Winning peacefully

[Melchizedek]

One tip for a peaceful game: don't build toward the AI like you probably always did in Civ 4. If you build a city in their direction at the start of the game, it greatly enhances the chance of war in the short and long term. Build into your own territory if you want to avoid a fight.

 

[Roxlimn]

Oly problem is if you want a peacefull game on a higher diffiits impossible because of their bonusses they will allways have a hihger military and willl always declare because they make their decissions on numbers

Specifically, the problem is that the settings are tuned to make sense on Prince to Emperor settings, and the AI code breaks down at the higher settings where the AI bonuses breaks the game entirely.

I have had no problems playing peacefully on King. In fact, I had one game where my Civilization, in all its history, had no war with anyone. Ever. It's a bizarre thing, if you look at real history.

originally posted by puyo
The huge amount of bonuses at high difficulty just shows how bad the AI is...
I understand that the comp needs bonuses to compete with humans but in this game they are just ridiculously massive at high difficulty.
Winning peacefully at deity is just abusing the AIs (massive RA for example) because your handicap is so huge that it's like you just don't play the same game as them, you don't follow the same rules.

In all fairness, this is how Civ has always been, even vaunted Civ 4. The difference is, in Civ 4, you abused the AI through Religion and Tech Trading. In Civ 5, it's through resource trading and RAs. Same diff.

Having played both games at the normative setting, I'd say that the Civ 5 AI is broadly better at playing Civ 5 than the base Civ 4 AI was at playing Civ 4. We give Soren Johnson a lot of praise because he's supposed to be an AI designer, but let's not forget that it's the Better AI Mod, made by a forum-goer and incorporated in latter patches and expansions, that really made Civ 4's game interesting.

 

[headcase]

Having played both games at the normative setting, I'd say that the Civ 5 AI is broadly better at playing Civ 5 than the base Civ 4 AI was at playing Civ 4. We give Soren Johnson a lot of praise because he's supposed to be an AI designer, but let's not forget that it's the Better AI Mod, made by a forum-goer and incorporated in latter patches and expansions, that really made Civ 4's game interesting.

Hear, hear. Judging from Civ4, a year after release is still young for a Civ game.

 

[pazmacats]

Having played both games at the normative setting, I'd say that the Civ 5 AI is broadly better at playing Civ 5 than the base Civ 4 AI was at playing Civ 4. We give Soren Johnson a lot of praise because he's supposed to be an AI designer, but let's not forget that it's the Better AI Mod, made by a forum-goer and incorporated in latter patches and expansions, that really made Civ 4's game interesting.

That's the most ridiculous thing I've seen about the Civ5 AI yet. At least Civ4 AI was capable of accidentially winning. The only way to lose in Civ5 is to get wiped out by some neighbor. The Civ 5 AI doesn't even know what the name of the game is which it is playing. Please explain how France having 20.000 gold and not winning a diplo victory before I do it with 5000 gold is "strong AI". And please explain why Hiawatha doesn't want to go to space although he is alone on a huge continent and is leading about one era in tech.
Also please explain why the AI is experienced by many as the equivalent of the average natural disaster in Sim City? Using Civ5 and AI and capable in one sentence just doesn't work.