Varadhon wrote:
Look in the upper right. There's a pink marker with a red "2" inside it ;-). I'm guessing that it's probably just where the cursor is and that the cursor itself is hidden in the screen cap.

I think you are right because the tile is outlined.

also what is the transparent wall anyway?

Yeah, the AI in GalCiv2 was pretty solid.

Varadhon wrote:
Of course not. ES diplomatic AI (and options) is also massively lacking. The sad fact with 4X games in particular is that the AI is pretty much an afterthought. This is a problem because most 4X games are designed to run along a huge time arc and take days to play. As a practical result, the overwhelming majority of such games will always be solo play games; i.e. it would be difficult to find several friends who all would be willing to play hours-upon-hours of time with you just to complete a game. Therefore, multiplayer is a tragically poor substitute for good AI in games like these.



MoO3 is the only 4X game that I'd say had a good AI, but the game gave such poor feedback and was so unpleasant to interact with that it was pretty much unplayable.

Very true.



Gal Civ 2 at the end had/has a good A.I., but it took a long time to get there.

Nasarog wrote:
Are you trying to say the ES diplo AI was any good??? CIV 5 DIplo AI is 100x better, and that's saying a lot.

Of course not. ES diplomatic AI (and options) is also massively lacking. The sad fact with 4X games in particular is that the AI is pretty much an afterthought. This is a problem because most 4X games are designed to run along a huge time arc and take days to play. As a practical result, the overwhelming majority of such games will always be solo play games; i.e. it would be difficult to find several friends who all would be willing to play hours-upon-hours of time with you just to complete a game. Therefore, multiplayer is a tragically poor substitute for good AI in games like these.



MoO3 is the only 4X game that I'd say had a good AI, but the game gave such poor feedback and was so unpleasant to interact with that it was pretty much unplayable.

Varadhon wrote:
Until Firaxis actually dedicates resources to the diplomacy AI, Civ 5 will never be fixed. Computer AI players are almost as erratic and irrational as in the original Civ published in 1991. This many years removed from that point in time, this sort of neglect of an essential game mechanic is inexcusable.



There are also lots of design choices that were made in Civ 5 that I think Civ 4 handled better (interaction between religion and diplomacy, diplomatic options, vassalage, the tendency of far-flung cities to rebel, principal among them). Oddly, there are also lots of visual bugs that have existed since Civ 5 first came out, especially as pertain to the placement and construction of wonders.



But, back to EL . . . =)

Diplomacy AI, that's a good one. I do not know of a single rpg be it a rts/tbs that has even mediocre diplomacy. I tend to play in such a way as to be ready for war and to genocide every other player at any given moment.



Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending CIV 5 at all. I actually preferred CIV 3 to Civ 4. I prefer CIV 5 to CIV 4 as well. IMO CIV 4 had no soul.



I play my games like Warlock. Perpetual cold war with everyone and I attack at any given time. Are you trying to say the ES diplo AI was any good??? CIV 5 DIplo AI is 100x better, and that's saying a lot.

Adventurer_Blitz wrote:


6. looks like a magic place based on all the colors. it might just be a good tile to exploit as it gives more food than farms, but it doesn't appear to have any buildings indicating that it is a special resource. although perhaps it has something to do with the glass steel mine in the top corner.

6. All the items in the upper left look like they are empire-wide in character. My guess would be that the "glassteel mine" is actually a technology and that the "2" with a clock icon behind it is a reference to the amount of time remaining until discovery, namely 2 turns. In the other screen shots, you'll notice that there are other items in that same slot: one is "Aura of Empire" and the other is "Watchtower." The only other thing that I can think this would be is the "empire plan" discussed in a recent GDD. It would make sense to feature it in such a place and indicate how long it continues to be in effect. That said, their designations sound more like technologies than like empire plans.

Nasarog wrote:
BNW fixed most problems with civ 5. Mods will do the rest, having said that, I am really looking forward to EL.

Until Firaxis actually dedicates resources to the diplomacy AI, Civ 5 will never be fixed. Computer AI players are almost as erratic and irrational as in the original Civ published in 1991. This many years removed from that point in time, this sort of neglect of an essential game mechanic is inexcusable.



There are also lots of design choices that were made in Civ 5 that I think Civ 4 handled better (interaction between religion and diplomacy, diplomatic options, vassalage, the tendency of far-flung cities to rebel, principal among them). Oddly, there are also lots of visual bugs that have existed since Civ 5 first came out, especially as pertain to the placement and construction of wonders.



But, back to EL . . . =)

BNW fixed most problems with civ 5. Mods will do the rest, having said that, I am really looking forward to EL.

Adventurer_Blitz wrote:
I think you are right because the tile is outlined.

also what is the transparent wall anyway?

If you're talking about the thing I've outlined in yellow-orange below, I'm 87.256% certain that's the border between regions. You'll notice that the terrain to the immediate north looks drier (inland plains? savannah?) than the terrain of the region in the pic (wet grassland?). Since the regions are supposed to be locked to a biome, it would make sense that there would be a border between a wet grassy area and an arid grassy area.



If this is the case, then it answers at least one question: regions are irregular in shape (yay!).

i personally would prefer for regions to have something other than magic invisible walls dividing them, seems odd considering they have water and mountains and the mountains look so good.

Adventurer_Blitz wrote:


3. they look like a luxury or strategic research to me as they do not appear to be common in this screenshot.

3. If you look really closely at the transparent grey overlay where in the field where the city's food production output is indicated, you'll notice what appears to be another such set of green spheres in the region immediately to the north. Not sure that this means anything, but I thought it interesting. I'm with you in guessing that it might be a luxury or strategic resource.

Adventurer_Blitz wrote:


2. i cannot tell what tile you are talking about as you make no indication using a pink and red marker.

Look in the upper right. There's a pink marker with a red "2" inside it ;-). I'm guessing that it's probably just where the cursor is and that the cursor itself is hidden in the screen cap.

1. well next to kazanji it says pacified as in the state of a region so i think it is indeed the region name.

2. i cannot tell what tile you are talking about as you make no indication using a pink and red marker.

3. they look like a luxury or strategic research to me as they do not appear to be common in this screenshot.

4. it is listed under city info, i would believe military maintenance would be more of a national thing.

5. to me, it looks like a building. possibly an unexplored ruin or maybe a city-extending barony.

6. looks like a magic place based on all the colors. it might just be a good tile to exploit as it gives more food than farms, but it doesn't appear to have any buildings indicating that it is a special resource. although perhaps it has something to do with the glass steel mine in the top corner.

A few specific questions relevant to the screen above. Please see the corresponding reference numbers in RED with a PINK background.



1. The city name appears to be "Ersay," so to what does "Kazanji" refer? Is it the region name?

2. This tile appears to be exploited, but it's not connected to the city. The tile also does not appear to have been modified in any way. What's that all about?

3. What's this set of green spheres all about? Is it a special tile resource? If so, what sort and what does it do?

4. Totally confused by the red "dust" icon. My guess is some sort of military maintenance, but that's a *guess* . . . Any ideas, Dev feedback?

5. I'm not really sure what sort of tile exploitation is going on here. It looks like the same exploitation as the "farms" in the surrounding tiles, but there's clearly something built on it. Thoughts? Feedback?

6. This looks like a tile special . . . based on the one being exploited next to the city, it produces 2 food, 2 dust, and 1 science . . . but what is this special?

to get back to the topic, how will dust be generated in cities and how can we generate tons of it? what sort of buildings will generate it, what tiles will, what heroes will, and maybe even more ways to get ridiculous amounts of dust.

hashinshin wrote:
Civ 4 had its own problems that Civ 5 set out to fix.

That's probably true for every sequel to any game. Alas, Civ 5 didn't resolve a lot of fundamental problems in the franchise. Much of what Civ 5 changed from Civ 4 either went too far or attempted to alter things that really didn't need significant change.

the best thing out of civ 5 in my opinion was the hex grid and a lot of the scenarios were nice. i didn't like how much they dumbed it down compared with civ 4 though

Civ 4 had its own problems that Civ 5 set out to fix.

Adventurer_Blitz wrote:
i personally would prefer for regions to have something other than magic invisible walls dividing them, seems odd considering they have water and mountains and the mountains look so good.

Yeah, a color border corresponding to the color(s) of the faction that owns the region would be appropriate. They'd have to have some sort of neutral color that could define the borders of unclaimed/neutral regions as well, though. I'm all for that sort of change because it would help indicate who owns what.

how would they show that the land was occupied by a minor faction? would they keep it nuetral just to make it harder to tell?