Jason Moyer on 23/9/2010 at 02:32
Quote Posted by Absynthe
others say it's irrational, retarded, and receives resource bonuses on higher difficulty settings.
Hasn't the AI always cheated beyond whatever the balanced difficulty is?
Swiss Mercenary on 23/9/2010 at 04:11
Quote Posted by Jason Moyer
Hasn't the AI always cheated beyond whatever the balanced difficulty is?
Yes, it did. Blatantly.
Thirith on 23/9/2010 at 07:26
I've been hearing some pretty hilarious things about the AI (at least in the version reviewed). My favourite has to be George Washington offering the player five cities for peace between the two nations, the player saying that peace in itself is enough and he doesn't want the cities, and Washington revising his offer accordingly: seven cities so there's peace.
Perhaps he was trying to get rid of those cities. Perhaps they were all in New Jersey.
What I find weird is that almost everyone who's played both Alpha Centauri and recent Civilization titles agrees that the AI factions and diplomacy in AC were much better than in the more recent Civ games - there was real *personality* to the Spartans, the Gaians etc. Some of that may be due to the writing and art, which made it easier to project personality into the AI's moves, but some of it must be the way the AI was programmed. If they got it right 10+ years ago (is that how long it's been?), what's gone wrong since?
Swiss Mercenary on 23/9/2010 at 08:09
All Civ 3 AIs acted... Pretty much the same.
In Civ 4, different AIs had different personality traits. Tokugawa would refuse to trade tech, Mansa Musa would make deals favorable to the player, treacherous AIs would backstab you at the first sign of weakness. There were certainly differences...
In Alpha Centauri, though, most of your AI diplomatic bonuses and penalties were the result of your social engineering choices. Fundamentalism was almost never a popular one for players to pick, for instance - as such, Miriam was almost always out for your blood - with near 100% consistency, from game to game. On the other hand, Morgan's traits made the AI really bad at playing him, so he would nearly always be a pushover. In Civ 4, diplomatic penalties were softer, and no AI was consistently behind the others (At least, until the end-game). As such, they felt more "samey".
TTK12G3 on 23/9/2010 at 19:33
Quote Posted by Jason Moyer
Hasn't the AI always cheated beyond whatever the balanced difficulty is?
Always. Always.
Jason Moyer on 23/9/2010 at 19:42
I don't remember if they continued this in Civ 3/4, but the Civ 2 manual actually told you exactly how the AI cheated at higher difficulty levels, in addition to the AI cheating in general since they could see the entire map, always (don't remember if/when they changed that in a subsequent version).
Shakey-Lo on 23/9/2010 at 19:51
No they don't do that any more, I am pretty sure that Civ 4 had none of that sort of cheating (ie. AIs only knew what a player in their position would know), they were only given bonuses to make construction quicker, etc.
And like previous games Civ 5 doesn't try to hide it either - when you select a difficulty it tells you that AIs will receive bonuses.
Loving this game a whole lot - its 4AM again :bored:
Koki on 24/9/2010 at 08:10
Is there a single city challenge?
Shakey-Lo on 24/9/2010 at 08:50
Yes.
Stitch on 24/9/2010 at 14:31
I am hovering around the periphery of Civ V, careful not to make eye contact lest it suck me into its vicelike clutches. It's in my future, yes, like a looming extended dalliance into crack, but I'm holding strong for as long as I can.
(or, at least, until I wrap up Dragon Age: Awakening)
