Starting question: Is this fair????

[Beatie]

I've entered the world builder just after the world was created. I've was planning playing with total of 9 civs, on monarch level. I checked out where the AI was starting and with what units. I was very suprised to see that the AI got 4 units or each AI civ! All got, 2 archers, 1 worker, and 1 Settler (duh), exept the russians they got a scout instead of a archer, (so 1 archer 1 worker, 1 settler and 1 scout) I ALL the games I've started on every level, all I've got was 1 warrior and a settler. That is not very fair I think . It takes at least 5 to 10 turns to only make a worker, and during that time your city is not growing. And the extra unit you need to build makes it that you that your 20 turns behind the AI to start with!

Bottom line: Why gets the AI 4 units, and the player just 2???? It doesn't matter if your playing on the lower levels, but for the higher levels you have to come from behind! I know that there are players who wins on the highest levels (Oh boy, I realy wants a few lessons of those guys ) I believe that everybody should get 4 units. I understand that you can't get a archer if your did not have the archery tech that you can't get a archer, but then 2 warriors, 1 worker and your settler would be a lot more fair.

Did anybody noticed all this???

[Blake]

Well that's why it's monarch difficulty. The AI gets starting bonuses.

It still can't use them properly.

[Kuciwalker]

You have one of the most powerful computers in existance controlling your empire, with millions of years put into its design and programming. The AI has to share your CPU with anywhere from 2-14 other AI's. Is that fair?

[Solver]

That's the point of playing at higher difficulties, indeed. Prince is the last "fair" difficulty - the AI gets some bonuses, but no big bonuses and the ones it gets are required because of some inherent weaknesses in game AI. At Monarch, the AI gets those starting bonuses - don't worry, the AI can never use its units as well as a human anyway.

[Beatie]

I'm afraid I'm not so sure of my own POWERFULL computer (my brain) if its come to Civ Strategy. I've ended my first monarch game. I was losing it. I think I've started not the right way. Withoud a good start you can't win. I have to experiment into starting on monarch level to get the hang of it I guess.

[Solver]

Every time you go up a level, it takes getting used to. At first, you need a good start to win that level, then you become better.

The fact that there are many people who can beat Monarch without a good start shows that it's clearly doable. Now, the highest difficulties, such as Immortal or Deity, are something that only a small number of people can handle.

Actually, though, Monarch is a pretty difficult leap. Much more difficult than Noble to Prince. On Prince, the AI doesn't have an early advantage, on Monarch, it does. That free Worker is important, of course, and it guarantees the AI economy a headstart.

[Blake]

At Monarch difficulty I'm going to go so far to say that an expert player will ALWAYS win, regardless of how bad the starting position is - even the worst imaginable highlands start.

What it comes down to is:
1) Exceedingly good use of terrain. A human can make a city with tundra deer, tundra copper hill and 2 grassland tiles into quite a productive citry - something like 7hpt and 2 cottage.
2) Smart wonder choice. A human will figure out a critical wonder and do whatever it takes to get it. Usually Stonehenge or Oracle, with stone/marble more wonders become viable.
3) Great People. Forget Civil Service - if you have a bad start, your bestest friend in the whole wide world is Philosophy.


For example, for me, a typical terrible (economy) start goes something like this:
Build a second city very near my capital for logistical support (ie training units).
Build the Oracle in my capital and grab Code of Laws.
Run Caste System and turn nearly all my population (except those on grassland cottage or better) into Scientists, once the banked food runs out, run as many as possible without starving.
Lightbulb Philosophy and switch to Taoism & Pacifism (possibly slavery too, since Caste has served it's purpose).
Use Philosophy to help get the Oracle Prophet and build a shrine.
Pump out Great Scientists and settle in capital.

This kind of power-GPP opening provides an indomitable tech-lead over the AI's and the Great People provide income regardless of terrain. And the AI's can't even imagine pulling off such a complex strategy - that's how big the expert humans advantage is over the AI's.

I'm not going to say that every Emperor start is winnable - I call it the Napoleon factor - Emperor+ Napoleon can build shockingly large sword/axe stacks shockingly quickly (for that matter even pacifist like Asoka can, but they wont always). Napoleon is difficult to befriend and preys on the weak, when you have no strategics and Napoleon decides you need to die, you may not have much say in the matter - while survival will probably be possible it usually leaves you weak enough that more AI's dogpile in and you can't afford luxuries like missionaries to change their minds.

Not that having Napoleon for a neighbour always means defeat is inevitable - it requires other unlucky factors like lack of strategics (or good resourceless UU) and other anti-social neighbours who aren't going to do the right thing when the weak get bullied. For example, while many people don't like Alexander, he can usually be relied upon to attack the strong rather than the weak.

[Diadem]

Just out of curiosity: Are there actually people who can beat deity difficulty any (or almost any) time, even at bad starting locations?

I can hold my own on deity if I have a good starting position (and I don't mean 'just above average', I mean really good). But with a bad starting position I'm pretty much toast.

Back on topic: Monarch I think is the first diffuculty that can be classified as 'hard'. The AI bonusses really start to become significant, and I don't think even the best players can afford to fool around too much at monarch difficulty. It's a really major difference from prince.

The difference between prince and monarch is bigger than the difference between monarch and emperor I think. In fact, it's probably bigger than the difference between monarch and immortal. Those three difficulties seem to be quite close to eachother.

Deity is in a league of its own though. Deity is insane.

[Diadem]

At higher difficulties the AI expands really fast. So a very important skill at these difficulties is being able to build a solid empire with relatively few cities, and little land area. Great people are indeed your friend. They can be extremely useful if used right. And they can be useful in any situation, irrespective of what your enemies are doing, what resources you have access to, etc.

That's why I like Gandhi so much. Spiritual and Philosophical are two very powerful traits, useful in any situation. And his UU is useful in any situation as well. Everybody seems to think that financial is the best trait, but I've never been convinced of this. Financial seems to be most powerful in situations where you are already winning, which is rather useless

[Blake]

As far as I'm concered Deity is about rigging the settings and rerolling.

[binTravkin]

Install this mod and play 2 difficulty levels lower (it will be much more fair!):

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=157780

(the newest version is on the 3rd or 4th page IIRC)

[Olavi]

Does the AI remain just as stupid, whatever the difficulty level? Does the added difficulty come only from bonuses that either help the AI (more units to start with etc) or hurt the human player (extra unhappiness etc).

It's a bit dissapointing if it's so.

[binTravkin]

Does the AI remain just as stupid, whatever the difficulty level? Does the added difficulty come only from bonuses that either help the AI (more units to start with etc) or hurt the human player (extra unhappiness etc).

It's a bit dissapointing if it's so.

Yes, yes and yes.

Try this (latest version in page 3 or 4):

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=157780

[Saurus]

Originally posted by Blake



I'm not going to say that every Emperor start is winnable - I call it the Napoleon factor - Emperor+ Napoleon can build shockingly large sword/axe stacks shockingly quickly (for that matter even pacifist like Asoka can, but they wont always). Napoleon is difficult to befriend and preys on the weak, when you have no strategics and Napoleon decides you need to die, you may not have much say in the matter - while survival will probably be possible it usually leaves you weak enough that more AI's dogpile in and you can't afford luxuries like missionaries to change their minds.

Not that having Napoleon for a neighbour always means defeat is inevitable - it requires other unlucky factors like lack of strategics (or good resourceless UU) and other anti-social neighbours who aren't going to do the right thing when the weak get bullied. For example, while many people don't like Alexander, he can usually be relied upon to attack the strong rather than the weak.

Agree to a degree even though I still think Alex, not Napoleon, is the biggest problem early on.
Sure, If Napoleon decide to swarm you early, then you are dead of course but most of the time Napoleon is merciful and choose not to attack.
Alex seem to attack almost every time and almost always picks me. I have not checked the settings for Alex and thereby do not know how he is supposed to choose his targets. In my experience, he seem to favor attacking me, or as I believe, the weakest player at that point.

The adittional problem with Alex is that he often attacks waaaay too early, even earlier than Napoleon.
Once Alex even invaded with a massive stack of archers(!) as early as around 2000BC. Alex starting position during that game was close to the north pole on a pangea. I started close to the south pole.
I´m still not sure what the h*** was going on during that specific game...

[Olavi]

Thanks binTravkin, I have to take a look at those AI improvements.

Gradually improving AI would be a way more interesting difficulty factor than dull bonuses and cheats, of course, but I know that it's more easily said than programmed.

A good reason to wait for Civ V!