 |
|  |
 |
|
Ision
|
|
Firstly, let me say that CIV is my favorite game. In spite of whatever faults I may list here, in my opinion there is no other PC strategy game that comes close.
The fundemental problem with CIV is the difficulty levels. As you move up in difficulty the game becomes progressively narrower in your strategy options. The AI bonus does not create a better game on higher level. It merely makes the human become more of a number cruncher and ultra micro-manager.
All expert players of any games are great micro-managers. The differance heres lies in the fact that on the 2 highest levels of CIV - micromangement is THE game. After Monarch - it's a game of 'catch up and kill'. Period - end of story. The game loses nearly all it's nuances.
The reason for this is the manner in which the game was designed to become harder. Massive initial bonus's to the AI does not maintain the same game at a higher level. It changes the entire dynamics.
Everyone knows the drill on Regent or Monarch level. A somehat close first age. A good lead in the second age. A forgone conclusion the moment you land TOE. I only use this example as one of many. For some of you the game is over much earlier (like the moment you take out that neighbor CIV's capitol). As the game goes on the AI is progressively handicapped by it's inability to make adjustments to it's gameplay. The human's micromangement ability begins to take it's toll on the AI's hard coded inflexibility.
The solution in my opinion is clear. The AI bonus's should be 'progressive' in nature. Imagine for a moment an Emperor level that went like this: Intial production bonus 9 - 1 extra worker - 2 extra defenders - 4 free units - AI trade 140. As each AI civ enters a new age it's production bonus's continue to go up as well. Middle ages production 8, Industrial age production 7, Modern era each city supports 4 free units. Ect...
That's only an example. I don't want to argue the details. Naturally a better formula would be arrived at that maintains a proper play balance. There would be other tweaks as well. But the essetial element is a slower but steady AI bonus that coincides with what is typically the humans progressive lead with each passing age.
I maintain that an age by age 'progressive' AI bonus system would create greater play balance for the better players, without sacrificeing those aspects of CIV that we all loved when we were still new to the game.
The idea is to restore the flavor the game had when you won your first couple of games on Regent or Monarch, but before you mastered those levels and went on to a completely different 'CIV game' on Emperor and Diety
Last edited by Ision on 19-06-2003 at 12:16
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ision
|
|
By the way, naturally each CIV will enter the new age at different times. This will only eccentuate the game even more. It creates even more killer AI's. As in real history, on average those civilizations that did not keep up technologically were doomed. Even if they were isolated from the rest of the world geographically, they were doomed on first contact with the technologically more advanced (as was the case with the Aztecs upon encountering the Spanish).
In game terms it will reduce the long stalemate type AI vs AI wars.
Last edited by Ision on 19-06-2003 at 12:12
|
|
|  |
 |
|
dexters
|
 |
Vancouver, Canada
Nov 2001 time: 05:29
|
|
I think if Firaxis could somehow committ the resources and have a lone programmer work part time on the Civ 3 Ai over the long term, as a kind of comittment to the community, we could very well end up with a very challenging game with things as is.
The problem is, AI fixes only seem to come with the big bad patches. I was extremely disappointed when I heard that there would be no major AI fixes in PTW. Soren ended up giving us fans a treat by improving several aspects of the AI and continued to do so in 1.14 and to 1.21.
Conquests, with its theme of war etc., needs to address many of the AI issues regarding naval invasions, stack movements, stack management and address some of the cheap war related and non war related exploits that some of the players out there use consistently or perhaps even subconciously.
I would even go as far as saying that I would gladly pay a subscriber type fee to Firaxis for their continued support of Civ III beyond the mandatory patching.
Those who followed the game into PTW have esentially had their vanilla Civ3 patched since day 1 (oct 2001 to feb 2003), and I can attest to the great improvements in the AI even though fixing the AI has never been the focus of these patches. I guess part of me is hoping for some serious effort to beef up the AI with Conquests.
A commitment to patch the AI would greatly energize the community and the game as we mull over exploits and how best to help the AI put up a better challenge. Perhaps I'm one of the few people here who believes in the Civ3 AI and its ability to do great things if enough resources is devoted to adapting it to common human playing styles.
Last edited by dexters on 19-06-2003 at 14:14
|
|
|  |
 |
|
I Am Jeff
|
|
New Jersey
Feb 2002 time: 00:29
|
|
The backbone of Civ3 is the A.I., the better the A.I. is, the better the game will be. Ideally the only difference between dificulty levels should only be difference in A.I. stratagy. Simply meaning that higher difficulty levels, should only mean harder A.I. I doubt that will happen with Civ3, but maybe if they could continue and improve the A.I. greatly, maybe the bonuses could be lessend.
I too believe in the A.I. and the great thing Soren, I now laugh when I look at the A.I. of previous civ games. I know that if there are not great A.I. improvements included in the new XP, I may have trouble spending the initial $30 for it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ktaek
|
|
Wow i think you guys are being harsh. The AI in Civ3 is why i keep coming back to this game, and it's a signficant achievement in game development.
Everything said is valid, the only change in difficulty should be better AI, but cars should run on water & air and we should be able to teleport to alpha centauri by now as well.
Consider how much more complicated Civ3 is vs Chess, and then think of the massive resources dedicated to creating Deep Blue.
And consider that so far there has never been any AI that has been able to be considered even passable at playing Go.
The amount of depth the Civ3 AI has and the fact that i bought it for about how 1/2 of what my polo t-shirt cost makes Civ3 the bargain of a lifetime imho.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
djafrot
|
|
You're right... this is a phenomenally complex game. The AI often surprises me in its ingenuity (sp?) and makes it a different challenge every game. Admittedly I don't play as much as many of the others here so I am not as good...
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29. Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|