For me it's gotta be global warming.
Yep thats my pet peeve too. What I've never understood is why global warming means desert and not tropical rain forest? Warmer temps means more water evaporation and more rain.
For me it's gotta be global warming.
When you get attacked by animals and they are referred to as "Barbarian bears". Barbarian bears? Really? Just make it say "bear", you lazy developers!
How about when I ask Caesar what he thinks of that hottie Boudica and his response is....."I like HIM".
Um,....... Caesar? Are you blind!?
It's nothing to do with being good at the game. It's to do with not being a pathetic cheat. Do you reload when YOU win a 5% battle? I don't think so. Drop down a level if you can't win without crying and cheating
Incidently, if you reload it does not change the outcome of any battle that is already insite, the AI is smart enough to calculate all the odds of all the individual units before the battle. Consequently, reloading just does exactly what it did before. So a 5% battle that you loose, reload and you'll loose again.
I have a question about unit selection... How do you "unselect" a unit... More specifically in this situation:
I often accidentally select a fortified unit in a town. Now, I see that green button flashing in the corner and know that there are more units to move somewhere on the map. So I want to go to the next available ready unit, but I'm stuck on my selected FORTIFIED unit in my city that I don't want to unfortify. It seems the only way to skip that unit is to unfortify/refortify it (doesn't that make it lose a defense bonus?), or to press space bar, in which case it becomes unfortified NEXT TURN and is ready to move again (argh). I just want to leave it alone and go to my next green guy!
Just wake them then issue the previous sleep/fortify order. I tested this in game, they wont lose their turn-based fortification bonus.
Sorry but that's inaccurate. The reason the battle results don't change is because the random seed is saved in the savegame. There is even an option in custom game to not preserve the random seed. So no, the AIs are not able to calculate battle results in advance - they do no cheating of that sort.
Personnally I wouln't call it cheating if it did it the way I thought it worked. Even as you have put it i'd call it a great feature.
If I were to reload - so that I could continue to enjoy an enjoyable game that had just been upset by an oversight, it would be to rush an extra troop not to change the outcome of a battle - theKurgen, don't even both to reply to this, we've all done it and so have you - give it up goose!
Having said that your post does make sense and thank you for the info.
- Neverending requests by AIs to "stop trading with this" or "join the war against that" AI. I would accept this if the AIs gave EACH OTHER negative hits for "you refused to give us tribute/help us during war-time/etc.", but the only such thing I have ever recalled seeing is a "you stopped trading with us" hit when YOU actively tell someone to stop trading with another. This is VERY unfair.
The stupid "repect for warlike leaders" dip bonus. I'm just playing a game. I'm on the same continent with Montsy and Alex. There is a jungle separating my land and these two guys, which are supposed to be fighting for similar stretch of land. Instead they are pleased with each other, and declaring war on me, which has similar power rating and is giving freebies to these two guys. This is just stupid.
My 2 main annoyances:
1. Bad grammar everywhere - this would be easily fixed with like.. 1 line of code. "You have destroyed a American battleship". No.. No I haven't. I've destroyed an American battleship
Warmonger's respect is not my favourite feature to say the least ( at least it should not be hidden ).... but unfortunately it is necessary some kind of it in the game: if it didn't existed it would give a unfair advantage to peaceniks, because if a more agreesive LH ticked another one of the same kind, they would enter in a spiral of violence, leving the rest of the world alone ( yes ,sometimes that would be bad... )
Now if that is the best solution possible... ... ( I could easily think on a greed-kind mechanism: ok this guy pisses me off ,but Gandhi over there has a rich holy city.... let's forget our divergences and attack Gandhi... then we'll resume our fight )
In fact some of Civ IV features show a lack of finesse in terms of the implemented solutions..... like the 3.13 diplo win restriction, the diplo ( it causes AI gangbanding against humans because of some badly implemented features (some were already talked here ) ), the siege units ( I bet that they will be completely diferent in Civ V, because this system already showed their flaws to the extreme ),......
The worst thing is AIs like Toku usually don't attack right away, they like to build stacks of units and force you to an arm race. I'm not a pure builder, but still, it's very annoying to keep building unit after unit and have no time to take care of the city infrastructure, not even mentioning wonders. And how fun a game can be if you keep hearing one after one great wonder "built far away" by those 2 archers per city Huayna guys hiding somewhere on the planet?
My 2 main annoyances:
1. Bad grammar everywhere - this would be easily fixed with like.. 1 line of code. <snip>