Just how much does the AI cheat on 'noble'?

[Harrier UK]

Once you get behind in Techs - you may as well start again, if you are not willing to mount military campaigns. Even if your units are weaker - if you build enough of them you can conquer slightly stronger Civs. But you will not catch up in the Tech race. If you survive while you catch up, you can then win a domination game. Its a long haul though.

What I would like to see is a partial return to a Civ2 concept.

In Civ2 if you captured a City of a Technology stronger Civ you gained a Free Tech.

What I would like to see is a graded implementation of that.

eg. Getting a new tech is not right - as you may not know how to use it.

Therefore if you capture a city off a Technology stronger Civ.

It the city had a Library you get 10% of the beakers need to finish your current research.

It the city had a University you get 20% of the beakers need to finish your current research.

It the city had a Observatory you get 25% of the beakers need to finish your current research.

etc etc. etc.

All percentages being cumulative.


Or somethng similar. At least with this method you gain some small benefit from capturing Cities of more advanced nations.

Capturing say 4 cities in 6 turns in your rivals scientific heartland, may grant you the equivellant of two free techs.

Maybe something for a mod, or an expansion pack.

Consider the advantages the US got from Germany in Rocketry etc.

[Strudo]

Don't people ever get tired of complaining about the AI cheating? I've never looked in the world builder myself and i wouldn't know if he AI was geting something for nothing or not. I just play the game that comes up. Just play the game and stop analysing every detail! You end up enjoying the game rather than being annoyed.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Strudo
Don't people ever get tired of complaining about the AI cheating? I've never looked in the world builder myself and i wouldn't know if he AI was geting something for nothing or not. I just play the game that comes up. Just play the game and stop analysing every detail! You end up enjoying the game rather than being annoyed.

You don't get annoyed by the computer players cheating?

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
You don't get annoyed by the computer players cheating?

Looking at ways AI players "cheat" brings annoyance (if not looked at from the perspective of "understanding").

Annoyance does not enhance pleasure of playing the game (unless you ENJOY being annoyed).

Therefore, one should either not look at such "cheating"
or play at a level you enjoy.

--
Personally, I play at a modified Noble difficulty where some of my costs are increased to Monarch level, and all combat advantages (both player & AI) vs. barbs are eliminated.

[fed1943]

I think the proposal makes the game worse,restricted.
The player can take actions to increase research and diferent actions to conquest. If conquest gives research the ways become narrow, and the game poorer.
(As in civ3 where war, and only war, gives GL ,maybe the most powerful building device.
Best regards,

[Harrier UK]

Originally posted by fed1943
I think the proposal makes the game worse,restricted.
The player can take actions to increase research and diferent actions to conquest. If conquest gives research the ways become narrow, and the game poorer.
(As in civ3 where war, and only war, gives GL ,maybe the most powerful building device.
Best regards,

It would not force you into war if you were on a par with the AI in research.

If you are behind in research, the AI will have stronger units than you. So all the proposal does is give you a small bonus if you manage to capture a few AI cities - assuming those Cities have the required buildings. I am talking about %s of a Tech you are researching, not a whole new Tech.

Also a weaker AI that attacks you will have the same benefit if it captures any of your Cities.

Currently if for what ever reason you fall behind the AI in the Tech race you may as well pack it in - if you do not become a warmonger. The AI will not trade Techs to you. Even a pleased AI will only rarely gift a cheap tech.

[Chaos Theory]

I have had some success in damaging an AI, then extorting several techs for peace. I've been able to do this even when significantly behind in tech, if I have a larger production base, thanks to catapults. 24 catapults vs several musketmen in a holy city = 1 razed holy city.

[bigvic]

overall civ4 is a much better game than civ3, but i have a few beefs...

like the tech thing - get behind in tech...give it up...

thats a BIG thing you know...at least in civ3 u could spy...now spies are half useless imho...

[MikeH]

You can trade your way back up the tech tree if you are behind and clever about what you research and who you trade with.

I was stuck on an island once (on Prince) and didn't meet anyone to trade with until I got Caravels (which I rushed to once I realised...) by that point I was a fair way behind the tech leaders but I caught up quickly by specialising up one branch of the tech tree and trading the same thing to multiple people for various different techs. In that situation sometimes trading the same tech to three different civs at a slight loss each time can be well worth it.

I didn't win because I got distracted by a war at a critical time and someone else got the spaceship just before me.

[Urban Ranger]

Yes. In this stage it is crucial to be the first to get a keystone tech of your era (e.g. Alphabet) and trade that to as many other civs as you can manage in the same turn.