• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

calmon

Sergeant
64 Badges
Jan 23, 2007
93
2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • BATTLETECH
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
Just want to know. civ 5 AI was so bad. Especially the tactical one. Is it better?

And yes this question is either to the devs or all the beta testers outside :)
 
Last edited:
Since it's a completely different game, I don't think you can compare...
 
Most of Civilization 5's AI was ripped straight out of cIV.

The problem being that Civilization 5 has 1UPT and cIV had stacks.

That made it an unmitigated disaster. At least combat wise. :wacko:

It'll be much better in W:MOTA since they'll be doing their own AI and have Fantasy Wars and Elven Legacy to draw from.
 
Since it's a completely different game, I don't think you can compare...

So what exactly IS different from army point of view? Look at the videos. This point is exactly the same!

And trust me from single player aspect I'm just disappointed from the AI at all.

They all add features over features over features in these games and on the end I just ran over everything because I USE THIS FEATURES and the AI not.

WoM/FE, HOI/EU/Vic/etc., MoO, MoM, GalCiv, Civ, AoW, etc. pp.

All have the same problem. While UI and "features"-additions improve a lot during years. AI not. I want to react to something, instead doing the same all the time works perfect... (no need of big tactics, just "exploit" the things the AI doesn't do/the AI can't handle). And I don't talk about complex strategies/tactics which should be exact the thing the Human should do to get rid of the AI bonus in hardest difficult level, I talk about very simple things that work to win (iE creating 1 Killer Stack, getting easily bad defended cities in the hinterlands, just FOCUS opponent units&HEAL my units, etc.).

In some games I feel like adding a "cheat command" just by creating a stack with a lot good units and the AI can't handle (1 "Killer" Stack running over everything).

In HoI3 I use the Theatre-Mechanic by setting everything to AI control and don't move a single unit by myself to limit me somehow to get some challenge at all.

I'm tired of games developed for all the Testers around who have fun for 2-3 hours with all the features and missing the fact that players want to replay the game and want some challenge after 1-3 games and not just collecting the features and win...
 
Last edited:
So what exactly IS different from army point of view? Look at the videos. This point is exactly the same!

The point is that it's a completely different game, not game type. They will build a new, own AI which will have nothing to do with cub.
 
The point is that it's a completely different game, not game type. They will build a new, own AI which will have nothing to do with cub.

As far as I can see (developer videos, beta testers) its a lot of Civ5 inside. Just look angry joes interview.

I don't see any REAL difference in battle. They run into the same stuff Civ5 developers run in case to structure the AIs army to have it strong enough to compete with players army but without let important places undefended.

Difficult enough! Sure the make a whole new AI but with more or less the same constraints. They need to make it better but could also struggle on the same things (Civ5 is still bad -Tactical AI wise- even 1.5 years later!)

Master of Magic seems far more different than Civ Tactical Battle) than Warlock from Civ5.
 
I don't see any REAL difference in battle. They run into the same stuff Civ5 developers run in case to structure the AIs army to have it strong enough to compete with players army but without let important places undefended.

Difficult enough! Sure the make a whole new AI but with more or less the same constraints. They need to make it better but could also struggle on the same things (Civ5 is still bad -Tactical AI wise- even 1.5 years later!)

When it comes to combat AI, they have experience from making Fantasy Wars and Elven Legacy, which used an almost identical combat system. Firaxis didn't have any experience with such type of game before Civ5.