Time victory seems broken?

[tripleducky]

Judging by the image, there are a few suspects:
- 21000 unspent faith points.
- Idle great prophet in 2045.
- 6 idle spies.
- A few undigged sites.
- 17/39 units.
- Random wonders.
- Too many farms / too few villages.

Or

It could be simply that in warlord downwards science is too slow. I'm checking on that.

- those great scientists were getting pretty expensive and I was saving some for great engineers to build the rocket I guess?
- idle great prophets are great to have around in case they do a religious push, unless I'm wrong about that
- 6 idle spies, what are you talking about? Kappa
- Those diggers take production time *shrug*
- peace thing that makes it cost more to have units was in action
- I didn't know what to build at the time but I suppose I could have pushed science harder instead of building them? All the wonders seemed beneficial with no consequences unless I'm wrong
- don't farms give science at the end? Don't you need farms to grow population? I don't actually know the muy bueno correcto way to ratio them tbh I was just guessing

 

[tripleducky]

No villages -> no enough gold to rush buildings
Lot of useless wonders
Tradition into fealty, not a big fan. Artistry gives a lot of science and culture when going tall.
No enough holy sites, 21000 faith points, did you get the reformation?
No enough alliances with city states (you're missing a lot of yields from chanceries in early game if you don't try to get some allies).

And seriously, Shonghai is a Progress or Authority civ, you have enough room for more cities. Jenne is a really bad city for my taste, you can't build a lighthouse -> harbor -> seaport.

Vox Populi is a whole different game, you don't need to go tall ALWAYS like vanilla civ. Try to build more cities, and be more agressive.

Your criticism sounds like it is probably valid :/ I actually found the alliance with city states was cutting deeply into my tech as the losing ai would spam it and make it unaffordable. It SEEMED like the losing ai had NOTHING to lose by spamming emissaries. It SEEMED like a flaw. I don't really know though. I don't really know the best way to go about that though this is, after all, my FIRST game with the mod. Also sending city states emissaries I actually found to be a chore. What was wrong with just paying again? I actually held off building chanceries except I THINK in 2 cities because they cut into yields.

All in all the game has a lot of text to read, but I am mostly wondering if the pacing of the game is off (which it obviously is if ai is nowhere near victory conditions) or if there was maybe a bug with my specific game. Also the yield icons kept switching off on me. Yikes that was annoying but I read somewhere that they're having trouble fixing that or something.

 

[Grabbl]

It seems that you are missing out on some game mechanics, but that's normal for your first game, VP adds a lot of complexity. I still recall my first game with VP, basically clicking around without clear ideas what I shoud build.

As you will probably see as you advance, time victory usually doesn't play a role (thus the surprised reactions). The general pace is quite balanced, however time victory is outside the balance scope (virtually no games go longer than 2020 in my experience), also if on lower difficulties AI may not be able to win, especially with a very advanced human player in the game (while technically, the AI did really well as it did win over you ). So, for safety, you should perhaps disable the time victory and it is right that you probably could move up one or two difficulty levels. You will be quick to get to a point where time victory doesn't matter anymore.

 

[Stalker0]

Also wanted to note....aren't we talking warlord, ie just 1 level higher than chieftain?

Realistically we shouldn't be criticizing anyone's strategy at that level, they should be able to pretty much play however they want and have a chance at winning.

 

[tu_79]

Also wanted to note....aren't we talking warlord, ie just 1 level higher than chieftain?

Realistically we shouldn't be criticizing anyone's strategy at that level, they should be able to pretty much play however they want and have a chance at winning.

That could be said for Settler, not for Warlord.
Warlord is like vanilla King. Suppose you are trying to play civ V BNW at King in your first game.

Actually, in my current testing, I'm losing quite a few wonders to AI. Askia is a good warmonger, but my map has little rivers and there's little in the economy field to make Askia win without putting a fight. I'm confident I can get scientific victory, cause I got Jesuit Education Reformation, though my chosen pantheon doesn't scale well. After destroying Carthage, and bothering Greece (I payed Shoshone for this), Askia is dominating all scores. But I'm a bit afraid that the lack of economic bonuses could be a problem in the late game.

 

[tu_79]

@tripleducky

Ok, now I see what you meant. It's not that the player cannot get the science victory playing at warlord. I'm pretty sure I can achieve it (it's 1900 and I have an A bomb), if I manage to avoid winning a cultural victory. It's that AI alone cannot play for the science victory at this difficulty, player or not.

This links with a recent concern of mine, that balance among victory conditions varies depending on difficulty, but it got little to no attention. I guess most users here are playing at king or above.

To achieve this, tech and policies costs should scale on difficulty. This way, AI would achieve the science victory at more or less the same time, but it would be much easier for a human player in lower difficulties, without altering balance.

EDIT. I know this sounds crazy now, but wouldn't have it been better that AI have the same handicaps across difficulties and only scale human player bonuses?

 

[tripleducky]

What could I have been doing that was so wrong that I would not have time to achieve victory though? You don't think there's some imbalance for players as well? Is going tall literally ineffective? I don't think 6 cities is 100% tall because I had to war to achieve it. It's not like I skipped building science buildings or culture buildings. I'm just wondering what I could have done because short of "owning" the ai with war, I can't think of what I did wrong. I just played civ 6 again do detox and I got a turn 350 win, but maybe it is more obvious what to do in that game.

Edit: i realize i've gotten some tips here already but none of the mistakes seem SO glaring.

I've been more of a sim city player than a warmonger throughout my civ time, and honestly I've always suspected civ 5 and 6 at least have limited strategic depth without war. I was really hoping this balance mod would emphasize sim city depth. I mean, apparently I was doing something wrong, so maybe it did.

This is getting off topic but I'm trying prince difficulty now, in hopes that the difficulty setting was wonky for victory time. Unfortunately both games I got sandwiched, and the ai decided both games to team up against me from above and below. Which is very intelligent of them, I'm just wondering what you can do to deal. The second game I actually survived all attacks (so far - the ai kind of throws units away sometimes) but my infrastructure was badly damaged by having tiles pillaged and not really being able to improve tiles with workers consistently. They don't show any signs of slowing down their war declarations either, brutal.

 

[tu_79]

What could I have been doing that was so wrong that I would not have time to achieve victory though?

Letme finish this game. Maybe you didn't do anything that wrong.
So far, I can tell you how I'm playing. This is Songhai. No economic bonuses but a few hammers near rivers. Even worse, few rivers in my map. So, what has Songhai for it? Mandelaaaku!!
This means, go for Progress, build a few Mandelakus, conquer your neighborhood. I founded a religion, mostly because I wanted to choose beliefs. I took Synagoges (extra science when WLTKD) and Cathedrals (extra gold), for extra religious pressure, so I could save faith points for the Jesuit Education Reform, that allows to purchase scientific buildings with faith. This is massive.
I also got a bit lucky and had silver as monopoly. Not that great for the extra gold on monopoly, but for it allows to build 'Civilized Jewelers, Inc', the amazing corporation that boost great people generation.
After making some room (so Progress bonuses can work well), I played the SimCity (R) game. I control world congress, and used it for boosting scientific production, ban travel (so I don't win by culture), and stopping bothering resolutions against me. I'm on the way to build Hubble, it's 1927, and I'm at war with every other civ in the world, so turns go quite slowly.

Unfortunately both games I got sandwiched, and the ai decided both games to team up against me from above and below.

Two reasons for this. You either are considered weak, and all AI want to abuse you, either you are undoubtly winning, and all AI are trying to stop you.

 

[ElliotS]

I've been more of a sim city player than a warmonger throughout my civ time, and honestly I've always suspected civ 5 and 6 at least have limited strategic depth without war. I was really hoping this balance mod would emphasize sim city depth. I mean, apparently I was doing something wrong, so maybe it did.

You definitely did. Many players including myself have won entirely peaceful games on Diety without taking a single city. Part of your problem is that you played in a very non-optimal way. Songhai going for science is a bad choice. Even moreso when you choose Fealty over Artistry, and Order over Freedom. People have already pointed out other mistakes.

If your question is "Does making a ton of bad choices prevent you from winning?" then my answer is "Yes!"

If your question is "Can you win a peaceful victory on difficulty X?" then you're getting the same answer.

If you disagree then you're wrong. I've played every difficulty to get achievements. I don't mean to come off as rude. I'm just being blunt and honest.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

Tripleducky, I urge you to not get discouraged by the current problems. Your game will get better the more you play and read here. It will become easier for you to learn how to win without being a warmonger, just be patient!

 

[tripleducky]

@ElliotS
Lol what difficulty am I supposed to play on to learn the game then? I wasn't aware that not choosing freedom and artistry was going to eliminate my chances of winning science. It is A LOT to read. And sometimes the exact meaning of the text is not perfectly clear. And you might, MAYBE understand how I could think to myself, hmmm I'm on top for science and culture, and the game ended before I won... nobody else was near a victory condition... that MAYBE something is wrong with the balance. Does that really seem like a stretch to you? If it does you're wrong. I don't mean to come off as rude. I'm just being blunt and honest.

I never had a game get time called without this mod. I have won more than one game in civ 5 and 6 where my "Score" was lower. You can imagine my dismay.

For real though, uhh... let me read them right now. Fealty... can purchase monasteries that grant +3 science... half of positive happiness added to culture... sounds good for tall doesn't it... trade routes to civilizations with more techs +2 science.. okay that last one sounds terrible for science victory. Cities following your religion get + science and + culture. The point is I took a quick peek and saw science written in it several times. I assumed the theme there was RELGION. So because I had a relatively safe religion. I picked it.

But really, it's not like I did not pick rationalism, which is obviously for science specifically.

And considering your previous comment was "srsly how could you not win?" Am I supposed to take it you're calling me an idiot? Now you've switched to a couple policy choices I made ruined me. That's not the same as "How could you not." Now you're telling me how I could not and its not a mistake no one could have made. Sounds like you're calling me an idiot. You mention nothing that makes it even seem like you have had a remotely similar experience to the one I had. If you had said, "yes the ai will be nowhere near victory conditions at 2050" I would be like, oh, okay, this game is not balanced on this difficulty, but it is my own doing nonetheless. Instead I am left to wonder if it is my own doing or not.

Oh and regarding Songhai. I picked random bro. I'm not a nation picker. Science victory is the most straightforward. I think it would be weird if any nation couldn't pull it off. But then again, let me read. No, nothing saying science penalties.e.

 

[Rekk]

Even moreso when you choose Fealty over Artistry, and Order over Freedom.

Is Order, in general, is a terrible choice for a science victory?

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

When I'm going for a science victory, I prefer to take Order.

 

[ElliotS]

Is Order, in general, is a terrible choice for a science victory?

I think Freedom is in general a bit better, especially for Tall. If you're going order make sure you leverage the two free techs really well/

 

[Stalker0]

When I'm going for a science victory, I prefer to take Order.

My two. I find that Great Leap Forward (aka 2 tree techs), comes at a good time to push to space race...which grants a free great scientist. You can have a heck of a tech lead from thst. Freedom will come back eventually but if you keep the “get x if you get it first” stuff you will never he overtaken

 

[tu_79]

Here's the thing. You are not supposed to win on a first try. Maybe playing at Settler difficulty, but not at Warlord. There's a TON of new things, as you've noticed. You are supposed to win at two levels downwards your usual difficulty level in vanilla, AFTER you've seen what's in here. If it is still difficult for you, then we should look at it. You've been given some advice, so it should not be too difficult next time.

That said, it's true that AI balance is very dependent on difficulty, making a science victory very unlikely for AI in lower difficulties, and I think this is something that should be looked at.

My two. I find that Great Leap Forward (aka 2 tree techs), comes at a good time to push to space race...which grants a free great scientist. You can have a heck of a tech lead from thst. Freedom will come back eventually but if you keep the “get x if you get it first” stuff you will never he overtaken

I'm with ElliotS here. Freedom is definitely better for tall empires.

 

[Stalker0]

I'm with ElliotS here. Freedom is definitely better for tall empires.

Sounds like we have some strong opinions on both sides....sounds balanced to me

 

[tripleducky]

Hey guys thanks for all the feedback and responses. It's cool that people play this mod and care about it. I don't know if I can keep it up because the 1 unit per tile gameplay drives me a bit bonkers. Remembered why I quit playing in the 1st place. I especially appreciate the responses from tu_79 who actually took a look at my problem. Thanks!

 

[tu_79]

Hey guys thanks for all the feedback and responses. It's cool that people play this mod and care about it. I don't know if I can keep it up because the 1 unit per tile gameplay drives me a bit bonkers. Remembered why I quit playing in the 1st place. I especially appreciate the responses from tu_79 who actually took a look at my problem. Thanks!

Funny, "1 unit per tile" is the reason I'm hooked with civ V. I guess I'm too used to chess.

 

[Workerspam]

That said, it's true that AI balance is very dependent on difficulty, making a science victory very unlikely for AI in lower difficulties, and I think this is something that should be looked at.

If the default victory achievable by the AI on Warlord difficulty ends up being "Time", would that be a bad thing? Seems like it gives newer players the opportunity to pursue any of the other victory types.