Do we need a level of difficulty above Deity?

[Alexander's Horse]

A lot of players find Deity quite easy. Should there be a level above this? A nightmare level perhaps. I'm sure many players could cope with something harder, judging by the high scores achieved at Deity level.

Maybe there should some fairly open options to set variables on the level of difficulty so you can make it as hard or as easy as you like.


------------------
Founder, Dear Leader and Great Helmsman of PROT -the People's Republic Off Topic www.delphi.com/prot1

[polymths]

In Civ2, I found that using "Infinite City Strategy" I could build lots of little cities and with the right happiness wonders and trying to get to Republic and Democracy as quickly as possible, I would eventually get a high enough science rate and enough production rate to easily surpass the computer in the final stage.

The real reason that Civ2's deity did not challenge me is because the AI Civs were quite pathetic. They simply did not build enough cities, did not develop enough, and did not attack in force during the early to middle part of the game when I am pathetically weak and open to attack. By the end stage, it is too late as I have built myself up.

With a "statistically managed" AI (see my thread "AI cheating is necessary..") no level above diety would be needed because the AI would by definition be developing and strengthening itself and attacking you at the theoretically determined maximum rate possible.

[Adm.Naismith]

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse on 05-03-2001 10:27 PM A lot of players find Deity quite easy. Should there be a level above this? A nightmare level perhaps. I'm sure many players could cope with something harder, judging by the high scores achieved at Deity level. Maybe there should some fairly open options to set variables on the level of difficulty so you can make it as hard or as easy as you like.

In my opinion, not. "Number of levels" only needs is to nicely draw a right learning curve, that a player can climb up until it reach its level of max enjoyment. Someone love to be bashed, punched and abused by game difficulties (there is a name for that ), others like more to relax and win with quite easy.

I agree that today a difficult level is not one where the AI is smarter, but only one where it massively cheat and you start with a big disadvantage.
That's not my opinion of "funny", but (of course) anyone is free to disagree

I'll like more the idea of a progressive add of rules and game depth while the difficulty level raise, and I'm very hapy to see this concept fullfilled with Firaxis diplomacy model, available in simple and complex flavour for newbies and experienced users. Great way to do!

I think mumber of available level become more a matter of smoothing the learning experience, but just for an opinion I'll like to see a simple "training level" for real novice, with plenty of game tips, advisor detailed helps, civilopedia automated pop-up and so on.
Next you should have three or four level, depending how much new rules should be managed per level.
You should be free to start from every level you like, but the system should recommend veterans Civ series players to start form first non-training level, then suggest them to climb up after good results in ended games.

The weak point of my suggestion is that adding rules the AI can be in more computational trouble, so resulting in unwanted less difficult game!
I suppose it can be avoided if added rules aren't more difficult to manage from an AI point of view then from a human player, and with a bit of "template strategies help" and "cheating added" to help.

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant

[Roman]

For those people who want extra challenge already in Civ 2, I suggest they have a peek on the thread called "Super Deity" in the Civ 2 General forum. A way has been found to create up to 5 higher difficulty levels above deity. Try that for a challenge.

[hexagonian]

quote: Originally posted by polymths on 05-03-2001 10:56 PM The real reason that Civ2's deity did not challenge me is because the AI Civs were quite pathetic. They simply did not build enough cities, did not develop enough, and did not attack in force during the early to middle part of the game when I am pathetically weak and open to attack. By the end stage, it is too late as I have built myself up.

...sounds like the complaints directed at the CTP series.


Here's hoping CIV3 will correct this. But it will probably be the same as in the past - the AI starts out with more advances, gold and settlers.


A scripted template of strategies might help, but players would probably be quick to analyze the tendencies, break it down, post the results, and then complain that the AI is too predictable. Maybe we can ask everyone to keep silent on these strategies for a year, so everyone will be able to play without the benefit of knowing how to beat the game

I know, its just a pipe dream! Still, a player can hope - and that is what I will do.

quote: Originally posted by Roman on 05-04-2001 08:18 AM For those people who want extra challenge already in Civ 2, I suggest they have a peek on the thread called "Super Deity" in the Civ 2 General forum. A way has been found to create up to 5 higher difficulty levels above deity. Try that for a challenge.

Forgive my ignorance (my experience with Sid Meier games is limited to playing some SMAC), but how did the creator of this manage to do this - did he simply add more starting advances/gold/settlers to the AI?
[This message has been edited by hexagonian (edited May 04, 2001).]

[Gramphos]

This has been discussed several times, and my current opinion is that we not need any more levels, but the existing levels need to be improved. This is partly done with better AI and new game rules, and at this state of development I have no idea how hard the hardest level in Civ III is, but as I see it all announced changes combined with the AI improvements would make deity hard enough (if the AI cheats stay as in Civ 2 (maybe some modifications to them)).

[joseph1944]

PC gamer said there will be "seven level of difficulty with all but the last three reasonable for normal players. The overall play mechanic has been enhanced by the concept of culture, figured using an algorithm based on cultural skills (language, arts, and so on)and the construction of Wonders."
It sound like you guys that want a tough time winning will indeed have a tough time.

------------------

[SilverDragon]

To get super deity you just go into game.txt with wordpad, and find where it lists the difficulty levels. Then you put Deity 2 below Deity, and Deity 3 below that, etc. It really works. The AI has unbelievably thin production boxes, and on the later ones the first citizen is a black pirate.

[Cyclotron]

What? A pirate? Whoa, tell me how to do that!

------------------
- Cyclotron7, "that supplementary resource fanatic"

[St Leo]

1. A pirate is one of the visualizations of the very unhappy citizens (aka anti very happy citizens).

2. Oh please, it took you guys seven years to get tired of Deity.

------------------
Leons Petrazickis (St. Leo)
http://aventine.cf-developer.net/minizigg/
petrazi@sprint.ca

[Alexander's Horse]

No actually Deity was pretty much beaten in the first few months off the bat

I started playing at Deity and haven't really bothered with any other levels.

------------------
Founder, Dear Leader and Great Helmsman of PROT -the People's Republic Off Topic www.delphi.com/prot1
www.out-post.net/phpBB/images/Banana.gif
[This message has been edited by Alexander's Horse (edited May 05, 2001).]

[Sparky]

Is that what the pirtate faces are? Super unhappy citizens? I thought it was a bug whenever they came up. They're not in the manual or in civ1.

[Admiral PJ]

I think the whole game setup should be changed,
so you can define each game parameter -
especially the game length (so you can play longer to 2100 say under deity )
AI intelligence (you could make all the players expansionist for example-lots of ics expansion)
Differing happiness levels (if your wanting to be peaceful etc)
Research rates for players and AI.. (maybe slowed down or started in a certain time period - eg if you just want to play in a modern era )

Admiral Pete

Emperor of the pinky blue Iguana

[Adm.Naismith]

It seems silly, but sometimes too much freedom is not so good (in game, of course ).

At least three problems come to my mind:
1) lots of variable settings means a nightmare to test in deep every combo effect, hence a bug is more likely to survive hidden in some particular group of choices.

2) agreements on settings become more difficult before starting a multiplayer game, or discussing about game results and tactics.

3) it's overwhelming for novice users and a bit too much for veterans too, have to experiment effects of every couple of settings to see how the game can change: if changes are relevant you must study their effects and sweatly develop new way (not necessarly fun, balanced or interesting) to play, if they aren't relevant, why to care anyway?

May be I'm only becoming too old to cope with all that details

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant

[Hasdrubal]

YES!

A harder SP challenge is on top of my wish list for CIVIII. But what we need aren't even thinner boxes for the AI or more unhappiness for the human player, but an AI with some tactical sense and better strategic insight.