Japanese players, please post your report links in this thread. (Either linking to your own site, or to your RB thread report here in the forum.)

REMEMBER: All discussions are supposed to take place in the sticky threads, not attached to any reports. Thanks!


- Sirian

English players, please post your report links in this thread. (Either linking to your own site, or to your RB thread report here in the forum.)

REMEMBER: All discussions are supposed to take place in the sticky threads, not attached to any reports. Thanks!


- Sirian

Egyptian players, please post your report links in this thread. (Either linking to your own site, or to your RB thread report here in the forum.)

REMEMBER: All discussions are supposed to take place in the sticky threads, not attached to any reports. Thanks!


- Sirian

Chinese players, please post your report links in this thread. (Either linking to your own site, or to your RB thread report here in the forum.)

REMEMBER: All discussions are supposed to take place in the sticky threads, not attached to any reports. Thanks!


- Sirian

Arabian players, please post your report links in this thread. (Either linking to your own site, or to your RB thread report here in the forum.)

REMEMBER: All discussions are supposed to take place in the sticky threads, not attached to any reports. Thanks!


- Sirian

American players, please post your report links in this thread. (Either linking to your own site, or to your RB thread report here in the forum.)

REMEMBER: All discussions are supposed to take place in the sticky threads, not attached to any reports. Thanks!


- Sirian

I've been playing with the AI a lot lately - reading the code, observing it in practise.

Today I watched an AI in isolation. By 1000AD it had still not researched pottery. I didn't test how far it would go. I gifted it pottery.
This highlights the glaring weakness in the AI's tech research strategy, retarded is not too strong a word to use. It reminds me of SMAC where the AI would sometimes refuse to research Cent.Eco and thus couldn't build formers and would go with unimproved land for thousands of turns.

The crazy thing is in the XML Pottery scores low on commerce. For crying out loud it's the most important commerce tech in the game! But this means the AI thinks it's a relatively weak tech - possibly especially if they are rich in food (Pottery is all about growth, in the XML), for an AI with a floodplains start - Pottery is the last thing on their mind.

I think this does explain the horribly weak performance of NTT AI's, since they are not assured of getting critical techs. Presumably the AI's normally research a random selection of techs (you could say a crapshoot) and rely on trading to fill in the gaps. NTT means they are stuck with what they research and they may miss out on the most critical techs in the game.

To me it explains why NTT is at least a difficulty easier.

At very least NTT games should be increased in difficulty to compensate for weak AI performance which is both real and percieved.

Hi everyone!

Well, OSG-10 is in the clean-up phase, so it's time to start brainstorming ideas for OSG-11. Anyone with ideas or an interest in playing, please post.

Over on CivFanatics in the OSG10 thread, Liq wrote:

[INDENT]About time to think up a new osg eh?

might I suggest a "pick any race" medium impossible with a strict number of planets we can colonize and seriously use. pop 1 bases are fine for range etc but we have to 'declare' a planet before building anything other than eco and stick to a strict limit on how many declared planets we may own. Thinking humans might be the wisest choice in race.

Cheers!
-Liq[/INDENT]

I'd suggest modifying the required spending allocation on the fuel base planets. Putting everything into eco will only work until the pop maxes, and then the game will automatically readjust the excess into tech every turn. Plus spending to grow pop would make those fuel bases more of a factor when it comes to the vote. I'd recommend setting the fuel planets to 100% defense spending. That way, they won't grow very fast, and without factories, it will take them a very long time to build anything. If one does get some bases up, we can either dismantle them whenever an enemy fleet is coming, or just not use the bases during battles.


An idea I was kicking around was trying a game with a limited number of opponents. Previous OSGs have tended to use 5 AIs, or maybe 4. I was wondering about trying a game with only 1 or 2 AI Races. And for additional challenge, recreate the game until the opponents are the Psilons and the Klacks. Or a 1 on 1 where the AI is one of the dominant races, and we are one of the weak races (Klacks vs. Bulrathi, Psilon vs. Mrrshan, etc).

--Olorin

Visit my web page at http://www.freewebs.com/demonslayer21/index.html

from there, explore around to see my picture gallery, my game advice page, and also my hall of heroes page! to submit your own char, then read the rules. until then, i will see you there! or here...lol

In Civ2 I have heard that ICS is totally broken. In civ-3 it was still very good. It was so good that T-hawk said it was soo good that people did not use it because it so good that if it was used it would be the only uberstrat. In civ4 the problem was solved by de-facto capping the number of citites you could have until spaming more in your core would be a bad idea.

In civ 2 I have read that the game makers did some things that would be ICS suck. But it still was the uberstrat. They did even more bad things to ICS in civ3 (Corruption, 2-pop settlers) but it was still overpowered. The only winner in epic 12 used ICS. In civ4 they killed it but at the cost of the boring, dull growth curve we have now. I don't understand why ICS is so good and game-breaking. Can you tell me?