Thinking back to how "hard" Civ IV was, and how easy Civ V is... I have concluded that the difficulty in Civ IV was purely based off hammers...
The faster you build, the easier the game is to win... There was no combat tactics, the AI wasn't any "smarter..." They just out produced you in higher diffs and they just sent a bigger stack than you did...
Also, they attack and they always attack, you basically pick their best defensive target against your attacker... Also, due to the lack of ZOC, there is no incentive for the AI to attack your stacks!!!
That's why good players away fight the fight abroad... There was no defense in Civ IV... In Civ V, you'll notice that now the game has evolved to logical and sensible combat with 1UPT, the AI is clearly out matched... Defensive positions actually gets used, ZOC slowed moving of attacking units...
Hammers does not mean insta win because you HAVE to play rock paper scissors...
So thinking back, is Civ V broken? Or was Civ IV masking their ineffectiveness to create a competent combat AI by making it impossible to defend?
Think about it, if your full stack of mega army chose to attack a single point, how can you create enough defense to stop it? If you have it stationed in one city, I'll just walk to the other... If you choose to attack me, then you'll always fight a losing fight...
Civ IV is really more broken and Civ V ever will be, Civ V just fixed the biggest AI handicap... They fixed defense...
The faster you build, the easier the game is to win... There was no combat tactics, the AI wasn't any "smarter..." They just out produced you in higher diffs and they just sent a bigger stack than you did...
Also, they attack and they always attack, you basically pick their best defensive target against your attacker... Also, due to the lack of ZOC, there is no incentive for the AI to attack your stacks!!!
That's why good players away fight the fight abroad... There was no defense in Civ IV... In Civ V, you'll notice that now the game has evolved to logical and sensible combat with 1UPT, the AI is clearly out matched... Defensive positions actually gets used, ZOC slowed moving of attacking units...
Hammers does not mean insta win because you HAVE to play rock paper scissors...
So thinking back, is Civ V broken? Or was Civ IV masking their ineffectiveness to create a competent combat AI by making it impossible to defend?
Think about it, if your full stack of mega army chose to attack a single point, how can you create enough defense to stop it? If you have it stationed in one city, I'll just walk to the other... If you choose to attack me, then you'll always fight a losing fight...
Civ IV is really more broken and Civ V ever will be, Civ V just fixed the biggest AI handicap... They fixed defense...