Your BtS questions

[binTravkin]

Ok, what's the most powerful leader-civ combination for a usual MP game (with civs not being spaced too far apart and a lot of action involved)?

[Solver]

Better ask some experienced MP guys. I know that Aggressive will be one of those. Maybe Agg/Cha?

[Robert]

Originally posted by ayronis
Here is one for you:

Does it still feel like Civ4 or have the changes changed the experience far enough that it should be described as Civ 4.5? In the months to come, do you think people will describe Vanilla and BtS as fundamentally different games?

I highly doubt that anyone would say that the changes made in Warlords changed anything fundamental about Civ4. That expansion was a refinement and an upgrade but the core mechanics felt the same. BtS is entirely different, in scope and focus, so it is possible that it may feel entirely different from the game we are used to. What do you think?

It's an expansion, not a different game to me.
But a broad expansion though.

The event system gives a new fibe though.

Some tester you are :P

you tried it

[binTravkin]

I mean leader+civ

I expect agg+cha roman could be a real nuisance, or agg+cha khmer for instance..

[=DrJambo=]

Does the 'Aggressive AI' option now up the ante for AI to AI wars or is it still primarily focused on dealing the human player pain? It used to make civs start out annoyed versus human but not vs other AI.

[yin26]

Originally posted by ben04
How well do the advanced starts work?

This is one of my favorite features, and I fear it is misrepresented in the features list. This is NOT just about starting in a later era with more stuff for MP, though is certainly has that use.

I start my games for all intents and purposes as a normal game, early era, would. But what AS allows me to do is to do away with some of that very early scouting and guessing about how best to place my first few cities. I can spend my time puzzling out the best overall "package" of cities/improvement/units. AS also help to mitigate the "I got screwed on this start" syndrome. You know immediately if your starting setup is worth trying.

[yin26]

Originally posted by ayronis
BtS is entirely different, in scope and focus, so it is possible that it may feel entirely different from the game we are used to. What do you think?

No doubt in my mind this is a Civ 4.5 situation. Some of it is subtle. Even after many games, I am still learning how to use corps effectively. Some of it is an entirely new direction -- like random events (well, they were in Civ 1, I guess, but I don't think on this scale). For my money, though, not of that means much if the AI doesn't improve, and it's here that I think we'll look back on BtS and say, "Yeah, that had the best AI of the series by far."

[yin26]

Originally posted by =DrJambo=
Does the 'Aggressive AI' option now up the ante for AI to AI wars or is it still primarily focused on dealing the human player pain? It used to make civs start out annoyed versus human but not vs other AI.

I don't play without it!!! First, it is NOT focused on the human, and other AIs don't start more annoyed just because you are the human player. What I find this primarily does is the AI is far more opportunistic about attack anybody who leaves themselves vulnerable. Yes, diplo still plays an important role even on this setting, but expect to get hammered by almost anybody if you are stuck in a protracted war that drains your defenses back home. This is on Monarch level, at least.

To me, BtS seems to be striking that very hard balance between artificial intelligence and artificial challenge. So far, at least in the last builds, the aggressive AIs 'strategy' has made good sense and been put to good effect overall, regardless of the player being human or not. That's pretty huge in my book. Are there still occasional oddities and dumb moves? Of course, but nothing like we have been used to.

[ayronis]

Originally posted by yin26

..., and it's here that I think we'll look back on BtS and say, "Yeah, that had the best AI of the series by far."

If this is true, then I highly doubt people will speak of Civ4 Vanilla and BtS as the same thing at all. Indeed, this is exciting.

[=DrJambo=]

Yin, I'm sure the 'Aggressive AI' option used to up the ante mostly for the human? I'm taking about Warlords and not BTS. I seem to recall Blake mentioning this when he was working on his BetterAI mod.

[Solver]

Aggressive AI has more effect on AI-AI warfare now, too. In BtS, it's not just about how likely AIs are to declare war. It's also about how they fight. With the option on, they allocate more resources to military and attack with a larger force. They are likely to train less defenders in favour of building more attackers and just rely on an overwhelming force to destroy the enemy. Under default settings, they're not so... enthusiastic.

[UnOrthOdOx]

Aggressive AI might actually present a challenge? Sweet...

Still not purchasing till I see more reviews.

/me pokes Solver.

Q from someone who hasn't followed anything at all closely (despite having access to the super secret tester place, no time)

How anonymous is espionage? What are the chances of getting caught?

[Solver]

The more I get poked, the more it's delayed

[Will9]

Could someone tell us the Cossacks stats?

[Solver]

Still str. 15