Arabia's AI let me win.
Yes it did, which is the main reason why I prefer Civ 4. It was probably dumber in C4, but had better judgement.
Civilization V
- Thread starter Hermiod
- Start date
Yes it did, which is the main reason why I prefer Civ 4. It was probably dumber in C4, but had better judgement.
I think the AI is discouraged from a diplomatic win because they have so much money all the time it wouldn't be fun. Granted, things might be different with the new City-State system, but it's still possible to use money in the right situation. If they did always aggressively go for diplo victory, the only way to beat them would be to ally with enough city-states and declare war, which is cheesy.
So my guess is they decided on diplo victory, but slow-played it rather than went aggressively.
So my guess is they decided on diplo victory, but slow-played it rather than went aggressively.
The whole point of Civ5's AI is that it wants to win, it picks a victory condition early in the game and then pursues it relentlessly. In fact, that's why so many people hated the Civ5 AI, because if another civ got a hint that you were going for the same victory as it then they would hate you for it (something that was removed from G&K). Civ4's AI was more roleplay-y, it attempts to achieve victory but it's not as consumed with it as Civ5's. I just got beat to a spaceship victory in my most recent game and, let me tell you, the AI went for that victory with gusto. They completed the Apollo Program about 60 turns after me (marathon game), and then built all the components of the ship in the next 30 turns, while I was still at least 50 turns away from getting the last component. A few months ago I played a game with a real nail-biter of an ending, with four different civs vying for 4 different victories, which I only just barely won.
That's why I'm so confused by how Arabia flubbed their lead, in dozens of of Civ5 games I've never seen an AI screw up such a clear lead. What may have happened was that they were attempting a domination victory and had targeted me as the next victim as I was the weakest of the three remaining civs, but I had a defensive pact with Mongolia and Arabia was waiting for that to run its course before attacking me. But because diplomacy was reworked in G&K, things like defensive pacts can be renegotiated between turns so they never run out, and Arabia never never got an opportunity to take a shot at me without taking on Mongolia as well, which they weren't prepared to do. If that's the case then they should have gone for a plan B or C and aimed for a diplomatic or scientific victory, and that would indicate there's a problem with the way the AI pursues victory.
For what it's worth, Civ5 DLC is 50% off right now for those who were interested in getting them but didn't think they were worth the price. I think the Civs and Map Scripts are worthwhile (I'd even add the wonders, although less so). The premade maps are probably not worth it.
There's a Civ flash deal ending shortly for those that are interested. Civs III, IV, & V (plus expansions and DLC, except G&K) for $25/€25. Civ V Game of the Year edition for $12.49/€10. Gods and Kings for 25% off.
Continents Plus would be my perfect map script were it not for the fact that it places all the city states on islands. I don't understand the reasoning behind that but it makes the continents feel empty and makes city states even less important than normal.
Alright guys, I need some help. I grabbed all the DLC's and the expansion while they were on sale and I started playing the game again. What exactly is the point/ purpose of religion? Sure, you get nice bonuses for founding a major religion, but what exactly are you trying to do with it? How do you benefit from spreading it across the land? I'm going ahead and trying to go all out with spreading my religion, but it is currently striking me as little more than a time-killer during your turn.
Am I missing something?
Am I missing something?
Religion is subtle, but can be very effective, it's like a wonder that gets more powerful the more you spread it. Tithe is possibly the most powerful belief, +1 gold for every 4 followers is a massive boost to your economy if your religion becomes the dominant one. The Just War belief is very useful for aggressive civs, just have a great prophet accompany your army, have him convert the city you're attacking, and you instantly get a 20% combat bonus. Religion doesn't turn the game on its head, but it gives you extra leverage to help you achieve your goals.
There are also diplomatic bonuses for spreading your religion to other empires, if it becomes the dominant religion in another civ then you get a healthy diplomatic boost with them that makes it easier to become friends and form alliances. But if you forcefully spread your religion (using prophets and missionaries) to civs that have already founded their own religion, they'll get annoyed, and if you ignore their requests to stop then they may attack you.
There are also diplomatic bonuses for spreading your religion to other empires, if it becomes the dominant religion in another civ then you get a healthy diplomatic boost with them that makes it easier to become friends and form alliances. But if you forcefully spread your religion (using prophets and missionaries) to civs that have already founded their own religion, they'll get annoyed, and if you ignore their requests to stop then they may attack you.
I think they should have added a religious victory condition to G&K similar to the Apostolic Palace (IIRC) in Civ 4. I can probably live without corporations though. I like the diplomatic marriage of city states ability that Austria has. It would be neat if there were a way for other countries to have a limited form of that ability with adjoining city states - perhaps after a combined long period of alliance and common religion.
Last edited:
For those interested in getting DLC or Gods & Kings, there's a Steam sale going on now where everything is about half price (so $1.50-3.75 for a civ or combo pack).
Probably tomorrow, yeah. I don't want to keep monitoring it to find out. I'm hoping X-Com will drop even more tomorrow, but it'll probably stay at 33% off.
Nice.
Well, not for me since I have everything, but still nice.
Well, not for me since I have everything, but still nice.
I put Civ 5 on my Christmas list. I love these types of strategy/world building games and there aren't enough of them.
New expansion incoming this summer: Brave New World
Sounds promising. If this expansion is as good as God and Kings was and successfully adds greater depth to diplomacy then Civ5 would be almost perfect for me. (Except the universal happiness feature, I still don't like that.)
Sounds promising. If this expansion is as good as God and Kings was and successfully adds greater depth to diplomacy then Civ5 would be almost perfect for me. (Except the universal happiness feature, I still don't like that.)
There had been the steam leak so I knew it was coming (although the name there didn't have "Brave" in it). I'm glad to hear it announced, although my firewall at work blocks the link.
The key features mentioned in the article are:
- The first player to discover all other civs founds The World Congress, which is a UN-type body that adopts resolutions such as sanctions or banning the trade of certain resources. Votes aren't instantaneous, after a resolution is proposed you spend several turns trying to convince other civs to your side or buy their votes. This new body will provide a new diplomatic victory.
- Trade routes are added. You create them using caravans or cargo ships and can use them to trade with other civs or between cities in your own empire. It will be possible to trade food and production between cities so you can quickly buff up a newly founded city, or to assist in the construction of wonders. Religion can spread via trade routes, and trade routes will somehow allow you to acquire technologies from more advanced civs.
- There's a new culture victory that requires you to spread your culture somehow with great works. There'll be some sort of archaeologist (unit?) that investigates old battle sites and ruined cities.
- 9 new civilizations, one of which is Poland.
I'm looking at the link now. Poland is a bit of a surprise. There are a lot of Polish Civ fans who have been pushing for them forever (although the last expansion had quite a bit of European civs). The changes to cultural victory are quite a surprise, but I'm intrigued. Trade routes could work, although it's odd that they're using a civ2 system.
O Brave New World that Has Such People in It.
ETA: That siege tower unquestionably looks Assyrian, so we might finally see the Assyrian Empire in the game.
O Brave New World that Has Such People in It.
ETA: That siege tower unquestionably looks Assyrian, so we might finally see the Assyrian Empire in the game.
Having read the RPS interview, the expansion sounds very ambitious, particularly ideologies and cultural influence:
That seems like it would radically change the endgame, but it would be a bugger to balance, and Firaxis don't have the best track record of having balanced games at release.
Similar threads
