|
I recently used nukes on free cities (i.e. not city states and not technically part of another Civ) and instantly got slapped by a emergency calling me out on it. Was pleasantly surprised. Also gently caress me the barbarians are going haywire lately.
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 09:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 22:13 |
|
|
PaybackJack posted:I think it's kind of nice that just giving the AI an impressively strong army doesn't mean they just don't go automatically conquer everything in sight. The combat AI is exploitable but it's not broken because it doesn't just roll over everything with its single death robot. Similarly, the fact that the AI is given a dozen nukes shouldn't necessitate it using them even if they're about to lose. I'd hope that even our real world leaders are smart enough to realize that dropping some nukes out of spite because you're losing is a lovely thing to do. What a weird post
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 09:50
|
|
|
When I started the video I was wondering if the AI would use their nukes on the barbarians but instead Delhi was nuked 6 times in 1 turn.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 10:16
|
|
|
PaybackJack posted:I think it's kind of nice that just giving the AI an impressively strong army doesn't mean they just don't go automatically conquer everything in sight. Yet they still declare war, so it's not just the AI being all nicey-nicey about a fair fight. It's the AI comparing military numbers and then being too thick to use the units.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 10:28
|
|
|
Should be an option to arm barbarian camps, instead of barbarians spawning with the latest tech available.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 10:29
|
|
|
PaybackJack posted:And gently caress anyone still clinging onto 1UPT being the death of the franchise. the death of the franchise is pretty obvious: look at the civ versions currently being played V and IV are nearly evenly split, and if VII isn't a huge change-up again (like V was), then it will have only a third of the playerbase
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 10:52
|
|
|
It's a bit hard to go back to 5 and its happiness system. How you can even play that game on higher difficulties is beyond me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 10:59
|
|
|
1UPT was meant to make combat more tactical and interesting than clashing doomstacks. Instead it’s completely hamstrung the war AI for two consecutive games. I don’t think it was an objectively bad decision but if Firaxis aren’t willing to put in the effort to make it work, perhaps they should revisit the issue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 11:02
|
|
|
1UPT was the death of the franchise.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 11:08
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:It's a bit hard to go back to 5 and its happiness system. Mods fix this
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 11:26
|
|
|
tbh civ 5's happiness isn't even that big of an issue. it's hard to manage in the early to early-mid game, but that's kind of the point: it's a challenge to balance expansion and growth with productivity and happiness before you really have the tools to deal with it (specific wonders, buildings other than coliseums, solid trading partners, powerful late-game policies, etc). you can have a dozen cities and still have happiness at a net positive--and even at the highest approval rating out of all players--if you know what you're doing. the REAL misstep 5 makes with its anti-expansionist design philosophy is increasing your culture and science quotas by a larger percent than the city itself can ever produce against
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 11:33
|
|
|
Global happiness in Civ 5 was a lot easier to deal with than housing in Civ 6 Which is another thing the AI cant handle at all and thats why they will have most of their cities under 10 pops even late game
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 11:39
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:Global happiness in Civ 5 was a lot easier to deal with than housing in Civ 6 Can't say that's been my experience. Insufficient housing doesn't spawn insurgents and I've definitely seen AI cities with 10+ pop. Then again I'm a baby so "late game" is probably around turn 150 or so to a normal player.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 11:46
|
|
|
if your happiness in 5 is ever low enough to spawn rebel units then you really really hosed up somewhere. you have to really work hard to make that happen, like capturing five cities at once and occupying them instead of puppetting i say this as someone with a lot of experience with that
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 11:48
|
|
|
I've never had cities rebel or even dip in the double digits in unhappiness, but it is annoying to maintain happiness nonetheless and it can very easily drop, especially at the world congress. And having multiple of a single type of luxury not extend beyond 4 pop is some straight up BS. I really miss puppeting though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 11:56
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:if your happiness in 5 is ever low enough to spawn rebel units then you really really hosed up somewhere. you have to really work hard to make that happen, like capturing five cities at once and occupying them instead of puppetting Yeah, I dint even remembred that was a feature Avirosb posted:Can't say that's been my experience. Sure, 1 or 2. In my experience (around a dozen games on kind and prince, some on emperor), late game, when I get to launch the satellite, I always check their cities against mine: I will usually have my main cities over 20 (sometimes a few over 30), and most if not all other cities over 10 pops. The AI will have like a 10-12 cities, 1 or 2 above 10 pops, usually the capitol, and all the others under it. Im not sure, but I think is housing. To keep growing you need to manage housing smartly, specially you need to develop your tiles with that in mind. The AI wont even develop most of their tiles
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 11:57
|
|
|
Wow, I completely forgot about puppeting in Civ5.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 12:00
|
|
|
John F Bennett posted:Wow, I completely forgot about puppeting in Civ5. spoken like a man who's never played as loving VENICE
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 12:12
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:I've never had cities rebel or even dip in the double digits in unhappiness, but it is annoying to maintain happiness nonetheless and it can very easily drop, especially at the world congress. I wish they went back to the per-city happiness system in Civ4. There was nothing wrong with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 12:23
|
|
|
Kassad posted:I wish they went back to the per-city happiness system in Civ4. There was nothing wrong with it. Arent Civ 6 amenities kinda like it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 12:24
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:Arent Civ 6 amenities kinda like it? amenities are like an unholy fusion of the worst parts of civ 4's per-city happiness and the worst parts of civ 5's global happiness, where you only get the effect of one copy of an amenity throughout your entire empire, applied to the one city that has the lowest happiness score
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 12:27
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:Arent Civ 6 amenities kinda like it? It's too pointlessly complex and obscure in comparison. In Civ4, a luxury resource would just give 1 point of happiness to all cities as long as it was connected (extra instances were for trading away, same as in civ6), while each citizen would increase a city's unhappiness by 1 point. If a city had at least as many happiness points than unhappiness points, then it was happy. That was it. It wasn't just about population and resources since you could have unhappiness or happiness points coming from buildings, some civics, religion, being at war for too long and a few other things. But the main point is that it was easy to read.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 12:54
|
|
|
Wait until you hear about the happiness system in Vox Populi  (I still like it)
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 13:16
|
|
|
My biggest gripe with happiness in Civ 5 was that you could do everything right but it wouldn't work against the AI since the game gave huge bonus happiness to the AI. So what would NORMALLY be a good strategy to cause city flipping or a big advantage in production was negated by the massive bonuses the AI got. It just felt like an anchor tied around the neck of the player in some kind of Harrison Bergeron mandated competition. I don't know why they don't just look at systems like the Paradox games and bring in some form of vassalization. IT seems so obvious.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 13:24
|
|
|
Glasses Optional posted:My biggest gripe with happiness in Civ 5 was that you could do everything right but it wouldn't work against the AI since the game gave huge bonus happiness to the AI. lol you're telling me brah. last game i was playing as boudicca i isolated everyone onto lovely island, desert, and tundra cities with impossibly large populations that, thanks to the by-era bonus happiness inflation, they were floating in the high 40s despite having no trade routes, no luxuries, no CSes, and not even ideologies
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 13:54
|
|
|
Does anyone else make any "stories" of these nations I their heads? Like you see how civilizations in your game progress and interact with one another and go all Dark Souls and fill in the gaps with a grandiose story your head? Or am I just weird?
punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 18:24 on Oct 25, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 18:19
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Does anyone else make any "stories" of these nations I their heads? Like you see how civilizations in your game progress and interact with one another and go all Dark Souls and fill in the gaps with a grandiose your head? Or am I just weird? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 18:21
|
|
|
Civ 5's biggest issue (okay, second biggest issue cause 1UPT is still the worst and is the Death Of The Franchise) is that it completely forgot one of the Xs in 4X and made turtling on 4 cities the strongest and most efficient form of empire building for pretty much every situation and that stops being fun very quickly. You end up envying the AI because with all their inherent bonuses they get spamming cities is actually just as good for them as choosing to go tall on very few cities. For all of Civ 6's faults (and there are many) the fact that this playstyle is dead and buried forever is a strictly positive change. Super Jay Mann fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Oct 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 18:38
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:spoken like a man who's never played as loving VENICE Actually, Venice was my favourite civ to play as! I just forgot about everything Civ 5 even though I have 1200 hours played according to Steam. Been playing a lot of Civ 4 which also has puppets but that's completely different and more fun.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 18:41
|
|
|
Super Jay Mann posted:Civ 5's biggest issue (okay, second biggest issue cause 1UPT is still the worst and is the Death Of The Franchise) is that it completely forgot one of the Xs in 4X and made turtling on 4 cities the strongest and most efficient form of empire building for pretty much every situation and that stops being fun very quickly. You end up envying the AI because with all their inherent bonuses they get spamming cities is actually just as good for them as choosing to go tall on very few cieis.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 21:02
|
|
|
you guys mean to tell me they made two expansions for this game and no improvements to the AI? jesus
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 21:53
|
|
|
Arrrthritis posted:you guys mean to tell me they made two expansions for this game and no improvements to the AI? They made five sequels with no improvements to the AI 
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 22:04
|
|
|
Arrrthritis posted:you guys mean to tell me they made two expansions for this game and no improvements to the AI? Didn't Firaxis say they wanted the AI to play to win the game in Civ 5 and 6? In 4 you could have actual alliances with AIs that wouldn't immediately back stab you if you got too far ahead. This makes it even worse that the AI is horrendous. I sometimes wonder if Civ 6's AI is also a performance problem because it must move every unit it has on every turn and tries to get as many units as possible. The issue with an AI that "plays to win" is you either have to design a good AI or design a game that an AI can more easily play, Civ 5 and 6 did neither of these things and 6 made it even worse with districts and housing. The easy solution would be to ditch their entire religion system (the AI over indexes on it) and remove ranged attacks as a concept. We know the AI does not use ranged attacks effectively and can't even use aircraft effectively. Keep the 1UPT in concept, but not in practice, by allowing you to make combined armies (e.g. Warrior + Slinger) with techs to let you make larger armies. Aircraft would be a multiplier on battles fought in their operation range, so bombers would reduce defense if you fight in range and fighers would reduce the effectiveness of bombers and other fighters. The nuclear weapon issue is bad from a game play perspective too, because it shows the AI's complete inability to use a tool. Nuking the same city, that it can not even take, 6 times in a row is just bad. This also flies against the trying to win goal. In Civ nukes aren't even all that terrible of weapons, you already kill millions when you invade a city without nukes and fallout is only an extremely temporary issue. Trying to bring real world issues with nukes when saying the AI's use of them (or lack thereof) is a bad comparison. If I could get an updated Civ 4 with QoL improvements I'd rather play that than 5 or 6. I really don't expect them to fix anything when they release Civ 7, because the average player doesn't care that the AI is unable to play the game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 22:18
|
|
|
Does the AI in Civ 6 even have personalities outside of their agendas that mostly just decide whether they like you or not? I know in Civ 4, each civ leader had crafted personalities that decided how much they'd demand tribute, how good your relations need to be before they let you open borders or declare war on you, how frequently they built units and pursued wonders, how much they valued shared/different religions, which techs they tended to research first, and even a "peace weight" that determined how friendly/antagonistic they'd be towards other AIs. In Civ 6, I can't help but feel that the personalities are pretty much the same outside of what their civ/leader abilities let them do and sometimes agendas might force them to like wonders or faith or something else random and possibly out of character for that leader.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2019 22:49
|
|
|
Maguoob posted:Didn't Firaxis say they wanted the AI to play to win the game in Civ 5 and 6? In 4 you could have actual alliances with AIs that wouldn't immediately back stab you if you got too far ahead. This makes it even worse that the AI is horrendous. I sometimes wonder if Civ 6's AI is also a performance problem because it must move every unit it has on every turn and tries to get as many units as possible. reminder that 5 and 6 have "chaos timers" where the AI will just randomly decide to gently caress with you or one of their allies if they haven't declared war on or backstabbed anyone in 90 turns or so, depending on game speed it's real bad
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2019 00:46
|
|
|
Bluff Buster posted:Does the AI in Civ 6 even have personalities outside of their agendas that mostly just decide whether they like you or not? I know in Civ 4, each civ leader had crafted personalities that decided how much they'd demand tribute, how good your relations need to be before they let you open borders or declare war on you, how frequently they built units and pursued wonders, how much they valued shared/different religions, which techs they tended to research first, and even a "peace weight" that determined how friendly/antagonistic they'd be towards other AIs. In Civ 6, I can't help but feel that the personalities are pretty much the same outside of what their civ/leader abilities let them do and sometimes agendas might force them to like wonders or faith or something else random and possibly out of character for that leader. They had all of those in Civ V, but warmonger penalties were so massive that even Genghis Khan or Napoleon were unlikely to do more than give you the stinkeye if you ever took another capital. Friendships and alliances could fall apart for other reasons, but mostly when AIs started hating each other and wanted you to pick a side, which is fair from a design perspective. In Civ VI, every AI has the exact same diplomatic approach outside of whatever is coded into their agendas. Everyone is equally likely to declare a surprise war of opportunity or decide to break all diplomatic ties because you're their juiciest target and they want to declare war on you a couple turns down the road, from John Curtin to Genghis Khan. The AI has a preference for civs they dislike which you can sway depending on their agenda, but all of them like juicy targets and only Gandhi, Wilfrid Laurier and Robert the Bruce are hard coded to avoid specific wars. They all do have different infrastructure preferences, but it's hard to notice since the AI is terrible at infrastructure and grossly overvalues holy sites in the classical era.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2019 09:41
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:reminder that 5 and 6 have "chaos timers" where the AI will just randomly decide to gently caress with you or one of their allies if they haven't declared war on or backstabbed anyone in 90 turns or so, depending on game speed There's not a  big enough for this. That's the opposite of "playing to win".Still, 1UPT isn't the death of the franchise, an AI that can't deal with it is. Understandably, most people then go with the snappier phrase that is technically wrong but frankly not inaccurate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2019 10:47
|
|
|
The franchise isn't actually dead, so nothing is the death of the franchise It might be on a decline, at most I'd never heard of that "chaos timer" thing though, you have a source for that? Not disbelieving it but I wanna know how people found out, and how it's coded in. It sounds awful.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2019 12:19
|
|
|
I more or less hope that Humankind turns out to be good and enough of a competitor to challenge Firaxis to up their game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2019 12:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 22:13 |
|
|
Yeah even with the agendas individual civs seems to not have much of a personality at all The agendas too are mostly meaningless, they liking or disliking you for an arbitrary reason with little consequence, other them they sending you annoying complains edit: thinking about it, I want to be able to yell at the AI for dumb unfair reasons too. "hey montezuma I see you dont have any submarines. I despise you, you pathetic fool" Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 13:16 on Oct 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2019 13:04
|
|