 |
|  |
 |
|
dognheat
|
|
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Apr 2001 time: 05:12
|
|
I am not sure if this has been brought up before, but one thing that has been getting on my nerves lately is what happens in games when your empire gets too powerful. The way I play, is I begin very aggressive in clearing out my starting island, or a sizeable space for my needs. Then play rather passively until someone pisses me off and then I invade. My reputation is usualy spotless, and yet at a certain point in the game everybody else declares war on me whether or not I have done anything wrong. This is a trend I have noticed in 4x games (Space Empires 4, SMAC, all civ games, warlords, etc.). I understand that the computer players must band together to offset my superpower status, but when that happens I usually stop playing because the fun factor drops significantly. What is really the most fustrating thing about it is that there is no valid pretext to all out war between my empire and the all the others. It is not even really dificult to fight off the other civs, but it just becomes a constant battle between sinking everthing in sight and sneaking trade caravans through. Not that I want peace with everybody forever, but having to build 32 SDI defences in 1 turn becuase everybody and their mom is going to nuke me next turn is kinda lame.
I would love to hear everybodies thoughts on this because I am not really sure as to a solution to this problem, but I know I what they in place currently doesn't work.
------------------
*PLOP*
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
airdrik
|
 |
Nampa, ID, USA
Oct 2000 time: 22:12
|
|
Actually, this should be fixed, since just being big is not a threat to the AI unless they decide they don't like you any more . The way the AI thinks in current games is that big empire=bad, even if you are giving everyone else all your techs, and money, and units, and anything else, and just trying to be nice, the computer only looks at the number of cities that your civ has and the number of techs you have, and the more cities and cities you have, the higher the rate at which they dislike you. Even in a recent OCC game I played, I had an alliance with the greeks (the most powerful civ in the game with a little of my help), and nearing the end of the game they broke off the alliance.
I have a very good feeling that this will be fixed in civ 3, though, and that how much people like you be more based on how many times you have committed acts against them and their friends, and inversly the number of acts against their enemies.
Being smarter than another doesn't make you enemies unless you are always talking about how smart you are.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
King Richard
|
 |
Oslo, Norway
Apr 2001 time: 06:12
|
|
I must say I agree! There is nothing more irritating than to be drawn into war with everything that can move! I've always had the same problem. I build a lot of cities, improvements, almost every wonder and have a lot more techs than the enemy. At a certain point, they all ally against me, switching techs like they where drunk in Las Vegas. Before I now it, I'm not so powerful anymore! When this has gone on for a while, I'll just have to go to war! I thought there should be possible to play, and win Civilization without killing everybody!? Well, it is possible, but not always very fun...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
dognheat
|
|
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Apr 2001 time: 05:12
|
|
So the general consensus is that this will be taken care of in civ III. That is good news, EXCEPT I am curious as to how they will deal with the later portion of the game. Without what now seems to be a standard AI activity in 4x gmaes, how would they keep the latter portion engaging. I for one would like to see the UN have a more active involvement in the game. Also idealogical conflicts are a must (cold war is a great example). More internal conflicts buying politicians and the like, and how it effects your standing in the world. I am just babbling at this point...
------------------
*PLOP*
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ilkuul
|
 |
of Thame (UK)
Mar 2000 time: 05:12
|
|
I've had the same problem that big=bad, and everyone gangs up against you in the endgame. Interestingly, the opposite has occurred a couple of times for me in OCC games: 'cos I was only 1 city, they paid no attention to the fact that I was far and away the most advanced civ, and would soon be winning the space race!
If I've understood correctly what's been said about Civ3, tho' (e.g. in the CGW article), diplomatic and economic victories will also be possible - so a large economically weak empire won't necessarily be a threat. There'll be other factors besides military might and technological advancement, and that gives me hope that (1) sheer size won't provoke an automatic 'gang-up' reaction; and (2), even if it does, there will be diplomatic and economic ways to counteract such AI alliances.
And of course with the possibility of revolts, secessions, etc. (see other threads), it'll be a lot harder to maintain a very large empire anyway!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
King Richard
|
 |
Oslo, Norway
Apr 2001 time: 06:12
|
|
quote:

Originally posted by Ilkuul on 04-13-2001 06:03 PM
I've had the same problem that big=bad, and everyone gangs up against you in the endgame. Interestingly, the opposite has occurred a couple of times for me in OCC games: 'cos I was only 1 city, they paid no attention to the fact that I was far and away the most advanced civ, and would soon be winning the space race!
If I've understood correctly what's been said about Civ3, tho' (e.g. in the CGW article), diplomatic and economic victories will also be possible - so a large economically weak empire won't necessarily be a threat. There'll be other factors besides military might and technological advancement, and that gives me hope that (1) sheer size won't provoke an automatic 'gang-up' reaction; and (2), even if it does, there will be diplomatic and economic ways to counteract such AI alliances.
And of course with the possibility of revolts, secessions, etc. (see other threads), it'll be a lot harder to maintain a very large empire anyway!
 |
I hope it will be possible to maintain large empires in civ3! But since they are probably going to allow economic victories, and a new trade system, I think that there is going to be even more wars in civ3, if you monopolize certain commodities. Sounds reasonable?
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
kolpo
|
|
minor civilization can partialy solve this. Because minor civilizations can't most likely win themself with economic, diplomatic or space race won't they see your growing power as much as a treath as the major ones, they may even try to ally you or even form a federation with you so that they can share in your victory and wealth.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12. Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|