Originally posted by vmxa1
"Originally posted by Toby Rowe"
"As the AI is actually cheating throughout the game I always reload because of it: "What's good for the goose is good for the gander" to use an old saying."
Define what you mean by cheating. Cheating is doing something outside of the rules and the only acknowledge cheat for the AI is that it knows the disposition of the tiles.
"Unless you are prepared to accept rampant cheating because Infogrammes couldn't be bothered to programme a real AI into the game due to fiscal constraints following the court case, then just reload when 20 Roman cavalry turn up on your doorstep and attack without logic, rhymme or reason (Given that they are usually on the other side of the planet and you have no interaction with them)"
Well I cannot address any court cases, but really there is no reason to expect much more than what is in the game in terms of intelligence.
If they were to put more into it, no one would want to play it and it would take too long and be too expensive.
The AI may not use any true logic about its plans, but most of the time one can anticipate what its next move will be.
You need not have contact with a given civ for it to know about you. They can get contact and maps from other civs and head your way.
They cannot know your map unless it was traded or scouted by one of the civs. They know a given tile in your land has x number of units and any resource, but not how to find it.
I do not know what these rampant cheats you talk about are, they do not exist. In any event what will reloading the game do about it?
"I reckon the Romans spend all their computer generated wealth on negotiating "right of passage" agreements- not. All AI nations have free movement in all others."
The AI does not have to have an RoP to traverse the other civs land, neither do you. You both can run the risk of having a DOW.
Most of the time they won't have an RoP and you can see it my the fact the the units have the same movement cost as you would on anothers land.
What they can afford is more a function of the level of the game and the relative size the the civ. If you are playing at emperor or better they have a cost factor the makes things cheaper than it is for you.
(Yes Monarch gets a bonus, but it is only 10%)
Just as if you play at Chief or Warlord they pay more than you do for things. These bonus items are not cheats. They are clearly defined for each level in the game.
They are handicaps meant to offset the better inteligence of most human players. Well not really intelligence, but more a matter of being able to adapt logically to the game.
"To all fans of this game that also programme, please give us all an official list of the cheats "Infogrammes" uses.
(I know all Sub's are seen by the others, I know once you give away your territory map all others know your troop locations, but most of all what basis is the technology cheat enacted? (and thus negating the entire point of trying to steam ahead in the technology field?)"
The ability to see the map (disposition of tiles) is basically the only cheat. In C3C there is an unintended bug that lets the AI build great wonders with an MGL.
Players have many exploits the AI cannot use.
The AI cannot out research most players below deity after the start of the industrial age. It can at Sid, sometimes all the way through the game. The cost factor at Sid is 4, so they have a huge discount.
As I said the AI knows your troop displacement at all times, regardless of any map. The map part is that if you have an empty town, it may not know how to get to it without a map, but it knows it is empty.
You can see this if you are at war and they had seen a map and knew where all the tiles were and you had a town with a strong garrison, they would leave it alone.
Move units out and watch them turn around and head for it. This was required to reduce the already massive routine to handle path finding. If you ever played an over size map you would appreciate this aspect.
So in short the tech deal is mearly a function of any cost discount and the trading discount for AI to AI. It is offset by players doing better with thier land and taking land from the AI.
That is until you get to the very highest level.
"Civ 4 is mean't to be different, I assume the fact that it isn't ligging throughout play and thus makes it better and more interesting???"
I do not understand the term "ligging", but it looks to me like Civ4 is different, but not better. I stopped playing after a month. It was fun, but did not hold my interest.
This of course is subjective and means nothing. Anyway I did not respond in any attempt to bash or anything other than to assure you the game is not cheating in any meaningful way. It is very beatable without reloading.
Ok, I will admit Sid is very hard to beat in any std maps and any pangea regardless of map size. I do beat it at contients and island maps, but it is not easy.
"Originally posted by Toby Rowe"
"As the AI is actually cheating throughout the game I always reload because of it: "What's good for the goose is good for the gander" to use an old saying."
Define what you mean by cheating. Cheating is doing something outside of the rules and the only acknowledge cheat for the AI is that it knows the disposition of the tiles.
"Unless you are prepared to accept rampant cheating because Infogrammes couldn't be bothered to programme a real AI into the game due to fiscal constraints following the court case, then just reload when 20 Roman cavalry turn up on your doorstep and attack without logic, rhymme or reason (Given that they are usually on the other side of the planet and you have no interaction with them)"
Well I cannot address any court cases, but really there is no reason to expect much more than what is in the game in terms of intelligence.
If they were to put more into it, no one would want to play it and it would take too long and be too expensive.
The AI may not use any true logic about its plans, but most of the time one can anticipate what its next move will be.
You need not have contact with a given civ for it to know about you. They can get contact and maps from other civs and head your way.
They cannot know your map unless it was traded or scouted by one of the civs. They know a given tile in your land has x number of units and any resource, but not how to find it.
I do not know what these rampant cheats you talk about are, they do not exist. In any event what will reloading the game do about it?
"I reckon the Romans spend all their computer generated wealth on negotiating "right of passage" agreements- not. All AI nations have free movement in all others."
The AI does not have to have an RoP to traverse the other civs land, neither do you. You both can run the risk of having a DOW.
Most of the time they won't have an RoP and you can see it my the fact the the units have the same movement cost as you would on anothers land.
What they can afford is more a function of the level of the game and the relative size the the civ. If you are playing at emperor or better they have a cost factor the makes things cheaper than it is for you.
(Yes Monarch gets a bonus, but it is only 10%)
Just as if you play at Chief or Warlord they pay more than you do for things. These bonus items are not cheats. They are clearly defined for each level in the game.
They are handicaps meant to offset the better inteligence of most human players. Well not really intelligence, but more a matter of being able to adapt logically to the game.
"To all fans of this game that also programme, please give us all an official list of the cheats "Infogrammes" uses.
(I know all Sub's are seen by the others, I know once you give away your territory map all others know your troop locations, but most of all what basis is the technology cheat enacted? (and thus negating the entire point of trying to steam ahead in the technology field?)"
The ability to see the map (disposition of tiles) is basically the only cheat. In C3C there is an unintended bug that lets the AI build great wonders with an MGL.
Players have many exploits the AI cannot use.
The AI cannot out research most players below deity after the start of the industrial age. It can at Sid, sometimes all the way through the game. The cost factor at Sid is 4, so they have a huge discount.
As I said the AI knows your troop displacement at all times, regardless of any map. The map part is that if you have an empty town, it may not know how to get to it without a map, but it knows it is empty.
You can see this if you are at war and they had seen a map and knew where all the tiles were and you had a town with a strong garrison, they would leave it alone.
Move units out and watch them turn around and head for it. This was required to reduce the already massive routine to handle path finding. If you ever played an over size map you would appreciate this aspect.
So in short the tech deal is mearly a function of any cost discount and the trading discount for AI to AI. It is offset by players doing better with thier land and taking land from the AI.
That is until you get to the very highest level.
"Civ 4 is mean't to be different, I assume the fact that it isn't ligging throughout play and thus makes it better and more interesting???"
I do not understand the term "ligging", but it looks to me like Civ4 is different, but not better. I stopped playing after a month. It was fun, but did not hold my interest.
This of course is subjective and means nothing. Anyway I did not respond in any attempt to bash or anything other than to assure you the game is not cheating in any meaningful way. It is very beatable without reloading.
Ok, I will admit Sid is very hard to beat in any std maps and any pangea regardless of map size. I do beat it at contients and island maps, but it is not easy.
Sid was good back in 1991, he's now turned his hand to a few things from the late 1990's and they've been found wanting in my opinion.
The inventor of headlights didn't go on to invent halogen lamps afterall.
Once the AI has your territory map "it" (all AI nations) know exactly where all your troops are- If you get caught out by the AI doing a mass attack on one city: if they enter your territory but can't reach the city they want to attack before declaring war- weaken a more distant city by removing a unit or two, then watch the AI units take their turn. The AI once you trade the map knows your co-ordinates perfectly IMHO.
I'm currently playing a self-made map with 4 Islands isolated by chains of mountains forcing all shipping to my central island, so only 4 peoples exist on each- this was to test the AI cheating on technology. (passing info)
On my second game, I can confirm that the AI does almost keep pace with you as the AI hands out freebies in tech's based upon your own level.
This negates your entire point of playing the game as their isn't any reward for playing well! (why have 6 levels if the levels are based on cheating?)
A good AI is based on good AI- Sid had it in "Colonization", the entire game was -4mb in size, as was Civ itself!
Patrician II, Europa Universalis I & II and Preatorians all have good AI. Civ 3 has cheats instead of AI.
Put a sub in enemy territory, watch a warship come out a attack it. Build a Privateer, leave it unprotected in your waters, but within about 10-ish squares of a rival city- by magic a warship will turn up and attack it.
Civ 3- the only game where all nations except yours had satellites in 1060 AD.
I want credible AI, I've seen it in many games, and in many real world applications oddly enough.
Losing an expensive court case for the right to make Civ 3 cost so much money that the game didn't get developed fully due to financial constraints- the blatent AI cheating (its easy to programme) was the result.
The result ruined the reputation that Civ 2 continued, onwards all the others were poor.
Fans of games might one day be listened to- I think the marketeers call them the "core market" in the car industry>
In Civ between 2 and 3 we just wanted better diplomacy and the ability to switch off certain aspects of the game that grew tedious. Civ 3 ignored all requests and actually increased the aspects most already felt tedious, as if to say, "**** you, you will enjoy this cake and eat it" Such arrogance for a seller is striking.
As for Sid Meiyer? Once he had the midas touch, now it seems everything he touches turns to dust- over complex and boring- He forgot that games should be overall like films: entertaining, not a trial. I hope he doesn't remake Pirates!! for the PC or even my magic memory of that will be spoilt as well.
A "ligger" is a sponger, a hanger-on, but it's almost old English now and I doubt it will survive my generation, just like other rich words like "narked" and "****", as English becomes standard US english instead, the richness and colour of it will give way to "snuck" not sneak, "embedded" not "attached", "hunkered down" not "lay low" and rout not route! Good grief, even Chuck Berry in '66 managed to say the word properly!
Enough!
Toby!
Leave a comment: