im glad someone can have fun with the game, but king lvl wow you must be real bad at these games the ai is so bad king is comical.
Moderator Action: Don't troll other people.
You're playing on Prince difficulty? Really?
- Thread starter eMCee
- Start date
im glad someone can have fun with the game, but king lvl wow you must be real bad at these games the ai is so bad king is comical.
Moderator Action: Don't troll other people.
Rusty Edge
Deity
I feel people should play at whatever difficulty gives them the most enjoyment in the game.
Exactly. Whether you want to follow a strategy guide, be challenged, beat up Napoleon, or recreate history according to your own rules.
JBConquests
Prince
I do know how to play and win at higher skill levels but I don't particularly enjoy that style of play. I've won Civ 4 on Diety but hated the style of play I had to use to beat it so I played Civ 4 on Prince using a style of gameplay I found fun.
I find it incomprehensible why anyone expects people to play at a higher skill level than what they enjoy?
thats how I feel I some times I like to have a heavy game and feel like im really under the gun having to make big decisions, then other times I feel like just loging on and dominating easly I see no reason someone should play at a lvl they are uncomfortable with. that being said you may want to up the difaculty on civ 5 as it is much easyer than previous civ games I have found I can do well at the higher lvls and I never used to play on the higher lvls in civ 4 but civ 4 was a masterpiece and civ 5 is a cheep knock off.
JBConquests
Prince
For me I just don't enjoy doing all the tricks required to compete at diety in Civ 4. I have allot more fun playing a "sloppy" unfocused game where I'm not trying to tweak and tune everything to the max.
skallben
Diplomat
Guess some like sandbox play with fictional restrictions on their gameplay. Some like to micromanage the latest patch cutting edge strategy on a challenging level. There is everything in between. IMO, slow gameplay is boring and rushed decisions make mistakes. So I play at the difficulty currently giving me enjoyment by challenging me without requiring me to super-strategize every detail at my maximum potential nor being too easy. I am NOT looking forward to next step when I have to deal with AI-freebies on Deity.
Freesmog
Skeptic1938222569
That can still be done on deity with Civ4. I'm having a fun Civ4 game on deity using RoMAND modmod. The trick is defending one's borders early on & encouraging other civs to war with each other, instead of going on a complete warpath which is I think what you meant(?).
skallben
Diplomat
You still have to achieve victory before the Space Race in the 1600s...
Mightion
Chieftain
I'm playing on Prince now... It's been quite a change from the previous level... I've only managed to win one game as Elizabeth, and it was a tiny map- only four of us. Gandhi only built one city, and although Suleiman had taken Beijing, he was embroiled in a war with China when I struck from the other side and took Istanbul.
Earlier tonight, I tried playing as Assyria (just bought the DLC), and while I beat America after a long war, Arabia used a Great Artist to bankrupt me and make my populace Livid at the same time - all my ground units were disbanded, leaving me with just cannons, so I threw in the towel. Maybe there are a few bits of genius in the AI.
My biggest failing is I seem to be having happiness and/or money issues, not to mention falling behind frequently in the tech race. Other than that....
I probably wouldn't last fifty turns against half the posters here. I never was more than a casual player in Civ 2, 3, or 4. I doubt even if I do get the hang of it, that I'll ever go to a higher difficulty.
So, you'll never hear me chiding someone else's difficulty level.
Earlier tonight, I tried playing as Assyria (just bought the DLC), and while I beat America after a long war, Arabia used a Great Artist to bankrupt me and make my populace Livid at the same time - all my ground units were disbanded, leaving me with just cannons, so I threw in the towel. Maybe there are a few bits of genius in the AI.
My biggest failing is I seem to be having happiness and/or money issues, not to mention falling behind frequently in the tech race. Other than that....
I probably wouldn't last fifty turns against half the posters here. I never was more than a casual player in Civ 2, 3, or 4. I doubt even if I do get the hang of it, that I'll ever go to a higher difficulty.
So, you'll never hear me chiding someone else's difficulty level.
i use to play on prince level, but without complaining. My problem is than in king level, i got stuck with tech and overpowered in time, until renaissance +- i do fine but then AI jumps to industrial/modern era soooo fast. 
Anyway, i keep trying in king.
Anyway, i keep trying in king.
I'm playing on Prince now... It's been quite a change from the previous level... I've only managed to win one game as Elizabeth, and it was a tiny map- only four of us. Gandhi only built one city, and although Suleiman had taken Beijing, he was embroiled in a war with China when I struck from the other side and took Istanbul.
Earlier tonight, I tried playing as Assyria (just bought the DLC), and while I beat America after a long war, Arabia used a Great Artist to bankrupt me and make my populace Livid at the same time - all my ground units were disbanded, leaving me with just cannons, so I threw in the towel. Maybe there are a few bits of genius in the AI.
My biggest failing is I seem to be having happiness and/or money issues, not to mention falling behind frequently in the tech race. Other than that....
I probably wouldn't last fifty turns against half the posters here. I never was more than a casual player in Civ 2, 3, or 4. I doubt even if I do get the hang of it, that I'll ever go to a higher difficulty.
So, you'll never hear me chiding someone else's difficulty level.
I would suggest that you read some Strategy Articles here (Subforum of Strategy and Tipps). When you put some of the things you read there into practice, you shouldn't have probs competing on prince any more.
killmeplease
Mk Z on Steam
I usually play on prince. I tried a few games on king and one or two on Emperor and the AI wasnt any better or more challenging, they simply built several wonders I wanted before I could.
The only reason I stick to prince is so I can comfortable build up and wonderspam, but if you're warmongering the AI is retardedly stupid at all difficulty levels, they just get massive tech and production boosts at the highest levels.
The only reason I stick to prince is so I can comfortable build up and wonderspam, but if you're warmongering the AI is retardedly stupid at all difficulty levels, they just get massive tech and production boosts at the highest levels.
Actualy i did a test comparing to civ 5 on the diety level to civ 5 on prince. I made a map that consexted of 20 units, the units were balenced at least it was for me.
I strangley enough lost more units on the prince dificulty than on the diety. But neither sides had any citys (if they did im sure i would have been creamed). and im realy a noob at civ 4 and civ 5 i can only win on prince.
So when every country has only one option, war, and all sides are balenced the ai even with a noob like me will be crushed
I strangley enough lost more units on the prince dificulty than on the diety. But neither sides had any citys (if they did im sure i would have been creamed). and im realy a noob at civ 4 and civ 5 i can only win on prince.
So when every country has only one option, war, and all sides are balenced the ai even with a noob like me will be crushed
Mightion
Chieftain
did you mean Babylon?
Yeah, Babylon.
I really need to look through these guides more on how to manage happiness. Capturing luxury resources and building buildings doesn't seem to help enough.I was going to post my own reply to the person you quoted, but you pretty much nailed it.
I've beaten Civ V on Prince, King, Emperor, Immortal and Deity, and can repeat any of those at will. That said, King actually turns into a pretty satisfying game if you don't want to have to execute a focused strategy planned out from turn 1 to victory. If you're not abusing every little micro trick in the game and not planning out your win conditions from turn 1, King AIs can provide a decent challenge to your unfocused empire.
And you know what? I enjoy playing the game a lot more that way. This is how I used to play Civ 2, Civ 3 and Civ 4.
wcbarney
Know-it-all
Mightion said:
did you mean Babylon?
Mightion said:
Glad you asked; I spent about 20 minutes on Steam earlier today trying to find a DLC that I'd missed.
I've played quite a few games until now, I managed to beat my first emperor game today (also first try), but the most entertaining were some earlier games: one OCC on prince where oda took out three of my cultural allies after declaring war, one archipelago with 16 civs on king where I got to fight in modern era against modern oponents. Not to say my first game on warlord, where I had about 1000 years war against Alex and Napoleon in the classical age...
Today, with a nearly perfect national college start continued as a one city-challenge untill the first DOW, I managed to get all the important wonders, I could buy all city states since beginning of Industrial, and won domination, I had mech. inf against samurai and musketmen, no other made it past renaissance.
Today, with a nearly perfect national college start continued as a one city-challenge untill the first DOW, I managed to get all the important wonders, I could buy all city states since beginning of Industrial, and won domination, I had mech. inf against samurai and musketmen, no other made it past renaissance.
