 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Computer combat AI is braindead by Rafiki 10/04/2010, 6:18pm PDT | ||||
 |
 |
|||
| Combat is actually fun since there's now more strategy than stacking up a rapetrain, but the computer is braindead. Won a conquest victory on Prince difficulty before the 20th century, and I was barely trying. Computer only seems to build a tiny handful of subpar units, which you can easily swarm and murder. This is in contrast to me sucking so bad at Civ4 I almost never won even on Warlord difficulty. I was terrible. Now suddenly I'm somehow awesome.
AI also doesn't appear to attack cities. I was playing one game where I had 3 units in my entire army and a city on another island unprotected by anything. One civ declared war against me, brought a mass of units to my island city, and just sat there and never attacked. I just had my city lob arrows at all the troops until they died. Then the AI brought another mass of troops later and this repeated itself 3 or 4 times. Dozens and dozens of turns of the computer standing around not attacking, not letting me negotiate peace, until I finally gave up and resigned myself to slaughtering its stupid, stupid troops. Eventually the computer negotiated peace with ME, and gave me a bunch of shit even though I had no army and wasn't on the offense. Other victories are trivial because there's no threat of military attack. Just race to resources and pump culture or science or whatever. Or horde gold the whole game and buy yourself a diplomatic victory at the very end. Maybe it would be fun in multiplayer if you had enough people to turn off AI and city-states. |
||||
 |
 |
|||
|
Computer combat AI is braindead by 10/04/2010, 6:18pm PDT  I don't know, I have a Caesar on my second game at Prince level that I'm in awe by 10/04/2010, 6:30pm PDT The AI lacks discipline. Also budgetary sense. by 10/04/2010, 7:55pm PDT Re: The AI lacks discipline. Also budgetary sense. by 10/05/2010, 4:50pm PDT It never tells you why it's killing you. by 10/05/2010, 6:01pm PDT |
