Variable Difficulty

[Atlas627]

Is this going to be the Civ game that they finally give us more flexible difficulty options?

Just like with map generation, there are a ton of variables that go into the difficulty settings. We need options!

Have default difficulty settings for all our normal Civ difficulties, then allow you to customize right on the game creation screen.

Some options: Different AIs have different bonuses, give some research boosts, production boosts, combat boosts, xp boosts, starting units, whichever parts you want. Scale them with game speed, scale them with era, scale them with number of places behind in each victory condition (since it keeps track of that now), scale it inversely if you want.

Has anyone heard anything about this type of thing? Anyone have any other ideas?

 

[stealth_nsk]

I don't think it's good idea. AI bonuses are designed to make gameplay competitive, altering individual AI bonuses will not get you anything except probably screwed game. There are a lot of other options (like no barbarians) if you want to really affect gameplay. And there are mods if you need AI to behave differently.

 

[Atlas627]

I don't think it's good idea. AI bonuses are designed to make gameplay competitive, altering individual AI bonuses will not get you anything except probably screwed game. There are a lot of other options (like no barbarians) if you want to really affect gameplay. And there are mods if you need AI to behave differently.

Competitive is just one way of looking at it. The goal of the game is to have fun. If I think the game will be more fun by making some of the AIs stronger than other AIs, why shouldn't I be able to? If I like my opponents to have stronger upswings at the end of the game rather than at the beginning, why shouldn't I be able to?

And this is the type of thing that is better off if done on the game creation screen by Firaxis. Not only is it usually difficult to mod the screen, but going back into the mod code to change a value every game is annoying, not to mention impossible for many players.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Competitive is just one way of looking at it. The goal of the game is to have fun. If I think the game will be more fun by making some of the AIs stronger than other AIs, why shouldn't I be able to? If I like my opponents to have stronger upswings at the end of the game rather than at the beginning, why shouldn't I be able to?

Setting different bonuses for different AIs is not a problem and could be actually interesting.

Setting bonuses in different areas for the same AI could be a problem. Imagine you give high level bonuses to produciton, but low-level bonuses to tech. AI could easily spawn warriors to the number it will be unable to control them. Things like this are likely to happen.

 

[Atlas627]

Setting different bonuses for different AIs is not a problem and could be actually interesting.

Setting bonuses in different areas for the same AI could be a problem. Imagine you give high level bonuses to produciton, but low-level bonuses to tech. AI could easily spawn warriors to the number it will be unable to control them. Things like this are likely to happen.

Sure, but why is that a problem? Why does misusing the option mean the option shouldnt exist?

Imagine you give the AI decent bonuses to production but scale it up in the Industrial Era, while taking away their science boosts. That AI might start WWI, which could be fun.

Why should we not have this option just because someone might screw up like in your example?

 

[stealth_nsk]

Sure, but why is that a problem? Why does misusing the option mean the option shouldnt exist?

Developers take some obligations for making game playable. Options which make game unplayable shouldn't exist (although it's totally ok to open them for modders, which are outside developer obligations).

 

[m15a]

Personally, I'd find that completely overwhelming. It sounds like you're imagining there maybe 100 dimensions of variation per AI (say there are about a dozen different factors to set and each can be set per era). The standard map options are nowhere near that complicated.

If somehow all those options could be distilled down to a handful of simple presets (like choosing a map script) or a few check boxes or simple drop down menus (like how you can choose sea level and temperature on some map scripts), that might be something I'd use. Those options should be those that result in reasonably fun games - I don't want spend hours playing a game just to realize I chose settings with unexpected results that ruin the game. But a handful of well-tested options could be really fun.

 

[Atlas627]

Developers take some obligations for making game playable. Options which make game unplayable shouldn't exist (although it's totally ok to open them for modders, which are outside developer obligations).

Well that's why there are default options. These would just be customizable options.

And there is already the option to do a huge map with 2 players, or a duel map with 12 players. Both are unplayable, but you can do them if you want.

Personally, I'd find that completely overwhelming. It sounds like you're imagining there maybe 100 dimensions of variation per AI (say there are about a dozen different factors to set and each can be set per era). The standard map options are nowhere near that complicated.

If somehow all those options could be distilled down to a handful of simple presets (like choosing a map script) or a few check boxes or simple drop down menus (like how you can choose sea level and temperature on some map scripts), that might be something I'd use. Those options should be those that result in reasonably fun games - I don't want spend hours playing a game just to realize I chose settings with unexpected results that ruin the game. But a handful of well-tested options could be really fun.

I think you're just imagining it to be more complicated that it is, but I agree about choosing bad settings and not realizing it until later. Of course, you don't have to use the settings if that is a concern to you, but Im sure there will be a point where I would rather risk wasting one game than play another game under the same old settings.

One bar for yields, with a checkbox for scaling with era and one for scaling with places behind in victory conditions (and the inverse of each). A button that lets you expand that into individual bars for yields with individual checkboxes.

That's really all I'm suggesting, if they don't want to make it too complicated. They could also do the same bar with checkboxes for starting bonuses.

 

[Atlas627]

I remember about three years ago, every time a design dilemma came up, somebody on this forum would say "Just make it an option," and everyone agreed.

It seems like this mood has come back. This is not a good idea. Why should the developers spend time making every XML variable directly accessible through the game set up menu? Adding clutter that 99.99% of players will never use is not good design. It puts off casual players, increases the chances of unbalancing (or downright breaking) the game, creates potential compatibility issues and a hundred other minor negative impact for virtually no gain what so ever.

FYI: In civ 4 you could set the difficulty (just one variable) of each AI separately. I don't remember the advantages of doing this ever being discussed on these forums, or anyone saying they used that feature.

I am well aware that these things take time. Do you actually know how much time it would take?

Most of it would be getting the UI right. They haven't even implemented an advanced setup screen, and changing it from the start saves a LOT of time.

The rest is just having the awareness to make the change, because programming this would take very little time.

You are imagining all these issues that would not occur, because UI design is a thing. The majority of players do not even go to the Advanced Setup screen. They would not be bothered by these options. Those who do could very well enjoy these options.

And I used the individual difficulty thing in Civ4. I didn't use the forums back then. I have multiple friends who I know would use the feature too.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I am well aware that these things take time. Do you actually know how much time it would take?

Most of it would be getting the UI right. They haven't even implemented an advanced setup screen, and changing it from the start saves a LOT of time.

The rest is just having the awareness to make the change, because programming this would take very little time.

You are imagining all these issues that would not occur, because UI design is a thing. The majority of players do not even go to the Advanced Setup screen. They would not be bothered by these options. Those who do could very well enjoy these options.

And I used the individual difficulty thing in Civ4. I didn't use the forums back then. I have multiple friends who I know would use the feature too.

Just so you know, what you want IS an option in Civ 5, it is accessed through the Mod UI. (Just like you have the option of playing India without Gandhi or having Combustion required for Flight or a game where nuclear weapons really hurt/are easy to get)

But those options aren't thought to be as desired enough to make them accessible in the more easily usable "Advanced Setup" UI... and they definitely are not thought to be desired enough to make them part of the Basic Game Setup UI.

...and I think for your particular request, that will probably be true for civ6 as well.

 

[Ryika]

Such obtions already exist partly, by editing the AI-bonus game files. I've done quite a bit of that and most of the time the results aren't exactly spectacular.

If for example you reduce AIs research Times but don't increase their production times then the AI will get ahead in science and at one point start constructing buildings that they don't have the production for.

If you reduce their building cost too much then suddenly it will almost always favor constructing buildings over units. I found that unless you leave all bonuses at around the same threshold it will more often than not cause the AI to completely go off-track.

So at least with the Civ 5 Flavor system varying AI bonuses simply wouldn't work properly.

 

[Atlas627]

Just so you know, what you want IS an option in Civ 5, it is accessed through the Mod UI. (Just like you have the option of playing India without Gandhi or having Combustion required for Flight or a game where nuclear weapons really hurt/are easy to get)

But those options aren't thought to be as desired enough to make them accessible in the more easily usable "Advanced Setup" UI... and they definitely are not thought to be desired enough to make them part of the Basic Game Setup UI.

...and I think for your particular request, that will probably be true for civ6 as well.

I disagree, but I appear to be, at least, in the minority here.

Such obtions already exist partly, by editing the AI-bonus game files. I've done quite a bit of that and most of the time the results aren't exactly spectacular.

If for example you reduce AIs research Times but don't increase their production times then the AI will get ahead in science and at one point start constructing buildings that they don't have the production for.

If you reduce their building cost too much then suddenly it will almost always favor constructing buildings over units. I found that unless you leave all bonuses at around the same threshold it will more often than not cause the AI to completely go off-track.

So at least with the Civ 5 Flavor system varying AI bonuses simply wouldn't work properly.

I'd like to be able to set a difficulty level per AI, at least. That's very easy to do, doesn't result in utterly bizarre games, and wouldn't overwhelm people.

I would also hope the AI isn't that stupid...but I'd believe it.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I disagree, but I appear to be, at least, in the minority here.



I'd like to be able to set a difficulty level per AI, at least. That's very easy to do, doesn't result in utterly bizarre games, and wouldn't overwhelm people.

I would also hope the AI isn't that stupid...but I'd believe it.

The problem is the difficulty level doesn't just affect the AI, it also affects you. So if one AI is at Deity and the other is at Settler....what bonuses/penalties does the human player get?

 

[Atlas627]

The problem is the difficulty level doesn't just affect the AI, it also affects you. So if one AI is at Deity and the other is at Settler....what bonuses/penalties does the human player get?

Set your own.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Set your own.

And that requires a modification to the system, which for sp is a difficulty level "for the game" as opposed to "for specific players".

They might make individual difficulty levels for each AI player possible. in advanced setup (since it probably needs to be available for individual human players in mp)

They are Much less likely to have customized difficulty levels (high science penalty, low amenity penalty, etc.) outside of mods.

 

[Atlas627]

And that requires a modification to the system, which for sp is a difficulty level "for the game" as opposed to "for specific players".

They might make individual difficulty levels for each AI player possible. in advanced setup (since it probably needs to be available for individual human players in mp)

They are Much less likely to have customized difficulty levels (high science penalty, low amenity penalty, etc.) outside of mods.

The game already had the ability to set individual difficulty levels (even for humans) in Civ5 Hotseat. The game (probably) doesn't need to be modified to accommodate, assuming they didn't take it out.

 

[Lucius_]

IIRC, GalCiv II did something like this....sort of. When you set difficulty level, each AI would be set at a different difficulty levels, creating an average of the level you set at. You could manually change each individual AI's difficulty level or leave them hidden. Generally, at random, some AI's would be better than others, but you wouldn't know which were set to be harder until it became obvious. This is something I could be in favor of for Civ VI. If you play on Prince level, for example, instead of every AI being a cake walk, you would know at least one civ is going to put up a decent challenge, because they are playing at Emperor level, while some would be at Prince and some at Warlord.

 

[Wellfooled]

In Civ V I play on Emperor difficulty, but I find the AI at that difficulty still don't offer much of a challenge in combat, however if I amp it up to Immortal difficulty I lag so far behind in tech that I must give up on the idea of ever getting wonders. I always wanted a way to give the AI some kind of military advantage (maybe a flat out combat bonus), while not adjusting any of their other attributes. I would love to see options like this in Civ VI, but then maybe the AI is smart enough not to need it.

 

[Browd]

Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas & Suggestions.

 

[LDiCesare]

You could set human difficulty in MP games at least in IV, but couldn't do so for AI. There's really no reason for that, though, and getting a global variable for difficulty level vs. an instance variable would be rather trivial to code.