Hi guys,
First of all, a bit of context given this is my first post. I've been an ardent Civ fan since Civilisation 1 (yes with an 's' - silly yanks ;)). I shudder to think how many hours i've put into this series.
When Civ 5 came out, after playing a couple of long games, i felt that things didn't really hang together all that well, e.g. AI combat, diplomacy, the absurd cost-benefit ratio of buildings (weighted towards cost), the fact that all the land tiles seemed to have homogeneous attributes. A year ago, if i had to choose, i think Civ 4 would have been my favourite of the series.
A few days ago i decided to pick up Civ 5 again and see how the expansion and interim patches have changed the game, IMO game balance is much improved, whilst the addition of religion adds an interesting strategic dimension. This is now a game that i would play over Civ 4.
However, there are a couple of things that still bother me (playing on Emperor difficulty, Pangaea map):
1. AI aggression. Maybe my memory is clouded by nostalgia, but in Civ 4 it used to be possible to have meaningful relationships with the AI. It was possible to nurture long-lasting friendships and alliances through the ages. In Civ 5, diplomacy is simply an unending cycle of peace-denouce-war-'oh **** we're losing'-peace-denouce-war'. NOT conducive to an immersive experience and simply not logical.
2. AI snowballing. In the 3 games i've played post-expansion, one AI will always subsume all others, such that it ends up being me vs the super-AI. I've abandoned all 3 games just prior to the modern era, not because i was losing, but because at this point, i know how the rest of the game will pan out. My economy is far more developed and the AI can't match my combat tactics. The AI will declare war. I'll take half a dozen cities. The AI will sue for peace. Then it will declare war. I'll take half a dozen cities. The AI will sue for peace. Then it will declare war...until nothing is left. :nuke::nuke::nuke:.
The end-game would be far more interesting if there were more than one AI left standing.
Maybe the 3 games i've played so far are just a coincidence - i'm starting another one as we speak. I want to be playing a building game with the option of combat. In Civ 5, at least at the higher difficulties, combat seems an unavoidable eventuality. I find that sad :(.
So, can anyone tell me if my experience so far is atypical of the game? Can anyone recommend some good mods which may change AI behaviour? Thanks in advance and sorry for the long post - wanted to get that off my chest :lol:.
First of all, a bit of context given this is my first post. I've been an ardent Civ fan since Civilisation 1 (yes with an 's' - silly yanks ;)). I shudder to think how many hours i've put into this series.
When Civ 5 came out, after playing a couple of long games, i felt that things didn't really hang together all that well, e.g. AI combat, diplomacy, the absurd cost-benefit ratio of buildings (weighted towards cost), the fact that all the land tiles seemed to have homogeneous attributes. A year ago, if i had to choose, i think Civ 4 would have been my favourite of the series.
A few days ago i decided to pick up Civ 5 again and see how the expansion and interim patches have changed the game, IMO game balance is much improved, whilst the addition of religion adds an interesting strategic dimension. This is now a game that i would play over Civ 4.
However, there are a couple of things that still bother me (playing on Emperor difficulty, Pangaea map):
1. AI aggression. Maybe my memory is clouded by nostalgia, but in Civ 4 it used to be possible to have meaningful relationships with the AI. It was possible to nurture long-lasting friendships and alliances through the ages. In Civ 5, diplomacy is simply an unending cycle of peace-denouce-war-'oh **** we're losing'-peace-denouce-war'. NOT conducive to an immersive experience and simply not logical.
2. AI snowballing. In the 3 games i've played post-expansion, one AI will always subsume all others, such that it ends up being me vs the super-AI. I've abandoned all 3 games just prior to the modern era, not because i was losing, but because at this point, i know how the rest of the game will pan out. My economy is far more developed and the AI can't match my combat tactics. The AI will declare war. I'll take half a dozen cities. The AI will sue for peace. Then it will declare war. I'll take half a dozen cities. The AI will sue for peace. Then it will declare war...until nothing is left. :nuke::nuke::nuke:.
The end-game would be far more interesting if there were more than one AI left standing.
Maybe the 3 games i've played so far are just a coincidence - i'm starting another one as we speak. I want to be playing a building game with the option of combat. In Civ 5, at least at the higher difficulties, combat seems an unavoidable eventuality. I find that sad :(.
So, can anyone tell me if my experience so far is atypical of the game? Can anyone recommend some good mods which may change AI behaviour? Thanks in advance and sorry for the long post - wanted to get that off my chest :lol:.