Is it just me or is the game way harder after the patch?

[astreeter]

I just purchased this game a couple of weeks ago and since then I have played and won a few games on Noble difficulty. My basic strategy usually was to expand as much as possible at the beginning of the game. Usually worked pretty well - I could get about a dozen or more cities built while the AI factions could only get about 4 to 8 each. This is the only way I could seem to stay ahead technologically so I could win, because somehow even the factions with only 4 cities often managed to stay just a few turns behind me in the space race. This was all before I installed any patches, so version 1.00.

Today I just installed the 1.09 patch, and I noticed something a little different - even on Noble difficulty the other factions all seem to be able to expand and build in the beginning of the game way faster than I now can - like in my latest game playing as the Russians by 550 BC I was just founding my 4th city, while the neighboring Mali already had 8 cities, and the nearest one to my territory had 3 Axemen, 3 Spearmen, and 2 Archers guarding it. During that time I had only managed to produce 1 Archer in each of my cities.

By 550 BC I am ranked 5th out of the six empires I've encountered. Previously on Noble difficulty I could easily stay ranked first from the beginning of the game.

So after the patch am I to understand that the AI gets significant bonuses now, even on Noble difficulty? If so I will have to refine my strategies.

[Sirian]

Are you certain you were playing Noble? Could you have selected another level by mistake?

I've played a few turn in to RBCiv Epic One (on Prince) and not noticed the AIs performing any better. What you see in the patch notes is what has changed, and that's it, so there shouldn't be any surprises.


- Sirian

[soztabak]

i feel the same. on version 1.00 i managed to outrun AI on prince and monarch difficulty pretty easily, but now i can barely win on noble difficulty. they several times crushed me on even prince. i thought i was improving my skills but now i think ai improves his/her skills faster )

[Fried-Psitalon]

Originally posted by Sirian
Are you certain you were playing Noble? Could you have selected another level by mistake?

I've played a few turn in to RBCiv Epic One (on Prince) and not noticed the AIs performing any better. What you see in the patch notes is what has changed, and that's it, so there shouldn't be any surprises.


- Sirian

Sirian- I believe the notes said something about the worker AI being improved? Perhaps he is playing a game style such that this would have a chance to play into the AI's overall performance more significantly.

[Stumple]

I've played on Noble since getting the game as that, I thought, was about the level where playing against AI was balanced & therefore a good place to learn. I have been playing with no tech trade option & no Spaceship victory. Since the patch I've noticed the AI getting ahead early on & staying a few techs ahead. One of the AI then seems to break away & get 3/400 ahead by 1900 or so. As I've kept to the same gamestyle as a trial, before & after patching, I have to assume the AI is being helped along more than previously.

[Cordelayne]

Well, I've continued to play mainly at Noble level since the patch, and I've won (or been way ahead) in every game. I think it's because I'm getting to know the game balance more instinctively, and I'm planning to move up a couple of levels on my next game. Incidentally, I always play with tech trading turned off, which enables me to stay ahead on tech, at least for most favored paths (for instance, I always make a beeline for Plastics to get the Three Gorges Dam, the best wonder).

[Sirian]

Originally posted by Fried-Psitalon

Sirian- I believe the notes said something about the worker AI being improved? Perhaps he is playing a game style such that this would have a chance to play into the AI's overall performance more significantly.

That's possible. If the AI building a few more farms has a major impact on getting them to higher populations and productivity, at the cost of some (often unused) extra cottages, then who knows. Maybe it did make a leap.

I think it will take more time to tell, though. Lot of maps, lot of civs, traits, and strategic situations to check.


Epic One is on Prince and it's probably a bit tougher than I had in mind when I set it up. But that's good. If the AI is even stronger now, so much the better.

I think it's too soon to tell if that's the case, though.


- Sirian

[Dis]

I simply cannot win a noble level game anymore, and it's really pissing me off. I'm seriously considering killing myself. I just cannot accept the fact that a computer is smarter than I am. I can't believe I'm losing when the odds are supposed to be even. What the hell am I doing wrong? I used to be able to beat noble. I can't figure out what I'm doing differently.

My last game I lost by 59 points. I was ahead by at least 100 points the entire second half of the game. And suddenly china overpasses Mansi Musa and myself to take the lead and win the game within the last 40 turns. WTF!

This is really pissing me off because I know I had a huge tech lead! I was the first to complete the apollo program. And the Apollo program and spaceship parts are way to expensive. The AI's didn't even finish the apollo program until 2035. Although amazingly they were able to complete severla casings in 15 turns. I didn't even bother building spaceship parts since there was no hope of victory.

[astreeter]

OK, I continued playing until about 1500 AD and I managed to claw my way into second place scorewise after Mali - they are above 1500 and I am at 1100. I have the most cities and the highest population. It looks like I am in second place in tech level too after Mali. But the only way I was able to get this far was to completely ignore building any military units - I am dead last in army size, and there is no way that I am going to be able to take even 1 city from the last place empire before the end of the game, because even they have an army over 3 times the size of mine. Usually (pre-patch) by this time in the game I have eradicated at least one other empire.

And yes I checked the settings and I am on Noble; playing on a Standard Size Terra map, with default rules. In the world builder I checked the "new world" and even the Barbarians appear to be doing almost as good as I am - they have 5 cities size 12 and over.

I am not completely sure this is all due to a change in the AI after the patch - I checked my old save games and this is by far the lowest score I have had by 1500 AD. I did have kind of a poor starting position, but not that bad. A good part of the low score is my being able to build only 1 wonder to this point - usually I build well over half the available wonders in a game.

From further examination of my old save games, here is one theory of what has changed - the AI empires are much friendlier to each other than they were before the patch - they never declare war on each other, and they seem to trade almost all of their technologies with each other as soon as they research them. This is evidenced by their being much less variance between the high and low scores of the AI empires than pre-patch, and they seem to build wonders in an even distribution - as if they start them at the same time because they have the same techs. Even the last place empire gets to build some wonders - that never happened in a game before that I witnessed. They also seem to propose tech trades with me much more than they used to (and just demand techs without offering to trade). And if I look at the screen that shows the techs they can trade to me, they almost all show the exact techs.

This doesn't really explain their very rapid initial expansion though.

Or this could all just be a fluke because I am having an extraordinarily bad game.

[Dis]

Mali seems to kick ass in this game. They are almost always dominate. Though it was the chinese that surpassed me in the above game, not the malinese. The malinese ended up #3.

[Son of David]

Sounds a bit like you might be spending too much time building?

Civ4 reminds me a lot of Civ3 with respect to the fact that to do well you really have to discipline yourself with building - it's important to cripple the AI militarily if you want to prevent it outresearching/producing you.

Hit your nearest competitor whenever possible. Take a few cities off them and they are essentially put out of the game.

[=DrJambo=]

Yes, I agree with Son of David. In my first few games on Noble and Prince levels I found myself concentrating solely on building important infrastructure and neglecting military. I was avoiding wars and conquest and trying to remain peaceful and technologically advanced.

Sooner or later I'd eventually be attacked and needless to say I was never prepared militarily speaking. Wars when you're not in control or inadequately resourced are always costly and they resulted in me losing too much ground on the pace-setters to then have a hope of winning. Ocne you're behind and inferior then everyone seems to decide they want a piece of you.

Since then I've always taken the initiative and it's been me declaring wars on unprepared Civs and not the other way round. I usually aim for my first conquest round about the time of swordsmen, axeman, catapults and instead of investing in multitudes of settlers I simply take opposing cities to expand.

This nullifies my immediate threats before they actually become threats and when the empire's established earlier, catching up on tech isn't so hard.

[Shogun Gunner]

uh oh.... Am I starting to detect a "one formula" to winning? I also have had the experience of not faring well when sticking to building and science. And yes, AIs smell the blood in the water -- which is actually a good thing, it seems realistic and a good tactic on their part.

However, one of the knocks against Civ3 was that there is no way to remain peaceful and win the game in the upper difficulty levels. Is this thread suggesting that if you do not prune your neighbors, you cannot win?

This has given me the idea to play the next cIV game completely peaceful -- only defending if attacked -- and concentrate of building/science AND a strong military to see if that will avoid conflict and allow me to be a builder. Is this a viable strategy?

[GeoModder]

It sure is a viable strategy. Once you look strong enough not much change you'll be attacked.

Hell, this OCC I did I had quite a nice territory (6-7 tiles outwards from town) and a standing army of 10-15 units on average. 't Was enough to keep the AI away from me.

[=DrJambo=]

Shogun Gunner, it's not so much that remaining peaceful isn't a viable strategy per sé, but rather remaining peaceful and neglecting military is bound to fail.

The thing about trying to remain peaceful throughout and winning is you're basically relying on your starting position, available resources and land in which to expand into being better than each of your AI opponents. If it isn't and the AI also remains peaceful throughout then logic would suggest that they will do better than you in the long run. At harder difficulty levels this is even more exaggerated since the AI starts getting bonuses to production, research, upkeep, etc. Remaining peaceful and on an even keel then becomes increasingly more difficult.