Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

At last! The truth about CIV 4!

wendigo

Novice
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
77
Hmmph. The AI cheated in Civ 1/2 even more than in 3... and the AI could at least put up a halfway decent fight on "Monarch" and above in Civ 3. The overall AI performance in Civ 2 was *terrible*, so I've never understood why anybody would prefer it to Civ 3. REX, micromanage, win. REX, micromanage, win. Yawn. In the "Test of Time" version it did seem a little better, admittedly. Even so, I can't imagine going back to a version without culture. You could create multi-continent empires by the early iron age in Civ 1/2, for fuck's sake. It was ridiculous.

Has the AI cheating finally ended with IV? I haven't read up on it much. If nothing else, the game has become more subtle about cheating. Not that there's any excuse for cheating at all anymore-- GalCiv 2 has pretty thoroughly proved that you can write AI that challenges the human player without giving bonuses to the computer-controlled players. Here's hoping that Civ 5 takes a page from Stardock's book.
 

sparrowtm

Insert Disk 22
Developer
Joined
Dec 13, 2004
Messages
167
wendigo said:
Has the AI cheating finally ended with IV? .

Not at all. Noble is the last difficulty setting which gives the AI no advantages over the player (at least in terms of building/research capability and extra units). After that, difficulty - as always - only increases by cheating AI's.
 

Excrément

Arbiter
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Messages
1,005
Location
Rockville
wendigo said:
Hmmph. The AI cheated in Civ 1/2 even more than in 3... and the AI could at least put up a halfway decent fight on "Monarch" and above in Civ 3. The overall AI performance in Civ 2 was *terrible*, so I've never understood why anybody would prefer it to Civ 3. REX, micromanage, win. REX, micromanage, win. Yawn. In the "Test of Time" version it did seem a little better, admittedly. Even so, I can't imagine going back to a version without culture. You could create multi-continent empires by the early iron age in Civ 1/2, for fuck's sake. It was ridiculous.

Has the AI cheating finally ended with IV? I haven't read up on it much. If nothing else, the game has become more subtle about cheating. Not that there's any excuse for cheating at all anymore-- GalCiv 2 has pretty thoroughly proved that you can write AI that challenges the human player without giving bonuses to the computer-controlled players. Here's hoping that Civ 5 takes a page from Stardock's book.

yeah in civ 2 the computer was cheating beceuse of tweaked stats.
in civ 3, it is because of tweaked stats + knowledge of all the ressources are. and that's annoying.
 

kris

Arcane
Joined
Oct 27, 2004
Messages
8,877
Location
Lulea, Sweden
The biggest problem in the earlier Civ games for mewas always that war was not a viable option and if you where forced into one you had it trough several technology ages. The AI always had several times my army with half the cities. Research always was to fast (goes for Civ4 too).

My problem with Civ4 is that all games feels the same. It doesn't feel different from game to game to me, regardless of where I start and which civilization I play. Can't tech rush either.

Another problem is that I am a sucker for choosing the largest map and Civ4 turns out to be unplayable in the late game on that map.
 

El Dee

Scholar
Joined
Jan 25, 2006
Messages
461
I have been playing a lot of Civ4 lately, and I have noticed that on monarch or above everything is really combat oriented. That is my main complaint about the game. I will be kicking ass scorewise and get too caught up in commerence and science, then some suckass civ will start attacking me and overwhelming succeed.

I don't know... like others here have said, you have to start gearing up for the space race and at this point or a little before I usually get attacked. Oh well, anyone got any tips, recommendations, or just want to call me a noob.
 

bryce777

Erudite
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
4,225
Location
In my country the system operates YOU
WELL.

I didn't bother with 4, but eventually I figured out the key in civ 2.

Constant warfare. The ai can produce a ton of units, but uses them really stupidly.

It is easy to fortify in a few key points and near their cities and slaughter them wholesale. The point is not conquest, but to keep those idiots occupied and from massing up 700 units.

Also, I trade tech constantly and once I win the tech race I give it away for free so that i can trade or steal for whatever advances the other civs come up with. This way you can get into space around 1000 ad if you really try, without cheating.

The real key to the game is choking them out and keeping them from expanding by fencing them in. If you can do that, you have won the game.

I don't know how much of this applies to civ 4. Maybe it applies well because of the cultural thing making actual conquest a pain in the ass.
 

Goliath

Arcane
Zionist Agent
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
17,830
El Dee said:
I have been playing a lot of Civ4 lately, and I have noticed that on monarch or above everything is really combat oriented. That is my main complaint about the game. I will be kicking ass scorewise and get too caught up in commerence and science, then some suckass civ will start attacking me and overwhelming succeed.

You cannot blame the game for your own ignorance. Your ignorance of the game mechanics in this case. AI controlled civs do always attack you for a reason. There is funny little element in the game called "diplomacy", you know. If you play your cards right you can make the AIs destroy each other while you stand back and watch (Jewish World Conspiracy Strategy). Realize that the game has been won many times even on the highest difficulty level and that includes cultural, space race, diplomacy etc. victories. You just do not know what you are doing.

I don't know... like others here have said, you have to start gearing up for the space race and at this point or a little before I usually get attacked. Oh well, anyone got any tips, recommendations, or just want to call me a noob.

N00b! All the strategic considerations which are important if you want to win on a difficulty level designed for grown ups (Emperor and above) cannot be explained here.
Try reading some strategy guides. http://civfanatics.com/ is a good place to start.
 

LlamaGod

Cipher
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
3,095
Location
Yes
If you play your cards right you can make the AIs destroy each other while you stand back and watch (Jewish World Conspiracy Strategy).

That was the most fun in Alpha Centauri. I managed to make Pacts with everyone except the 1 at war with me, then convince all of them to go to war with them.

After that, i'd call up the weakest of my 'friends' and piss them off, then tell everyone to attack.

Throw in some nukes and hey, it's awesome.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom