|
Chomp8645 posted:I took it that way because you are constantly and fervently white knighting the game against anyone who criticizes it.  there are things to focus on that are wrong with the game without making things up about it. everyone acts like their singular pet peeve is the single most important issue, or that a leader hating you one turn and loving you the next hasn't been happening in civ for 25 years
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:11 |
|
|
Antti posted:
I'm in love with the cocoa. I'm in love with the cocoa. e: The game isn't bad which means it is the best Civilization game they have developed in the last 10 years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
Efexeye posted:
There are games where you can form meaningful diplomatic relationships with the AIs, as though Civ having had this problem for decades makes it OK, let me guess, the expansions will fix it, right, or is it Civ 7 that will fix it? Allied Civ: "Hey let's go to war on my enemy" Allied Civ: Denounces you for warmongering
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Watching a Crossbowman being gunned down by a chopper is suitably brutal. Though one thing that needs serious work is the spy interface. It's so drat clunky and terrible to use, and it takes way to long to assign a spy. Plus you need to do it every so often! I prefer watching a Conquistador take a Panzershrek to the face.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
Brendan Rodgers posted:There are games where you can form meaningful diplomatic relationships with the AIs, as though Civ having had this problem for decades makes it OK, let me guess, the expansions will fix it, right, or is it Civ 7 that will fix it? They will never fix it because 'AI' is impossible as the current state of technology stands. All they can do is write decision trees, yes? Civ never has and never will have 'good' AI. edit: that's why harder difficulties are just ramping up the AI civ's material advantage. boar guy fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Oct 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
Gentlemen, we just don't have the technology.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
Efexeye posted:They will never fix it because 'AI' is impossible as the current state of technology stands. All they can do is write decision trees, yes? Civ never has and never will have 'good' AI. The matrix prequels were actually about developing an AI intelligent enough that it wouldn't constantly enter battles flagged "decisive defeat"
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Endless Legend and Stellaris must have Google Deep Mind embedded into their systems, it takes cutting edge AI tech to have an AI actually fight a war with you and send units to help you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:17
|
|
|
Brendan Rodgers posted:Gentlemen, we just don't have the technology. learn python and mod up a dope AI homie- it didn't happen for the previous two games with mod support either. I just dunno how it'd be possible to have an AI make decisions and convey those decisions in a way that makes sense, when some soldier from a civ you haven't met yet winning a battle against a barb somewhere on a continent you haven't discovered tips the decision making algo .0001% in one direction, cascading down the line and now victoria hates you because the military ratio is unfavorable, or something?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
Brendan Rodgers posted:There are games where you can form meaningful diplomatic relationships with the AIs, as though Civ having had this problem for decades makes it OK, let me guess, the expansions will fix it, right, or is it Civ 7 that will fix it? The problem is that diplomacy is a weird thing to have in a game where everyone is a player trying to win. Diplomacy is a holdover from when Civ was Sid Meier's World History Simulator, and diplomacy was there because it wouldn't have felt like history without it. Now that Civ is hyper board gamey, diplomacy feels tacked-on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
crusader kings 2 passes the turing test by that abysmal standard
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:I took it that way because you are constantly and fervently white knighting the game against anyone who criticizes it. Dude, Efexeye does not white-knight for BE. That job falls to Cythereal and me. And as one of BE's white knights: BE's UI had an absolutely unforgivable color scheme (white/light grey lettering on dark grey background) and information was put in weird places but it had a better UI than VI. VI's UI is horribly bad in places because it hides info from you: half of the time you can find it by standing on one hand and touching your nose with your tongue by looking crosseyed, the other half it just isn't there in the game (like how luxury amenities and district costs work). That being said, the mechanics in VI are above and beyond those in BE. The game is fun, it's reasonably balanced-ish. It does need rough edges and splinters smoothed out in about a hundred places. With any luck we should be getting patches that start smoothing the edges soon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
People tend to get into AI arguments in video games while not fully understanding that comprehensive AI is loving difficult. It always sounds easier than it ACTUALLY is to accomplish, and that's even for companies that have insane budgets. There's a reason bots have become a rare feature in most modern games: they're loving insanely hard to program and that takes a LOT of money. Firaxis is not the kind of company that has the capital to produce insanely sophisticated AI. That's the simple truth of the issue. They can eventually find ways to make it RESPECTABLE, mind you (BNW had some relatable and understandable leaders who, while often fickle, would more often than not react to things how you'd expect them to.) Civ's got an even bigger problem in this arena in that it's not just responding to you the player, but to every other AI civ in the game, as well. To get a fully realistic interpretation of the interactions involved in a large game of Civ would likely cause your processor to spew smoke. That's not to say that there aren't flaws and things that Civ has fixed in the past, but it's worth noting a lot of the issue here really IS the lack of tech. It's also equally a lack of talent, so you know  My big issue with the AI in 6 so far is the Agenda System. On paper (and how it was introduced to us), this sounds loving brilliant. You always know how certain Civs are going to react to your presence in the game. That's great! The problems come up with two things: 1) The Hidden Agenda. This thing will likely become a thorn in your side. It is quite possible to deduce these on your own fairly early in the game, but they can often be a tipping point in early relationships, when you have NO WAY of dealing with them. 2) THERE'S NO GRACE PERIOD! The stories of the Kongo getting pissed off at you for not spreading your religion the turn you found it are not a myth. The civs will enforce these agendas on their perception of you immediately from the start of the game, meaning you're going to piss a lot of them off with no recourse at all. Combined with the lack of information provided by the UI and the seriously gutted Diplomacy screen and this poo poo can get even more obnoxious than release Civ V.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
Normal Adult Human posted:crusader kings 2 passes the turing test by that abysmal standard CK2 won't be released until shortly after the singularity when an AGI makes it for us.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
Antti posted:
 Get Chichen Itza ASAP, too. Brendan Rodgers posted:There are games where you can form meaningful diplomatic relationships with the AIs, as though Civ having had this problem for decades makes it OK, let me guess, the expansions will fix it, right, or is it Civ 7 that will fix it? Civ should really take more leaves from CK2/EU4's book and have a relationship modifier. In those games, it ranges from -200 (despises you with a dark burning fury) to -100 (hates you) to +100 (likes you) to +200 (best buddy allies 4 lyfe and/or loyal vassal state), and you can give gifts, join in wars, or use some of your limited diplomatic resources to boost it with a given nation. More importantly, you can see this number and every modifier that applies to it at all times, and any decision you make that will change it shows you how much it will do so. In those games, just participating in wars doesn't affect your relationship with other countries. Instead, you get penalties based on how much stuff you take in the course of a war, and they only apply in full to your relationship with countries that logically would hate you for it. For example, if you're a Spanish country and you go kicking the poo poo out of all the Muslim countries in North Africa to take their stuff, you'll get relationship penalties with those countries, but none with other European countries (and you could well get bonuses instead if you, for example, give some land or gold from the victory to your European allies to thank them for joining in).
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:Dude, Efexeye does not white-knight for BE. That job falls to Cythereal and me. i think he meant i'm white knighting for VI but it's all good, just people discussin' stuff in a discussion forum also i really really wanted to like BE but man. bad game is/was bad. the first civ ever i didnt buy the expansions for.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
I think VI currently has more exploits than launch BE had, and they're more gamebreaking. Disregarding those however the balance isn't nearly as out of whack as release BE trade routes were. The UI is an abomination though and worse than launch BE's already bad UI.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
This is not definitive, but it looks like the AI's relationship status with you is actually based on an invisible number. The modifiers you see when you check your relationship are actually the per turn adjustments to this invisible number, not your current standing with them. This would be a +12 per turn modifier, so assuming no changes, eventually that Neutral status should improve to Friendly. How many turns? Hell if I know. The Warmonger penalty naturally decays at a rate of like +1 per turn (or was that every other turn), up to 0, but in the meantime you're losing some big points every turn if you can't offset them. If you can build up a healthy surplus before taking a warmonger penalty hit, it'll be easier to keep out of the red. And conversely, if a civ has racked up a lot of negative modifiers, it'll be hard to dig yourself out of the hole even if you manage to finagle a positive modifier. Code seems to support it- there are "RelationshipLevel" values like 33 for Unfriendly and 66 for Friendly, and "DiplomaticYieldBonus" values attached to various states. Probably not absolute values and just percentages of whatever that magic diplomatic number is instead. An otherwise neutral civ with a static total modifier can be brought to friendly over time by giving them gifts every so often; "Favorable Trade" modifier goes down by +2 every turn, but by renewing whenever it runs out, eventually they'll tick over. There's often a first impression bonus or modifier; if it's negative, it's like -5 and can make a newly met civ start to hate you even if nothing else you do gives a penalty, and your bonuses get reduced at lower diplomatic states, so one take away is to try and always set up a delegation as soon as you meet if possible, before their opinion decays and they won't accept the deal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
Roadie posted:
Working on it! The game feels like a formality at this point to be honest, I'm absolutely crushing it on every metric thanks to this kind of nonsense:  Districts I build yield 5-8 of gold/culture/science just from adjacency.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
Hogama posted:This is not definitive, but it looks like the AI's relationship status with you is actually based on an invisible number. The modifiers you see when you check your relationship are actually the per turn adjustments to this invisible number, not your current standing with them. ???????????????? Why would they do it like this and not tell you about it? What determines first impression by the way?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
Mandatory Assembly posted:The problem is that diplomacy is a weird thing to have in a game where everyone is a player trying to win. This right here is exactly the problem. There isn't a single decision in the game that isn't based around winning. Even religion which was originally a tool to allow you to win harder, has become adversarial because it's a win condition. If everything you do directly and solely contributes to a winning scenario, diplomacy has no point- its merely a gage of how you're doing according to arbitrarily assigned parameters. If religious victory were not an option, if trade provided things for both parties, I think a lot of the issues with the AI would be in a state where they could be cleaned up. As it stands, because every system in place demands competition, there is nothing for the AI to do but compete. It essentially waiting for an excuse to attack or denounce or harm you, because there's no system by which alliances are ever beneficial. So it sits like a toad building warriors for all of history because why wouldn't you, if all you cared about was one guy not winning? Religion shouldn't be a victory type. There should be heavier penalties for pissing off a trading partner. Cooperative bonuses would go a long way towards creating an AI that isn't binarily aggressive or waiting to become aggressive, and will like you for more reasons than "I do what you say and give you stuff"
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
Smol posted:Some of you guys might be interested in this: Sid is lovely, but he's usually a pretty boring interview. But I'll listen to it anyway, of course, when part 2 is out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:I prefer watching a Conquistador take a Panzershrek to the face. I like the details in unit destruction in this, the horses running away and such.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
Well, i lost (gave up). Pericles, protector of the city states realized everyone apparently hates the city states except for him On to the Scyths and exploits. Hopefully this game will be titled Revenge of The Scyth
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:What determines first impression by the way? I suspect it's just a set bonus/penalty best on what they thought one leader would think of another if they ever met.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
FisheyStix posted:Religion shouldn't be a victory type. There should be heavier penalties for pissing off a trading partner. Cooperative bonuses would go a long way towards creating an AI that isn't binarily aggressive or waiting to become aggressive, and will like you for more reasons than "I do what you say and give you stuff" It doesn't help that alliances and such don't appear to work. I was allied with my girlfriend, it was a defensive alliance, America declared war with me out of nowhere. She didn't get the option to join in at all, it just pretended she didn't exist. And then you have to refresh the stupid thing every 30 turns.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Antti posted:
What the gently caress, I just started a game as Brazil last night and I'm in the middle of a massive plain of grassland with 2 rainforest tiles not near each other.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
Is there some way to retrieve your seed once the game has started? I hosed up some stuff but I like my start spot a lot
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
Playing as Rome on King, Germany got all mad because I am friend to all city states and he attacked...with his ancient tech army while I had seasoned Legions and crossbows. On the bright side, he did sue for peace once I got within range of his cities, even though I had no siege weapons. I am pleased that I was not forced to utterly destroy him like in previous Civs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Mac question: how do I move the game from my laptop screen to my external monitor? Running in windowed mode and dragging it doesn't work, and full screen just stays on my laptop. Any ideas?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
nevermind im dumb
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
The long-standing tradition of complaining that the AI in civ games is trying to win instead of roleplay as the "essence of tokyo circa 1960" or whatever is the funniest thing and basically describes the problem with what people want from CIV. It must work as a game first or all of the fancy roleplay and historical docudramas you make in your head about washington's archers taking down hammurabi aren't going to be engaging for anyone who has played a game before in their lives. If you want to write alternate history fanfic there are many other places to do so. The problem with the AI in this game is not that it cheats or that it tries to win, but that it must cheat so horrendously in order to barely do anything with its gigantic armies. It's hard and processor intensive to make an AI simulate good human play, but it should be able to move its pieces in such a way that 2 archers can't hold off 8 or so charioteers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
^^^It's not even that the AI is bad at winning, that is expected, it's that it's also obviously stupid, inconsistent, and annoying.Brendan Rodgers posted:Gentlemen, we just don't have the technology. I think that with a concentrated effort Firaxis might just be able to make breakthroughs in the fields of: Requiring a bigger difference in score between telling the player they are poo poo at something and telling them they are awesome at it. AND/OR Putting an anti-spam cooldown on diplomatic feels talk. Maybe even revolutionary advances such as: Reacting differently to wars they asked you to start vs wars they didn't ask you to start. AND Checking your GPT rather than your saved gold before mocking you for being poor. The AI doesn't actually need to be good to be fun to play with, it just needs to not keep making GBS threads in its hand and then shoving it in your face. Darkrenown fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Oct 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
I'm sorry it's just not possible, we would need quantum computing, and a massive increase in our understanding of what intelligence itself actually is, to even start on this problem.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
Inspector_666 posted:What the gently caress, I just started a game as Brazil last night and I'm in the middle of a massive plain of grassland with 2 rainforest tiles not near each other. My first Brazil start was like that, I decided to start a new game since I figured it couldn't possibly be worse. It's a Huge Inland Sea map, everything else is normal. Is there a way for me to find the RNG seed value after generating a game? Oh and Chichen Itza is online:  Next up: doubling adjacency bonuses via policies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Efexeye posted:They will never fix it because 'AI' is impossible as the current state of technology stands. All they can do is write decision trees, yes? Civ never has and never will have 'good' AI. LOL if you think your own brain doesn't heavily rely on decision trees.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Every time someone says that AI can never be any good and that losing wars despite having 5x your strength is Just The Way Things Are I imagine an Amplitude Studios employee frantically waving and hollering in the background.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
You guys do realize they don't actually need smarter AI, just better AI design and better game systems for interacting with other countries in general. Look at paradox games, warhammer total war, and endless legend. None of those companies have magical AI technology, just a better designed game system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:11 |
|
|
Am I the only one who's reasonably pleased with how the AI works? It's not amazing, but definitely improved from Civ 5. Maybe there should be a toggle to disable hidden agendas, but everything worked out fine in my one game so far.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 20:00
|
|
