Edit: Please read the entire thread before posting (or at least some of it) and not just relate to this message, as things have changed and addressed several times in it since I first started it. Thanks!
I tried playing Galciv 2 with all the patches and expansions a few days ago, and I got bullied and wiped out by the AI in normal difficulty. I remember having the same issue with the first Galciv as well when I tried playing the updated version of it some time ago as well.
Brad, or anyone else which reads this: Stardock seems to always listen to the 'Hardcore' war-mongering fans which complain about how easy the game is, how passive the AI is, and how this is too strong, and that is not balanced. Elemental was actually just fine before the patch, but the process has started already - you took out the summoning spells, which could actually help me out survive and actually gave me an alternative to building an army.
I wanted a game in which I could actually defend and slowly expand while slowly leveling my sovereign, but unless I build an army and maintain it as soon as I'm able, that is no longer possible without the summoning spells. Before I'll know it, you will listen to the fans and the game will, again, become a war-fest filled with bullies that attack you from turn 0.
This happened so many times before, and it looks like it is going to happen this time again. If I wanted a pure wargame, I'd buy one. That is actually disappointing. As a long time fan and supporter since the times of the first GalCiv, I don't think I'll buy your next expansion or game you guys make any more, I think I've had enough virtual masochism to last me quite a while
Sorry but most gamers don't hold your sentiments so tough luck for you eh? ) I want a fantasy wargame and I'm getting one. There's too many babyfied ones already out there you can play with your precious summoning spells from the beginning. Master of Magic and AOW both have them so there's no need for another. Thankyou Stardock for listening to the hardcore wargamers out here. )
Lancu, yeah, that'll surely help as a workaround, thanks alot!
Keemossi, you're right, I forgot to mention that. If you go diplomatic all the way in Galciv 2, it is almost like an invincibility cheat mode, you get to do whatever you want, juggle the AI, cause them to fight each other, get millions from them for simple techs and stuff like that. But that is just that - a cheat mode.
No, I prefer something else. I want it fair and square without resorting to building dozens of nameless stickfigures/ships with +1 in attack every other turn just so I could play the game, as even that doesn't always work.
Nova, interesting, but that will be a bit too complicated to implement in Elemental, I think.
Part of diplomacy having the strength behind you to compel others to consider your demands. If you're just peacefully building up your kingdom and don't have much of a military then why would a much stronger kingdom/empire want to cut a deal instead of just wiping you out and taking all your stuff? So at the very least you need to build up a decent military if only to defend yourself from aggressors. If your enemies fear you or at least consider you a credible threat then they'll be more willing to accept a diplomatic solution. Incidentally, this is how it works in real life, too.
To put it another way, if you're finding yourself getting steamrolled by the AI then you need to adjust your strategy.
Actually it's too complex for most games which is why no one has done it. I like to think game developers have a ton a great ideas for games but are mostly limited by time and tech so maybe only a good 50% of their ideas ever make it into a game.
Mtn_Man, I think the problem is not just with my strategy, but with ignoring players with playstyles such as mine. What you think is a logical thinking of an everyday warmonger, which grabs things by force when he can and only talks when he can't. But that way of thinking and playing shouldn't be the only one, in my opinion.
Agree with the OP if it's true that the lower difficulty levels are being made harder. I don't either necessarliy play this sort of game for a challenge, and quite enjoy just cruising through at my own pace. Have no problem with other people wanting to optimise their empire and face a tough game, and I assume that this is the point with having difficulty levels... At 'easy' difficulty it should actually be easy.
It's not the only way of playing. As I said, you can field a strong standing army and then pursue diplomacy from a position of strength. Or you can send your sovereign out questing knowing that your cities are well defended. But no matter what victory path you choose, you will always need to defend yourself. These kinds of games really aren't meant for the peaceful isolationist play style with an AI that basically sits back and lets you win at your own pace. That's what games like SimCity are for.
Although i wonder, if you disable the "conquest" victory condition when creating a game, will that prevent the AI from following that path?
Civ Accomplished a balance with the aggresive AI flag which you had to check to really activate the war unit production of the AI.
It was a smart way to do it, create an option of aggresive AI that will reduce AI unit production for the people that play more for leisure.
Mtn_Man,
1. No, I don't ask the AI to sit back and wait for me to win. Look, in other games such as Alpha Centauri and Galciv 1/2 you had ways you could detract them from attacking you, either diplomatically, economically or you just delayed them with passive defenses and bunkers while you build your mega-units. Even RTS games managed this, like Seven Kingdoms 1/2, or one of my all time favorite games: Rise of Legends (Rise of Nations 2). Even something strictly battle oriented such as Supreme Commander 1/2 would make me content. I want other ways than having to rely on multiple lousy units to prevent the AI from attacking me or to protect my empire.
2. Enough with the Simcity/Anno references already That's not what I want out of an empire building game, so please drop this already.
I am generally pretty passive militarily in my games, my patient also played a bit and she played on 'easy' the computer did not go 'yes master' and she actually lost her last two games because she build maybe 3 peasants total 300 turns in. Plenty of time to expand slowly, easy does not mean 'easy' it means easier than normal.
Basically what the OP seems to be asking for is not an easier AI, but adjustable (or moddable) aggressiveness, which is something GC2 and other similar games have and Elemental certainly should as well. That is you want an AI that plays well and builds up and provides some competition in an economic and diplomatic sense, without automatically going to war with any weaker nation.
That being said, be careful labeling anyone that wants a challenging AI or game balance as a "warmonger" - I know you didn't mean to be insulting, but stereotypes often seem like an insult no matter how they're intended. Myself I like to try every playstyle, diplomacy and warmongering included, but honestly my favorite is turtling while focusing on tech/economy, with just enough military to fend off the AIs - but mainly avoiding war and pursuing some tech or quest related victory, perhaps ultimately a conquest when my economy and technology has far surpassed my enemies. So I wouldn't call myself a warmonger, but I still check the aggressive AI option in Civ4 and play the highest difficulty level I can survive, I still want the game to be challenging and balanced even if I never intend to go to war - it's just not interesting for me if the AI isn't a threat, if there's no danger of being conquered while I tech up if I'm not careful.
Still I think more options are always a good thing, and fully support a Civ4-style "aggressive AI" checkbox or a slider or something, I'm just saying don't call anyone that wants threatening AI a warmonger
Like what exactly? What specifically are you looking for?
Cant relate. Playing on hardest and finding it abit to easy. Started a new game with hardest settings + all factions and 2 self made ones just to give me something to chew on.
So you want to have an AI that will harass you, but only on your time?
This would be interesting. Let it selectable or randomized for each Sovereign. You could have several types of opponents then. Have one a military expansionist, a diplomatic pacifist (cannon fodder), a turtle, etc. The difficulty level could still be an option, but how each Sovereign behaved would be interesting. Personally I would want it Random and just deal with what is given to me. This would really add a lot of depth.
As I mentioned earlier in Gal Civ 2 on the select opponents page when you click on the edit button for each race there is an aggressivness slider.
It is reasonable to expect that this will be added at some time ( patch or expansion ) but for now they need to focus on the current version.
The subject title is that this game will end up like Gal Civ 2 - well we can only hope so because each patch and expansion gave the players more options and choices of playstyles to choose from.
If you can't take the heat of a dragon's breath, stay off the battle field.
Jandurin and Mtn_Man, come on, please read the entire thread and not just my first venting message, I addressed these types of responses several times already.
Austinvn, I know, sorry, I was merely trying to defend myself against the flames. My apologies for that. I enjoy wars as well, but not as the only option of survival (in my opinion).
Leoric12, you are not the first who says that. In fact what triggered this thread was a message I read from someone complaining that the game is too easy even on the hardest difficulty, and after watching the difficulty curve climb up steeply with each Galciv 1/2 patches, I've had enough of that. I want a game I can enjoy and pass just one more turn in, not work through like a math problem (and before anyone yells, my wishes can coexist with yours using a simple trigger in the menu).
Wintersong, thanks alot for replying to this guy, but I think ignoring such remarks are the best course of action, really.
That is exactly why I wanted to to raise the priority of this issue I'm having now, while they are in the process of ironing out the kinks.
I think the fact that you are suggesting something like this, Gromoth1, exposes a design flaw in the game. You say you want to level up your sovereign and slowly expand without having to confront the AI militarily. You back this up with the remark that defending yourself early on with a bunch of crappy units is not fun. This is a design flaw. It SHOULD be fun to defend yourself early on. Instead of putting a band-aid on the problem by introducing an aggressiveness slider or different AI personalities, how about we tackle the issue at its root: How can we make scouting and defending early enemy attacks fun for the player?
This is the key question IMO because let's face it, Elemental is a war game first and foremost. The ability of the player to defend themselves is a key component of how well they play a core part of the game.
Heh ! fair enough
Try a larger world size. That's what I do.
Don't forget there are two difficulty settings. One for Neutral Creatures at map selection and Individual Faction AI difficulty which you select for each opponent at the opponent selection screen.
If you are just changing the ONE setting for the map that does not affect AI players!
I agree with you in the sense that I'd like to see something like diplomacy be just as devastating as conquest in the hands of the right player, but as long as conquest remains a viable path to victory then you can expect the AI to use it, and you'll just have to develop a strategy for defending against it. It's no more complicated than that.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
