AOM3 Is Out

[Dale]

If you kept up with the Ages of Mankind, you would also know that I dropped the mod. Why?

1. Some of the new concepts I wanted to bring in could not be programmed so the AI was at an acceptable level for me (colonisation was one of them).
2. There was little to no interest in the mod.
3. After getting halfway through the mod it was obvious it was becomming another repeat and rinse mod. Really, except for a few minor things, it was nothing new.
4. I got bored of it.

Dale

[Dale]

Sorry Generaldoktor, some things need to be said. Some people are perpetuating a MYTH that you can only win AOM by playing on ultra gig maps with 10-12 opponents and drawing your sword on turn one. This myth is untrue and is being perpetuated out of ignorance, thats my main point Maq. OK.

Funny, when some people make comments about AOM, they are "myths" and those people ignorant, but when you guys make comments about Civ4, the shoe is on the other foot.

Thus the hypocracy is exposed.

Dale

[Maquiladora]

Originally posted by angrybowen
Both complained that AOM is too long and repetitive when both did or planned to produce games that were longer and more repetitive.

Planning and releasing are two entirely different things. Dale himself just said, "he got bored of it", and so we never saw a release.

Now if he had released such a long mod and now complained about AoM there would be some point to what youre saying, but as it is, there isnt.

[smithldoo]

Can someone refresh my memory please. Didn't SAP have an ultra gig version? Also who were the person/s involved?

So hypocracy = saying you can only win one way with a game, and not acknowledge other victory conditions?

Or does it = saying I have won one way with a game with an exact repeat of the boring "repeat and rinse" gameplay of civ 3/cradle (i.e. civ 4) and never said there was no other way of victory?

FYI Hex in both games if Civ 4 where I set out to conquer I ended up with a dam lot of cites, probably very close to the 60 you mention. One reason was because there are no other means of controlling territory.

[smithldoo]

Hi Dale,

I have just responded to your PM of 12 June. Sorry, but for some reason I did not get an email about your PM.

[Dale]

Actually, it was hypocrytical that you guys can bag civ4 cuz you don't like something about it, but me 'n Hex can't bag AOM cuz we don't like something about it.

[angrybowen]

Actually, it was hypocrytical that you guys can bag civ4 cuz you don't like something about it, but me 'n Hex can't bag AOM cuz we don't like something about it.

Ah, beaten to the punch but now maybe I can clarify.

I have never intended to bag you Dale, and Hex just because you like civ 4. If I did or you thought I did, I apologise. I have expressed specific opinions about Civ 4 after playing several games to near or actual completion. Hex tells us this is allowed. These opinions include its lame and a micro managers dream (options may equal good gaming strategy, but making 3 decisions where one will do is just unecessary micro management and gets very teeeeedious IMHO). It also allowed me to to go on IAS which gave me the quickest path to a major victory. I was like the picture supplied by smithldoo, way out in front and cruising. All I had to do was keep capturing cities (i.e. rinse and repeat).

I am bagging both of you and calling you hypocrits becuase You have made generalisations about AOM that are not accurate and in Hex's case without finishing a game of any kind and in your case, at best, without finishing more than one game of AOM. The myth you are spreading is that AOM requires some gigantic monolith empire that is just rinse and repeat, in other words, just ctp2 all over again.

Stan has said and although i have never tried it, you can win with 35 cities if you maintain a total focus on that victory condition. In addition, in 2 games of civ 4 I would have been very close to or even OVER this un acceptable total of 60 cities (Hex), nearly the SAME number as I was when I won my last game of AOM III. And more than when I went for a diplomacy victory in AOM II. I did not question Dale when he said you could win in Civ 4 with 4-6 cities, but neither has the above been acknowledged. Last night I was in because of very cold weather, so I abandoned my game of AOM III and started a new one which will be focused entirely on a science victory. Will keep you posted.

If having plenty of options is good game design, lets check a few facts.
Cities. Civ 4, I only found one practical way to acquire (rather than build) cities, by capture. AOM, capture, acquire by royal wedding, acquire by diplomacy (not easy but has happened several times), acquire by surrender. (score civ4 1, AOM 3.1)
Goody huts. Civ 4 a couple of warriors, gold and an advance. AOM 50 turns for a great goody hut rush then can still get stuff till turn 400 +, Score civ 4 1, AOM 5.
Advances. Civ 4, research, espionage (never succeded though) and diplomacy. AOM research, diplomacy, espionage, from resources (2 rounds), from city capture, from city conversion, from empire surrender. Civ 4 3, AOM 8.
Resources. Both games similar (happiness, trade, health, etc, although you can trade AOM without special improvement). In AOM you can use any and EVERY resource on the map (unlike civ 4), for bonus pw or gold through cartels and large scale use of resources fights disasters and improves bonus events, to the point where your cities can grow more quickly. Civ 4 3, AOM 5+.
Acquire territory. Civ 4, have a city. AOM city, or one of 4 tile improvements that extend borders. Civ 4 1, AOM 5.

IN civ 4 I was able to use one victory condition to win, that was all I needed to do, capture cities (rinse and repeat). In any version of AOM you cannot just capture cities. You need 125(AOM I)-150(AOMIII) cities to win this way and no government will support them. I have NEVER, EVER came close to a victory in AOM through just conquest. Not once.

Riddle me this you pair of jokers, if I am unable to use conquest alone in AOM, but CAN use it for an absurdly easy victory in Civ 4 (in 2 games at emperor level), how is AOM "rinse and repeat" and Civ 4 not? I kept every city I ever built or captured in Civ4, I have never in AOM because of government cap.

[Dale]

Just a couple of things about civ4 that you missed (whether through not knowing, not exploring, or ignorance), which BTW, is very similar to what you claim about me 'n Hex.

1. Cities: can acquire cities through capture, barbs, diplomacy and culture. Civ4/AOM: 4/3.1 (as you put it)
2. Goody huts: Civ4 you can get workers, settlers, units, maps, gold, advances and contact with other civs (rarely). In a Terra map game it's not uncommon to still have goody huts well into the renais era. Civ4/AOM: 7/7 (not exactly sure on what's available in goody huts in AOM)
3. Advances: Civ4 can gain advances through research, espionage, diplomacy, gifts, goody huts, wonders and great people. Civ4/AOM: 7/8
4. Resources: In civ4 you CAN use every resource on the map. Excess resources are tradable. Plus they can give isolated cities the resources they need. Civ4 has a whole range of health and luxury resources which add food, health, happiness to make cities grow quicker. The more different types of resources you have, the better off you WILL be. BTW, by having control of all of one type of resource, you can effectively create a cartel through trade. Civ4/AOM: 6/6
5. Acquire territory: Civ4 you build/capture cities, increase culture, diplomacy. Civ4/AOM: 3/5

Either your ignorance of the game is evident, you didn't read the manual, or you're just simply skipping these features of Civ4 to make it look worse.

Let's look at some other stuff then shall we?

6. Invasions: Civ4 AI can handle invasion on a number of fronts, including a naval invasion. Oh wait, AOM cant!
7. Promotions: Civ4 has tons of promotions for your units. Oh wait, AOM only has a linear upgrade promotion. Civ4's promotion create specialist units.
8. Civ4 I can change my play style during the game many times to change what victory I'm heading for. Can you do that in AOM? As has been said here a few times, you can't.
9. Civ4 has an active MP.
10. Civ4 I can play a completely isolationist game and still win.

You see, I can play that game too.

But as has been said numerous times here, in AOM to win by conquest (since I haven't seen anyone win a different type of win) you have to have a lot of cities. In Civ4 you don't have to. As also expressed, in AOM you have to concentrate on ONE victory from the beginning of the game. In Civ4 I can change what victory I'm heading for many times during the game. If I don't look like getting a conquest win, then I'll change to science, or diplomacy, or culture. Can't do that in AOM as has been said here, cuz to get a non-conquest victory you MUST concentrate on it from the beginning. Strategy limitation.

Dale

[Dale]

Riddle me this you pair of jokers, if I am unable to use conquest alone in AOM, but CAN use it for an absurdly easy victory in Civ 4 (in 2 games at emperor level), how is AOM "rinse and repeat" and Civ 4 not? I kept every city I ever built or captured in Civ4, I have never in AOM because of government cap.

From you have been saying here, and at the AOM site, I seriously doubt you played on emperor level. What you say is damn near impossible to pull off 2 games in a row, if at all at this level, even by the pros.

Now I'm not going to call you a liar, but either you are full of sh1t, or you're mistaken and played at warlord or chieften level.

Dale

[angrybowen]

Now I'm not going to call you a liar, but either you are full of sh1t, or you're mistaken and played at warlord or chieften level.

Now the pot calls the kettle black. IIRC you claim you won a game of AOM. IIRC you announced with much fan fare at the AOM site your first game and posted descriptions and pictures (may last year). Those posts ended before you had contacted another civ, before you had built an outpost, got an advance from a resource, in fact by around turn 100 IIRC.

2 other people have recounted their civ 4 IAS experience to you as well, so you are now calling all of us liars and full of shi1t, fine. On the basis of what i have seen, pretty obvious who is full of shi1t. Your allegation would be true if there was some kind of city cap in civ 4. I do not recall reading about one nor encountering it during game play. Update us all on this please.

Just to clarify, I was playing on the 3rd highest difficulty level, which I think is emperor, but since I dont have the game anymore, I cant say for sure which descriptive level it was.

Re cities, yes I forgot culture but I never got one in Civ 4, even in one case where I culture owned 3 tiles adjacent to a small city for 20+ turns. Playing as Louis xiv, I got a culture bonus. As for barbs, if you mean capture barb cities, then that is in AOM.

Re goody huts, I understand on higher level difficulty you cannot get settlers for example. My experience in 4 games was NO settlers, NO workers, I forgot maps, couple of low grade units, an advance, maybe 2, some gold and lots of wild animals and barbarians. IIRC, NO huts after about 200 AD, all cleaned out. Large maps BTW, all great plains.

Advances. Gifts I included under Diplomacy. I forgot great people but for wonders, there are wonders that boost your science by 10% in aom for long periods, which is equal to more than one advance.

Resources. question, are resources outside a city working radius useable other than trading? IIRC they are not, so you can only use them if you can trade them internally or externally. Towards the end of many games I had many resources that were not being used, especially things like cow, apart from a city if they were in its working radius.

Territory. How do you acquire territory through diplomacy in civ 4. Apart from cities, what other means is their to establish a national border of any size? Did I miss something.

Since bloody when has AOM been unable to handle "Civ4 AI can handle invasion on a number of fronts," it was the biggest complaint about AOM I, ref Louis for example. If you had played ONE game of AOM 1 to the end through conquest, you must have been driven batty be the incessant ai invasions like Louis was. Yes there are no naval invasions, but you must have an acutely short memory Mr Dale if you cannot remember what frenzy does. But if you eneded your game around turn 100 before you even met an ai, then of course AOM can't handle invasions on a number of fronts.

Oh yes those promotions, 40 + promotions, where if I win a combat against cavalry in a desert I can select hill combat bonus, very good. 40 extra decisions to do what, I select one unit and the computer auto selects the best counter, isn't that the case? General promotions that reflect average improvement suit me fine.

Show me where I said I cannot change my victory focus, I have said repeatedly i have to use every means possible, only that it is hard to maintain focus on one thing such as science, when there is so much going on. This reflects the complexity, depth and challenge of the game, not an artificial limit as you imply. BTW smithldoo posted the outcome of a diplomacy win at the aom forum last year.

If you mean by isolationist game, you mean peaceful builder, you can do the same in AOM. You yourself said that if you pick the higher difficulty levels "you will face one aggressive/expansionist ai player". By this I assume you mean that that player is likely to attack you, as happened in mine and smithldoos attempts to emulate Nikolai and play just a peaceful game. Again you seem to have forgotten what frenzy does, it is tied to the human aggression level. Don't you remember that? And an aggressive ai type attacking an explorer is not a real war.

[Dale]

Originally posted by angrybowen
Now the pot calls the kettle black. IIRC you claim you won a game of AOM. IIRC you announced with much fan fare at the AOM site your first game and posted descriptions and pictures (may last year). Those posts ended before you had contacted another civ, before you had built an outpost, got an advance from a resource, in fact by around turn 100 IIRC.

Just because I didn't report it, doesn't mean I didn't play it.

2 other people have recounted their civ 4 IAS experience to you as well, so you are now calling all of us liars and full of shi1t, fine. On the basis of what i have seen, pretty obvious who is full of shi1t. Your allegation would be true if there was some kind of city cap in civ 4. I do not recall reading about one nor encountering it during game play. Update us all on this please.

City maintenance is the city cap in civ4.

Just to clarify, I was playing on the 3rd highest difficulty level, which I think is emperor, but since I dont have the game anymore, I cant say for sure which descriptive level it was.

And like I've said a few times, that level is actually pretty easy.

Re cities, yes I forgot culture but I never got one in Civ 4, even in one case where I culture owned 3 tiles adjacent to a small city for 20+ turns. Playing as Louis xiv, I got a culture bonus. As for barbs, if you mean capture barb cities, then that is in AOM.

Actually, the culture I was referring to was a great artist. You need one of them to do an effective culture capture of a city.

Re goody huts, I understand on higher level difficulty you cannot get settlers for example. My experience in 4 games was NO settlers, NO workers, I forgot maps, couple of low grade units, an advance, maybe 2, some gold and lots of wild animals and barbarians. IIRC, NO huts after about 200 AD, all cleaned out. Large maps BTW, all great plains.

If you use scouts/explorers, you ALWAYS get a positive outcome from a goody hut. And you get the GOOD ones.

Oh and great plains maps? Come on. Play on a real man's map like terra or continents.

Advances. Gifts I included under Diplomacy. I forgot great people but for wonders, there are wonders that boost your science by 10% in aom for long periods, which is equal to more than one advance.

There are wonders like that too in Civ4. As well as instant advance wonders.

Resources. question, are resources outside a city working radius useable other than trading? IIRC they are not, so you can only use them if you can trade them internally or externally. Towards the end of many games I had many resources that were not being used, especially things like cow, apart from a city if they were in its working radius.

Yes, resources outside a city radius ARE useable. The bonus they imply is used, as well as trade. IE: aluxury resource will give every city connected to it +1 happy, an iron resource will allow cities to build spears etc, even if outside city radius.

Territory. How do you acquire territory through diplomacy in civ 4. Apart from cities, what other means is their to establish a national border of any size? Did I miss something.

In peace negotiations you can demand cities. You can ask for cities in diplomacy. I've had the AI give me a city to keep me happy too.

Since bloody when has AOM been unable to handle "Civ4 AI can handle invasion on a number of fronts," it was the biggest complaint about AOM I, ref Louis for example. If you had played ONE game of AOM 1 to the end through conquest, you must have been driven batty be the incessant ai invasions like Louis was. Yes there are no naval invasions, but you must have an acutely short memory Mr Dale if you cannot remember what frenzy does. But if you eneded your game around turn 100 before you even met an ai, then of course AOM can't handle invasions on a number of fronts.

I was referring to a simultaneous invasion on numerous fronts from one AI. Not the crap AOM/CTP2 throws at you with frenzy AI's all attacking. AI alliances work together on multiple fronts. And a CTP2/AOM AI cannot handle a naval invasion. It's the biggest hole in CTP2 combat.

Also, can you have multiple nations units on one tile? Can you have 50 units on a tile? Civ4 can.

Oh yes those promotions, 40 + promotions, where if I win a combat against cavalry in a desert I can select hill combat bonus, very good. 40 extra decisions to do what, I select one unit and the computer auto selects the best counter, isn't that the case? General promotions that reflect average improvement suit me fine.

Cavalry don't just have hill combat promotion. What about flanking, strike, etc. You pick the crap promotion, it's your fault. lol.

Show me where I said I cannot change my victory focus, I have said repeatedly i have to use every means possible, only that it is hard to maintain focus on one thing such as science, when there is so much going on. This reflects the complexity, depth and challenge of the game, not an artificial limit as you imply. BTW smithldoo posted the outcome of a diplomacy win at the aom forum last year.

Stan himself has said:

A vell resources Republican or TE government can theoretically win a science or diplomacy victory by turn 400 in the game, but you would have to have the patience and virtues of a saint and never wage a war of expansion and be a bit lucky re your starting location with good land and no near ai neighbours. This is with 8-10 opponents on a gigantic map.

Sounds like you really have to have one goal in mind to achieve it. Like you can't switch to a science or diplo win halfway through the game.

If you mean by isolationist game, you mean peaceful builder, you can do the same in AOM. You yourself said that if you pick the higher difficulty levels "you will face one aggressive/expansionist ai player". By this I assume you mean that that player is likely to attack you, as happened in mine and smithldoos attempts to emulate Nikolai and play just a peaceful game. Again you seem to have forgotten what frenzy does, it is tied to the human aggression level. Don't you remember that? And an aggressive ai type attacking an explorer is not a real war.

In Civ4, even an aggressive AI can be passified through diplomacy. With frenzy, they can't be. As frenzy rises in AOM, so does the AI not wanting anything to do with you but death. You can buy off a Civ4 AI.

[Generaldoktor]

StanK: Thanks for the help, but I found the "cheats" editor on my own, probably should have looked harder before asking for others' time/help.

Bickering Others , Part XIX: Carry on! Obviously all of you enjoy this and its providing more life to this thread than AOM strategy and positive observations, at least right now. I personally have nothing to add from the strategy angle on AOM as I'm still studying the game. But I do like it.

For balance, I will play C4 all weekend instead though, to maintain my patina of impartiality.

[Generaldoktor]

Originally posted by Dale


Cavalry don't just have hill combat promotion. What about flanking, strike, etc. You pick the crap promotion, it's your fault. lol.

I don't normally double-post, but this caught my eye and was misunderstood. (Oh, and I don't want to get in the Great Debate in any kind of a big way. )

When you defeat a unit in Civ4 you are sometimes given an incongruent promotion. Where I notice it is with barb archers before axemen come out. You can take a "melee" promotion, even though the unit you defeated was archer. You are frequently not offered a "woodsman" promotion early on, but have to take "hill" instead, even if you beat your opponent in the woods. This is a design flaw, admittedly a rather unimportant one. This is undoubtedly what AngryBowen was speaking of, the limiting, incongruent promotions often offered, which don't reflect the environment of the actual battle.

I'm playing AOM on gigantic maps with only 8 opponents, during my "learning" phase. The games aren't playing bad and I'm getting farther each time, though still ultimately losing on beginner setting, probably because I just don't know what to do yet. I still find them enjoyable. I am playing with "bloodlust" on and "default surrender" and "spontaneous happenings" so I am playing AOM, not CTP; however I am also playing with the five starting nomads at the low difficulty, so it is neutered in some way from Stan's ideal, but I would recommend this to anyone who wants to learn to play well, without getting overwhelmed and/or frustrated initially. I recently bumped up barbs to "marauding" as Stan told me this is probably the way to get ruins back in the game, with their advantages. The difference between that and "raiders," at least in the early game, is not extreme or unmanagable.

That's my report on that. "Play what you want!" I'm thinking of making that my signature slogan for all my posts on this website after viewing some considerable controversies here my first year.

(Others of note: Civ Multiplayer vs. Single-Player, People who hate levels below Monarch, People Who Want Hitler in the Game, People who think Napoleon is a Stupid Choice, etc... )

[stankarp]

I have one comment.

I played 2 games of Civ 4 using IAS last December and posted the information to Yin for consideration in his review.

It was no problem, and by far the easiest way to victory. Does that mean I am full of **** too?

[smithldoo]

City maintenance is the city cap in civ4.

The cap did not work in my games.

Dale I furnished a screen capture for you of my progress in an IAS game in progress where I was 2X ahead of the next ai after killing one.

Am I full of shi1t too?

I cannot for the life of me see how you can say civ 4 ai invades on multiple fronts. When I was aggressive, they never invaded me AT ALL. In addition if you look at my picture you will see that I was centre top of map. I occupied the whole west third, then attacked the ai in the middle south in that game and no AI interfered at all. I did not have to protect my north or west AT ALL. The AI could only come at me from basically one direction. And never did.

The biggest difference between AOM and Civ 4 is the map. There is no x/y wrap round in civ 4. In AOM there is, so the ai and barbs can come at you from all directions. Absolutely every direction. I have had one ai with 3 stacks coming at me from different directions at the same time many, many, many times. In civ 4 nothing like it.

To say that you played a game of AOM I (no diplo update) and did it by conquest (your words) and did not have the ai coming at you from all directions is pure fantasy IMHO. I know who is full of shi1t.

You actually don't read stuff that carefully. On the point made by angry re resources. I will put it in SIMPLE language. If I have 2 cows with the appropriate improvement, and every ai has cow or won't trade with me, what use is the 2nd cow??? That is the point he is making. In AOM every resource on the map can be used, and has a useful and cumulative benefit.

In my 4 games of Civ 4 I do not recall any ruins after 1 AD in any game. They were all cleaned out well and truely.