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. BSPollux

    BSPollux Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    2,210
    Location:
    Germany
    Very nice post, you are one of very few in this thread who made a real attempt of validating your impressions.

    And btw I like that change. If you KNOW you will allways be attacked, then having a strong army is allways worth the investment. If you got a realistic chance for a peacefull game, that investment may be a waste that sets you back. The possibility of avoiding war adds strategy to the game.
     
  2. BroOfTheSun

    BroOfTheSun Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2012
    Messages:
    228
    Location:
    Chicago
    I'm on my second game. Both the Huns and Assyrians are warmongering and are runaways. Huns took out 1 civ, Assyria took out 2. I've had two wars with my neighbor China because they dropped their second city right next to my Capital. I'm not sure what you're talking about with AI not being aggressive enough.
     
  3. BSPollux

    BSPollux Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    2,210
    Location:
    Germany
    I am part of the german civ community and I tell you you are not allowed to speak for me. You got zero authority. If you can make a valid argument then do so on your own. Dont hide behind imaginary supporters.
     
  4. BSPollux

    BSPollux Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    2,210
    Location:
    Germany
    I doubt that you you can provide a savegame that backs up all these claims. I think you are exaggerating because you want to create a problem where there realy is none.
     
  5. godman85

    godman85 Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    122
    the only civs in history that ever had a small army were isolated.

    Every civ in the classical and medieval period were REQUIRED to have a standing army regardless of goals because that is the law of life.

    M.A.D. mutually assured destruction.

    The only time you ever hear of truly peaceful civs is in the modern era where people can become planet enemy no.1 due to mass media.

    Take away mass media and people got slaughtered left and right.
     
  6. BSPollux

    BSPollux Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    2,210
    Location:
    Germany
    Are you able to prove your claims?
     
  7. godman85

    godman85 Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    122
    name one major civilization before 1500 that fought no wars and had no standing army that wasn't living on some island, far away from anyone or anything.


    name just 1.
     
  8. Snuffleupagus

    Snuffleupagus Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2005
    Messages:
    167
    But this is part of the struggle between the 'historical setting' of Civ and game balance. You also can't name war mongering civs from before 1500 that occupied enemy terrority and still exist (at least I can't, I guess European colonies could count..?) The point being that ancient war mongering civs, collapsed under the weight of their empires.

    So if we look to history as a guide we conclude that:
    1. ancient civs must have big armies because war is a way of life
    2. ancient war does not lead to long term prosperity of the civilization

    seems to me that they conflict.

    I suspect there will be continued attempts to balance this.
     
  9. Emperor Giulio

    Emperor Giulio King

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    Messages:
    658
    Location:
    California
    :confused:

    So Greece can have them instead of Egypt? I don't know what you meant by this.

    But what I actually meant to say was, if you have two civs going for a cultural victory, the AI should be aggressive towards the other culture civ they are competing with.
     
  10. Emperor Giulio

    Emperor Giulio King

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    Messages:
    658
    Location:
    California
    As much as I enjoy the World Congress, I feel it's kind of ham-fisted into the game when you think about the development of actual historical international relations. For balancing purposes, the game totally ignores the idea of sovereignty. Even to this day, international laws are non-compulsory. But I get why they have to force players into it.
     
  11. Nicasen

    Nicasen Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2013
    Messages:
    55
    Same here. In my first game Rome completely destroyed every civ on his continent and on my own, Dido, Napolean, and Sejong were in perpetual wars. If there's a shortage of AI aggressiveness I've yet to see it.
     
  12. godman85

    godman85 Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    122
    Egypt was in perpetual war for 3000 years straight. They prospered. You seem to forget what a successful empire is.

    If a world power dominates for 200 or more years, they have gone way over any other.

    Rome lasted 800 years. In those 800 years they influenced 2000 years of western civilization.

    Egypt was the world's largest power for 2000 years. They were constantly at war.

    Ghengis Khan rules for his lifetime, but during his lifetime he conquered as much territory as the roman empire over 800 years while setting up the first international protected trade routes and placing the strongest civilization of all time (china) in chains. He was so successful that 1 out of every 5 people of asian decent have his blood in them. His family then reigned for 200 years.

    Greece was your typical american civ. They had democracy, warmongering, philosophy, religion, and interntional trade. They reigned for maybe 300 years.

    Reign = most influential.


    So let's go through ancient wars. Egypt vs nubia and hittites. Hmm. 2000 years of prosperity, trade routes, and gold from nubia AS WELL as an elite force of nubian warriors.

    Guess Egypt didn't benefit from that conflict.

    Alexander conquering persia... Hmm.. Guess that didn't spread greek culture or bring amazing wonders to the barbaric west.

    mongolians conquering half the world under ghengis causing mongolian laws and ideals spread across the world and unlimited properity and decendents which to this day still exist...

    Japan being in perpetual war with themselves for a millienium thus changing their idology to one of unity and less abotu personal gains. Thus making them the most advanced culture once they found out about the rest of the world, doing 3x the work and afficiency of other nations because they WANT to do the work.

    Islamic nations conquering most of northern africa and the entire middle east to spread islam within a 100 year window of opportunity. Thus causing 2 billion of today's people to be islamic and leaving legacies all over the world...

    Mayan's defeating their tribal rivals that threatened them then settled the lands after having no more enemies to become a 1000 year empire that had the most advanced science the world had ever known or would know for another 1000 years.


    I could go on and on but every single great civilization was forged through war. Whether they rebelled and became independent or conquered everything they saw, all of our greatest influences TODAY were from FIGHTERS in the past.


    And for the "still exist" claim. Really? Since every civ around today has lasted maybe 500 years, can we use that as the example?


    To say "still exist" as in 2014 is ********. Nothing that was before 1500 still exist today. Even european nations. Because last time I checked, there were no witch trials or burnings at the stake. Science isn't outlawed, yada yada.


    This game bases civs on their PARTICULAR period in time. Not "today"

    Because america's UA and UU is based on when we had slaves and were a band of rebel hillbillies.
     
  13. ellgieff

    ellgieff Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2013
    Messages:
    69
    You know, you probably need some actual evidence to back up your assertions.

    Allow me to introduce you to the good friends I've gotten to know well over my years on the internet: Confirmation Bias and Small Sample Sizes
     
  14. godman85

    godman85 Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    122
  15. RealHuhn

    RealHuhn Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,172
    Location:
    Germany
    Pretty heated discussion here. :lol:

    I certainly didn't like the 100% chance of an early war in G+K. Forced me into the same narrow build order everytime.

    So more variety in AI aggression is a very welcome change. As a neutral observer of this thread it's pretty obvious that everybody needs to take a deep breath and play a lot more games before claiming something. ;)
    1,5 hours left. Can't wait arghhhhh ...
     
  16. BSPollux

    BSPollux Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    2,210
    Location:
    Germany
    You are trying to switch roles here. A very cheap trick. You made a claim, you got to back it up!
     
  17. RealHuhn

    RealHuhn Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,172
    Location:
    Germany
    So you want him to list every civilization that has ever existed and give scientific evidence about their army, wars and conflicts?

    That doesn't sound very practical. :lol:
     
  18. Calouste

    Calouste Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,725
    Medieval Europe didn't have standing armies. Armies were raised by barons in the name of the king whenever there was a campaign needing to be fought. The first standing armies in Europe after the Roman Empire only appeared in the mid 15th century.
     
  19. BSPollux

    BSPollux Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    2,210
    Location:
    Germany
    Who cares? He made the claim, he has to find a way
     
  20. Froze

    Froze Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    14
    I'd say the aggression has definitely been turned down, and probably just a bit too far. The 'follow these 8 steps exactly' builds that where nearly required in immortal/diety play to get an army up large enough before the first DoWs wasn't all that fun. And generally as long as you were able to beat and flip those early DoWs you wouldn't have too many challenges left. Now it seems that there's nearly no danger of early war unless you instigate it. It's just a footrace to the ren. to see who has the best situation when the congress stirs things up.

    If you have an aggressive neighbor he should make some prelimanary incursions. I just played a game bordered by Alexander, Atila and Siam and never got DoW'd. I'd say the current is better than the hyper-aggressive, but that's just too passive.


    Even it is setting based (which it might be. I usually play emperor-huge-marathon) but if those settings are causing the issue, well that's a bug and it needs to be fixed. Or the options removed, but that'd be bad as well.
     

Share This Page