Thoughts on New Patch Strategies

There are still some funny bits in there. I had a raging world war going initiated by Askia. After taking two of his cities and killing about 20 of his units, he offered me peace and was Friendly the next turn.

I wouldn't have minded, but he was still grunting in that Mr. T-with-a-greatsword way of his. I was afraid I was looking mighty good in them jeans...
 
Playing at Immortal in a game where I intend to dominate, and it feels a bit different. Two neighbors have launched 3 quick attacks on me very early. Started around turn 35 or so (for the first 2) with a mass of warriors. It's "quick" in the sense that they came in fast, there was much killing, and then they were ready to settle a few turns later but in a way that made more sense than pre-patch. In pre-patch, I always look at being attacked as a prize. I get lots of experience for my units and a big gp prize to boot. Here, I had to payoff one civ (500 gp) even after killing many units. Despite killing many of his units, I was not a threat to him at this time but he could really ruin my day in the next turn. The second settled for no cash after I killed 5 of his warriors (after which, neither one of us was a real threat to the other). I almost felt in both cases that the AI was launching these to extract some prize money, rather than a serious takeover effort. I'm only now seeing the first civ offer me cash (~500 gp) as I have 4 swordsmen at his border city. So my first impression of civ war settling is good (hope it's not just my imagination).


Yeah...I used to be able to deliver a decent LS rush opener on diety and get to see from there how the game would turn out...now it's more like certain civs just rape the living crap out of me...Isabella has become an absurd threat because of all of the early gold she gets from wonders. She tends to have a 6 warrior + 6 archers(or horse archers) by turn 35-40. If she's a far neighbor, she gets 3-4 horseman/swords by turn 50 and she's definitely not the onlyone...

I'm fine with "occasionnal" but there has been a single game yet where I didn't get swarmed by 6+ units by turn 50...and I was isolated sooooo far. Currently I really don't see how I could deliver a domination victory after wasting so much hammers(or gold) on early units that will get killed because I'm outnumbered and surrounded by the swarm.

Deity AI begins w...2 settlers 3 warriors 2 scouts and 2 workers I believe? I tried NC then rex, NC/HE single city, straight rex and nothing has allowed me a good start yet...the best I had was anihilating Arabia with LS and Catapults but I didn't actually have a tech advantage, he had just been crippled by someone else...

Time to play archipelago science or culture I guess...
 
One thing I found in the only two games I've complete post-patch is that bribing AIs to war with one another seems to be less effective at preventing you from being DoWed yourself. In both games (culture both times, so admittedly my military was lacking but not pitiful), I had the sort-of-runaway-superpower at war with 4+ civs on just about any given turn. And both times, that didn't stop me from being declared on. It could be they resented my meddling, but only one or two of those wars were of my doing; the rest was just the AIs ganging up on their own.

patch notes:

1 Operational AI: If AI sees that WarState is Calm (i.e. no one has troops near enemy lands), still consider launching an attack if overall military strengths are at least even.

2 •Tactical AI: Early game AI tweak to allow occasional sneak attack.
(occasional my ass, on deity the naturally rich AIs swarm you with ~6-12 units anywhere between turn 25 and 50 depending on proximity)


Been trying to figure out a viable opener for deity for 2 nights now -_-
 
100 turns later, and I have been building a new destroyer every couple of turns. The AI, on the other hand, is sinking them faster than I can build. My mech-infantries are dead upon landing. The AI is keeping a lot of artillery out of my reach, and I can't keep up with the slaughter. I am losing the war, and Ramses wants thousands of dollars for peace.

Before the patch, this army would have destroyed the AI in a few turns. I think it's gotten a lot smarter.

There is also a comment in the patch notes about expecting casualties -_- the AI no longer sends it's troops out to try and tear you if it thinks it will lose
 
I haven't been able to try the changes yet myself. But seems like several people on these forums might need to lower the difficulty level or improve their game. That, combined with the positive stories seems like a good indicator these changes are worthwhile. Can't wait to try 'em out now!
 
still haven't finished my first game (Askia, Prince, large) with the new patch, but here's my first thoughts:

-Is it normal that 3 AI (Rome, Aztecs, USA) out of the 5 on my continent want to play OCC? and there is still a lot of room to expand...
-Globally, the AI expansion seems a lot smaller...
-Monty declares on me while being quite far from him. However, he had some reasonable forces...
-Nappy is a really bad scout, i found an unmet CS (Sydney) and ruins right by his territory

-when AI expansion is slower, wagin war is much difficult, because you have a lot more of "non-roaded"/"non-lumbered" tiles and supply your army with fresh troups is harder...
-with less cities, AI teching is really really slow... I went to Iron working, and two or three others tech before attacking the intellectual part of the thech tree and still manage to land the GL, the oracle and was 4 turns from getting stonehenge...

It's really a very strange game so far...

And with so many barbarians camps, being askia is fantastic (75g per village!!!). I'm allied with 6 of the 9 CS on the continents...
 
It does seem a lot harder to play the early part of a war luring the enemy troops into a death trap. I've found attacking Inca very difficult, even moreso than normal. My crack samurai just can't break through the shifting wall of slingers peppering the with 1 point hits as they move slowly through his Great Wall guarded lands. I'm having to adjust to incorporate more ranged units than I'd planned with some meat shields taking the first wave of hits.
 
It seems AI will DOW you in deity all the times, except maybe if you build warriors only.

I was able to get a good start with babilon and bowmens. (seriously these guys are too op, having 6 melee str is way too strong they even survive a horseman attack) but it is hard as you cannot NC-Longsword with no units, anymore it seems (on pangea)
 
I think we're going to have to redefine for ourselves, at each difficulty level, what constitues an "adequate" early defense. There is a bigger case to be made for Tradition/Oligarchy now and taking archery sooner than later.

On Emperor, I'm going to assume that Oligarchy, a garrison warrior for each city, and a defensive army of 1-2 archers and warriors will be sufficient.
 
Recently lost an immortal game. I was on a standard continent map with the Americans, Russia, Rome, and Siam. I executed a longsword rush very nicely and had them on the field before any of the AI. Rome was on my western border and I quickly dispatched his cities as he and Siam (father west) had been fighting for years.

After eliminating Rome both Siam and Russia (to my east) were friendly at first but within 10 turns both had declared war on me. My empire was six cities big with only a small longsword army to defend it. Immortal AI has a ton of units and Russia did not have iron or horses but Siam had elephants and longswords.

I had blocked Russia's early expansion by grabbing a natural wonder city as I was Spain. This immediately got a message from Catherine to stop expanding into her lands. I told her to stick it. This happened very early in the game because I used the gold from the wonder to build a settler and take the city. Until she declared war on me after I defeated Rome she had not expanded from Moscow at all even though there were good lands around her to take. Her invasion consisted of at least 5 archers and 5 warriors with some spearman mixed in. My wonder city fell quickly even with 2 longswords defending and a 3rd rushed in. I also had Oligarchy. Once she took this city she proceeded to settle two additional cities so my assessment of her behavior is this:

1. She set a very long-term plan (at least 40 turns) into motion to build up a force to expand to her preferred first city location by building a force that was overwhelming.
2. After I had defeated Rome she jumped on me and quickly took the city she wanted and placed two other cities.
3. She did a good job of putting warriors and spearman in front and archers in the back. With as many troops as she mustered it was a well executed attack.

To the west Siam rolled into my Roman puppets with longswords, elephants, and catapults. The size of force he had in the hands of a human would have been game over faster than what he did but he still easily took my three Roman cities.

Siam then declared war on Russia and started moving across my former lands into Russian territory. This allowed a CS to take my former wonder city from Russia! I guess everyone likes a city with a big fat Natural wonder in its borders. :lol:

I played that game very aggressively on purpose to see if the AI would react and react it did. I really needed at least twice the Army size I had (4 longswords and 2 catapults for offense and a few spearman and warriors) to even begin to defend against the onslaught I faced. Probably playing more cautious and taking out Russia before Rome would have been a better course of action. I smelled blood with Rome weak from wars against Siam but that blunder led to me looking big and bad with nothing to defend myself and the AI took me to the cleaners.

My next game I dropped to emperor and proceeded to win a space race in which I played a game with no wars, a very tiny army until Infantry and launched a space ship the turn or two after Arabia built the Apollo program. I used RA blocking extensively and it was simple to stay entire eras ahead of the AI on emperor.
 
@Architect seeing as immortal's AI initial start isn't too far from deity's, I would dare saying even if you had not warmongered, Siam would've likely beat on you with 4 LSs and 2 catapults near your city. Or at least, regardless of how well I do my rush opener and luck out an isolated start, I get DoWed every game, pretty much always before LSs, very often from AIs I have going trades and are friendly, and ultimately they very often do teamed DoW.

I love the state of the AI, I just don't think their start with 8-10 units is necessary anymore. Their gold income is already huge and since they open with such a strong military, they currently ALL seem to blow all of their early gold into more troops.

I was attacked and swarmed by a friendly Ghandi who broke a RA and a lux for gold trade yesterday...I mean WHAT

Also, about your emperor game that was war-free, do you mind me asking what map you were playing?
 
The rules for CS have also changed, as they now can puppet cities! Imagine my surprise when I saw a strong Florence take and convert a city from Montezuma.
 
Started a new game as Hiawatha on prince, continents and had much fewer barbarian problems than I reported with my Egypt game. The barbs still seem smarter - better at coordinating multiple units & targeting weak spots, but not as insane as in the earlier game I posted about. Must have just had a run of bad luck there.
 
The rules for CS have also changed, as they now can puppet cities! Imagine my surprise when I saw a strong Florence take and convert a city from Montezuma.

In my last game, Pangea-Emperor-small, the Chinese were at war with the Iroquois and reduced them down to their capital. A Chinese allied CS took out the Iroquois capital and kept it as a puppet.

In the same game, I had reduced the Americans down to one city (not the capital). About 10 turns after the Iroquois were eliminated from the game, the Americans fell to another city state. It's really cool to see CS empires forming.
 
I keep getting random DOW from civs halfway across the map. My only real problem with this is that a few times a civ has sent their entire army at me only to be attacked by a civ actually next to them and destroyed creating a runaway civ.

This is one of my main gripes with civ, the AI has problems correctly identifying actual threats to it and not getting distracted by shiney objects.
 
I played two emperor games (my comfort level) over the weekend, and was warrior-rushed in both games by the nearest AI (Haiwatha & Rome) with about 4-6 warriors each. The AI definitely seems more aggressive early, from this small sample size at least. In one game I was aggressively expanding but the other I was going for OCC. Both times I was defending with about 2 warriors + 1 spearman...and both times I got the iron hooked up just in the nick of time to upgrade the warriors and defend myself.

I also agree with folks saying the barbs are tougher. Honor buff?
 
I also agree with folks saying the barbs are tougher. Honor buff?

I haven't noticed individual units being that much tougher, but I haven't played above King. More that they are better coordinated - used to be I'd rarely run into more than one barb unit at a time outside their camps, but now I see two, three, even four units working together to hunt down a scout or worker, or attack an undefended city.
 
patch notes:

1 Operational AI: If AI sees that WarState is Calm (i.e. no one has troops near enemy lands), still consider launching an attack if overall military strengths are at least even.

2 •Tactical AI: Early game AI tweak to allow occasional sneak attack.
(occasional my ass, on deity the naturally rich AIs swarm you with ~6-12 units anywhere between turn 25 and 50 depending on proximity)


Been trying to figure out a viable opener for deity for 2 nights now -_-

I've gone from beating Immortal 90% of the time to 8 or more failed starts now. Now playing Emperor. I'm confident I will win this but there are about 3 civs ahead of me in score at 1000 AD, which is very unusual for me. If the developers really did this through AI tweaks or changes in AI behavior (and not additional boosts), then great job! :goodjob::goodjob::goodjob::goodjob::goodjob:

Now that the AI is using its masses of warriors more effectively, it may be time to cut back on these AI boosts a little. The jump in difficulty from Emperor to Immortal seems a bit too big now. (Don't get me wrong, I want Immortal to be very hard and Deity almost impossible, even employing all of the experts' tricks.)
 
I was seeing multiple barbs and massed AI warrior rushes before the latest patch. On emperor.

I played two emperor games (my comfort level) over the weekend, and was warrior-rushed in both games by the nearest AI (Haiwatha & Rome) with about 4-6 warriors each. The AI definitely seems more aggressive early, from this small sample size at least. In one game I was aggressively expanding but the other I was going for OCC. Both times I was defending with about 2 warriors + 1 spearman...and both times I got the iron hooked up just in the nick of time to upgrade the warriors and defend myself.

I also agree with folks saying the barbs are tougher. Honor buff?
 
Started 7-8 Immortal games,(standard size, normal speed) ended up losing 3 of them right at the start (warrior rush by Monty,Cathy and Isa in different games).

Usual 1 city NC start ends up being attacked if you have a close civ. Starting with something defensive such as Nebu with archery becomes too slow.

Attacks are more coordinated, AI tries to run away with wounded units, attacks ranged units with horses, in short behaves as it should in many cases.

I'm thinking of going down one notch in difficulty also. Maybe try an immortal succession game to see if some people have better ideas for opening.

Last restart. Powned by Oda on turn 30. I knew I should have made an archer. But then it becomes impossible to catch AI on tech. I don't know.
 

Attachments

  • pwned2.jpg
    pwned2.jpg
    157.8 KB · Views: 325
Back
Top Bottom