leave Civilization to the civilised.
     
  17. apocalypse105

    apocalypse105 Deity

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    I've seen even brazile expand drasticly they just expand slower the normal .

    Look at the lets play of marocco immortal where pedro just expanded crazy
     
  18. True_Candyman

    True_Candyman Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,713
    Location:
    Leicester
    This kind of comment is just so crude, i thought the civilised were above it :p

    Clearly everyone likes their AI different ways which to me means there is one obvious solution to help everyone.

    Moar customization. Make some sliders for AI bonuses or AI aggression or some such other thing, and for all sorts more in the game set up menu. Stick in in an extra tab called "super advanced setup" or something so it doesn't clutter the quick start stuff.

    Civilization is a big enough game that can be played so differently that really i'm surprised there aren't already more settings tweaking options like this.
     
  19. Thorn

    Thorn King

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2002
    Messages:
    820
    Location:
    Project Tic-Toc
    The bold, underline sentence is why Firaxis will never please everyone. I've played Civilization since 1991 and have never thought of it as a war game. I like the idea that you can become allied with a Civ for the entire game and not have it turn on you just because 'it's trying to win the game'.
    If you want wars, like someone said - start them. Or add back the 'Always War' option to your setup menu.
    Or maybe Firaxis can add a Play a 'Wargame' or 'Buildergame' option? :dunno:
     
  20. Thorn

    Thorn King

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2002
    Messages:
    820
    Location:
    Project Tic-Toc
    Hey, I just said that! :mischief:
     

Share This Page