Tweet
The only reason anyone complains is because they don't know about certain ai advantages. If the developer had just told everyone what all the advantages are, there would be no problem. I think we have established that the manual doesn't reveal all the ai advantages.
-
-
They HAVE documented it and they HAVE made it public.Originally posted by Tiberius
But then they (Firaxis) should document this and make it public.
No one would complain (or very few) that the AI starts with an extra warrior, if the purpose is clearly defined.
When they say that human and the AI are even on Noble, and then we find out that the AI gets free units, pays less maintenance and so on, I am not surprised that people are upset.
How hard is it to read a manual?
I can't quote from it, since my manual is dutch (
). But on the page where it lists the effects of difficulty it clearly says so. It does indeed say that on noble AI and human are equal, but they are talking about speed of building and teching etc. Directly below that the manual clearly states AI gets starting bonusses.
On higher difficulty levels, barbarians are also stronger, you can't get shettlers or workers from villages, and your cities have less starting hapiness and health, to name a few effects.
Realisticly, humans have a big edge with starting. If you don't like your starting position, or the first few moves turn out to go wrong, you just restart. The AI doesn't have that luxury. No surprise they get some other bonusses to compensate.Comment
-
Yeah? Read it again. The manual talks about lower difficulty levels, Noble and higher difficulty levels. It describes Noble the level where the AI plays under the same conditions as the human players, and then later talks about AI advanteges on higher difficulty levels. Which clearly sounds as "above Noble", if you read the whole thing.Originally posted by Diadem
They HAVE documented it and they HAVE made it public.
How hard is it to read a manual?
I can't quote from it, since my manual is dutch ( ). But on the page where it lists the effects of difficulty it clearly says so. It does indeed say that on noble AI and human are equal, but they are talking about speed of building and teching etc. Directly below that the manual clearly states AI gets starting bonusses.
Sorry, I didn't mean to be rude, but this is what the manual says.
Most people complain because Firaxis acclaimed the new AI as being competitive and much better than the previous one, and it turns out that the AI has to rely on "cheating" even on lower difficulty levels. This sounds very bad especially after they praised it on how good it is.
Now, I don't really care that the AI gets some help to be competitive (except for paying less maintenance for units, which I dislike), though I would prefer to have an "intelligent", and not a cheating AI. I realize that it isveryextremly difficult to achieve something like this, but in the end the whole thing still leaves a bad taste in my mouth."The only way to avoid being miserable is not to have enough leisure to wonder whether you are happy or not. "
--George Bernard Shaw
A fast word about oral contraception. I asked a girl to go to bed with me and she said "no".
--Woody AllenComment
-
No, many ai advantages are not documented in the manual. For example the reduced ai maintanence, the 10 shield production bonus, and others. Even the manual doesn't specifically say what the ai gets on what level. Why has nobody complained about the fact that the ai gets a free settler on deity? Because it WAS documented in the manual. If the manual just set everything out, nobody would be complaining.Originally posted by Diadem
They HAVE documented it and they HAVE made it public.
How hard is it to read a manual?Comment
-
If the manual did point everything out though, people would just exploit the AI rather than try to play the game. It does allow you attain a higher score, but it kills the fun of the game.Comment
-
Just a quick note: Warriors cost 15 hammers, not 20 as O.P. stated...Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiaturComment
-
Actually u can delete the warrior without deleting the city in the world editor.
Just set player to the AI, select the unit and RIGHT click on the warrior. This will remove the AI warrior,Comment
-
But it is....Originally posted by Diplomatic
So? Yes people will scream no matter what. I don't really see how pointing out an alternative is really that funny...
IT IS!!!
Isn't your alternative suggestion cheating too?
See...
YOU complained about cheating, AND THEN offer your own cheating solution!!!
Silly!!!Comment
-
...Originally posted by hoeleng
Actually u can delete the warrior without deleting the city in the world editor.
Just set player to the AI, select the unit and RIGHT click on the warrior. This will remove the AI warrior,
you can do that?
Comment
-
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!Originally posted by Kuciwalker
...
you can do that?
Kuciwalker, you kill me!"Let your plans be dark and as impenetratable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt." - Sun TzuComment
-
Originally posted by Aileron
There have been a lot of other threads on why making good AI is hard, and why AI needs to get bonuses/cheats, and about the bonuses/cheats that the human gets on low levels too, etc...*but* I also think Firaxis could have been more explicit in their public comments, and the little blurb on page whatever of the manual.
They could have just said something like: We think Noble gives the most balanced game play human vs. AI, but the AI does get bonuses on every difficulty level. We felt this was necessary for these reasons: xxxx (to prevent AI from being wiped-out early, compensate for weakness here or there, whatever, I don't know what their reasons were. I'm sure they debated long and hard over them, and thought their final decisions were good, but it would be nice to know their reasoning).
Exactly
Fireaxians several times highlighted the fact that some dramatic civ III cheats are no longer present while promoting the game here and there so they removed civs knowing in advance resources,till now,well done, they recognized AI kiddy cheating makes customers really upset.
Now it has been discovered the way that medium and higher levels cheats maybe in a heavier way than civ III , and this hasn't been promoted in the marketing interviews,why ??
GunterComment
-
I didn't complain about cheating. You sure love those exclamation marks though, so I hope you're enjoying yourself.Originally posted by rockhopper
But it is....
IT IS!!!
Isn't your alternative suggestion cheating too?
See...
YOU complained about cheating, AND THEN offer your own cheating solution!!!
Silly!!!Comment
-
Argh matey, ye be splitting hairs, har.Originally posted by Diplomatic
I didn't complain about cheating. You sure love those exclamation marks though, so I hope you're enjoying yourself.
You say cheating, I say tool for suspension of disbelief required by any gamer to sufficiently enjoy any game.
And we always enjoys ourselves, yes we do.
Not in that way, ya perv.
This posting has been deemed Exclamation-Point-Free by Internet grammar lawyers eveywhere.Comment
-
I don't see why the AI needs warriors early anyway except to protect against the human.. Animals are your only opponents for the first thousand years or whatever and they don't go inside cultural boundries at all.~I like eggs.~Comment
-
This is the Firaxis response to the civ III human-smash tactic of conquering the starting continent in first turns.Originally posted by ghen
I don't see why the AI needs warriors early anyway except to protect against the human.. Animals are your only opponents for the first thousand years or whatever and they don't go inside cultural boundries at all.
I would have thought something more classy than such a cheat ...
GunterComment
Comment