I don't feel the game...

[Saurus]

Originally posted by Handel


It probably is so, but why this bonus on noble and prince level? Weren't we suposed to be even with the AI on noble level?

I have not checked out the XML-files for myself and cannot do so from work where I am now so I can only relate to information I have read here at the forums.
But if I remeber correctly, the A.I player enjoys this 40% VS Barbarians (and 70% VS animals) on EVERY level. (including the settler level!)

Please, correct me if I am beeing incorrect here.

[Cort Haus]

I think the AI gets generous upgrade discounts on Noble, too.

[Tiberius]

Re: Re: I don't feel the game...

Originally posted by Fried-Psitalon
... and that the bonuses given to the AI at noble are pretty miniscule.

{HandicapInfo}
     {Type}HANDICAP_NOBLE{/Type}
     {iAIUnitSupplyPercent}35{/iAIUnitSupplyPercent}
     {iAIUnitUpgradePercent}30{/iAIUnitUpgradePercent}
     {iAIInflationPercent}70{/iAIInflationPercent}
     {AIWarWearinessPercent}70{/iAIWarWearinessPercent}
{/HandicapInfo}

I wouldn't exactly call minuscul a:
65% discount on unit supply +
70% discount on unit upgrade costs +
30% bonus on inflation +
30% bonus on war weariness

Edit: correction: the human player also has a 10% bonus on inflation, so the AI advantage here is "only" 20%
{iInflationPercent}90{/iInflationPercent}

[Fried-Psitalon]

Add up how much that really comes to, Tiberius. The biggest chunk of that is the unit upgrade discount... but since the AI upgrades all units without regard to strategic location, and humans upgrade with extreme regard to strategic location, I don't see this as all that big a deal.

[Tiberius]

This is a good point, but it also means that compared to the AI I should upgrade only 30% of my units, which is not really possible. The AI will attack me if I have a weak army, regardless of whether my units are strategically located or not.

[Handel]

Originally posted by Cort Haus


Handel, perhaps you can find another game to play. Everything about this one is "stupid" according to you, so it seems sensible not to play it.

No, it is not stupid, but largely unbalanced. But yes, as soon as some good game is released (and in Christmas time many good games will be released) I will dump the Civ 4 until an add-on is released.
And something more important - the devs are trying desperately to force the player to stick to the peacefull victories. On civ 3 I could win with domination on huge maps on the hardest levels. And it was a tough task - but it was achievable. Now it is impossible - simply because you can achieve a culture victory still with muskets if you give stuff to the AI to preserve peace and put 100% culture. Not to mention space race and the diplo victory. So you have to turn those type of victories off, but you still cannot dominate because you will go broke. But if I wanted an economic "fight" I should take an economic simulation.

[Handel]

And something more - nothing rages me more then ruing game aspects to create "political correctness" as it is done in Civ 4. The devs wrote a lot of pages to apologize for the different religions and made them absolutely the same. But they are not. It is anecdotical to watch buddist Isabella allying with jewish Saladin, fighting muslim Mao Zethong and backstabed by christian Montezuma. The religians are different and they should be made different in the game.
BTW - in above post I mentioned Christmas - maybe many of you don't know, but right now it is political correct in USA to denonce Christmas, because some stupid but politicaly correct ******* decided Christmas is christian holiday and will allienate people from the other religions if the people celebrate Chirstmas. I am not a pious type, but I think this is the most stupid thing I ever heard. Every religion has it's own religion holidays and everyone if free to celebrate them as he or she prefers.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Handel


No, it is not stupid, but largely unbalanced. But yes, as soon as some good game is released (and in Christmas time many good games will be released) I will dump the Civ 4 until an add-on is released.
And something more important - the devs are trying desperately to force the player to stick to the peacefull victories. On civ 3 I could win with domination on huge maps on the hardest levels. And it was a tough task - but it was achievable. Now it is impossible - simply because you can achieve a culture victory still with muskets if you give stuff to the AI to preserve peace and put 100% culture. Not to mention space race and the diplo victory. So you have to turn those type of victories off, but you still cannot dominate because you will go broke.

In the past Civ games have usually favoured mililtary solutions, and if that's your preference then I can see that you'd find Civ 4 a bit buildery for you. There were some domination victories recorded in the AU100A game on the Apolyton University Forum, so maybe check that out. OTOH, a peaceful builder Spaceship game isn't exactly easy above Prince either, you have to fight for the land or nerf the AI trading somehow. I think Civ 4 is a great builder game but you still need to go to war for most victory conditions above Prince.

I wouldn't worry too much about people getting culture victories with Muskets - it's no cheesier than building 200 howitzers and taking over the world in one turn like in Civ 2.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Handel
BTW - .... politicaly correct ******* the most stupid thing I ever heard.

Political opinions should really be posted on the Off-Topic forum.

[Handel]

Originally posted by Cort Haus


Political opinions should really be posted on the Off-Topic forum.

Ah, yes - sorry

But my rant was the devs actually killed the religions for political reasons.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Fried-Psitalon
Add up how much that really comes to, Tiberius. The biggest chunk of that is the unit upgrade discount... but since the AI upgrades all units without regard to strategic location, and humans upgrade with extreme regard to strategic location, I don't see this as all that big a deal.

Not necessarily, Fried. I upgrade units asap that are not threatened because I want to keep my military stat as high as possible to reduce both attacks and threats. Border troops first, sure, but all troops when possible.

As far as the AI goes, seeing as it often upgrades archers to LB the moment I arrive, and not sooner, it seems to be taking strategic location into account. While not under threat - leave. When approached - upgrade.

Seeing as a round of upgrades is ~ equiv a Gt Merchant, with several rounds of upgrades during a game, this is a big bonus. If the AI needs a thousand plus gold to upgrade, why can't it use the slider for a few turns like us? It's not like they're short of commerce in their cottage-tastic hinterlands.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Handel


Ah, yes - sorry

But my rant was the devs actually killed the religions for political reasons.

I know, but we've had that argument over-and-over before on previous threads.

So what should we have?

Islam : a special terrorist unit
Christianity : an Inquisitor UU that tortures non-believers as witches.
Judaism : 'Zionist Conspiracy' National Wonder

etc ...

Yeah, that should get a few hackles up!

[John-SJ]

Nothing like throwing out a few extreme stereotypes to raise the hackles though, eh Cort?

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by John-SJ
Nothing like throwing out a few extreme stereotypes to raise the hackles though, eh Cort?

I'm lampooning the stereotypes to make a point - damn, should have used joke tags as obviously people can't recognise one see when they see it.

[Handel]

Actually at least they could make preferred religions. Does make much more sense then making preferred civics. Don't understand why Cleo prefers "hereditery rule" and Isabella not (just an example). Now Isabella (which by quite "random" chance is all of my games) always grabs buddism.

BTW - giving such bonuses to AI even at so-called "even" noble level shows the devs know perfectly weel they failed to achieve balancing.