The Best of the Best

[Hurricane]

I can confirm that all camps in the world will rise up on the same turn. I proved it long time ago when the multi-cheat made such observations easy.

[Theseus]

So I'm still confused.

If there are barb camps still around, every time a 2nd civ enters a given new age, there's an uprising? From every barb camp then in existence?

[hagen]

This is my first post to Apolyton. Thanks for the info Soren, very useful.

About the origin of the word "barbarian". Cyberhunne was right. It comes from the ancient Greek language, the Greeks used this term to the foreigners, because of their strange language.

I heard an explanation in Greece (they must know it, i think), that in that time the Greek language didn't use the "B" letter, but non-Greeks did, and Greeks found it so weird that give others the name bar-bar (or baa-baa, who knows).

Later Romans used it too, and then the whole Europe. And now America does too.

[kring]

Originally posted by Jaybe
Ah, I get it now!
The 2nd civ to enter Middle Ages triggers uprisings.
The 2nd civ to enter Industrial Ages triggers uprisings.
...

Of course, there has to be at least ONE(?) barbarian encampment in existence.

JB,

Yes, there would have to be at least one camp. But, all camps go if one goes.

For even more fun with Barbs, make the units more advanced: Spearmen, Cavalry, Man o War, Knights, Samurai, etc.

Definitely, makes for a more challenging game.

[DeepO]

Originally posted by Theseus
If there are barb camps still around, every time a 2nd civ enters a given new age, there's an uprising? From every barb camp then in existence?

Yep, that's how it is

DeepO

[cyberhunne]

Originally posted by hagen
This is my first post to Apolyton. Thanks for the info Soren, very useful.

About the origin of the word "barbarian". Cyberhunne was right. It comes from the ancient Greek language, the Greeks used this term to the foreigners, because of their strange language.

I heard an explanation in Greece (they must know it, i think), that in that time the Greek language didn't use the "B" letter, but non-Greeks did, and Greeks found it so weird that give others the name bar-bar (or baa-baa, who knows).

Later Romans used it too, and then the whole Europe. And now America does too.

Thanks for confirming this, I wasn´t too sure myself .

BTW don´t you also think it´s outrageous that the Magyars are considered barbarians ? BTW my parents are from Budapest, és tudok is magyarul beszélni, csak az irás elég nehéz nekem.

Sorry about this to all non-Hungarians, I just took this chance to practise a bit .

[Jaybe]

Star Mouse,
Especially if you are not giving barbarians more advanced units, I say "Reduce your advantage against them to ZERO!"
It's my standard settings on Regent, upwards. On Large/Huge maps I prefer raging hordes. It's a shame that we now have a clue as to when the uprisings occur -- now we can somewhat prepare for them.

With a little luck, it will hurt the AI civs also.

JB,
President of the Equal Combat Rights to Barbarians Society

[nbarclay]

Personally, I think barbarians should have to come from land that isn't civilized yet or that has had the civilization beaten out of it. People don't materialize out of thin air, nor do they materialize out of thin water. Independent pirates might make sense as a threat at sea (not to mention as a smokescreen for civ-built privateers to use to help mask their existence and nature), but not as a threat on land.

One thing that would make barbarians a greater threat would be if they actually used their galleys to land warriors. Barbarian ships off the coast ought to strike fear in the hearts of anyone on the nearby shores. As it is, they're a joke for nations that have no interest in building galleys of their own.

I also think it makes sense for barbarian units to get better over time, although I think the tech level should be defined by what "most nations" on the continent (or in the world after Magnetism or Navigation) can build rather than the most advanced nations. Both native barbarians and "barbarian" mercenaries born from the remains of razed cities would logically be expected to lag behind the more advanced civilized lands in technology.

Nathan

[DAVOUT]

Nathan,

Barbarian ships off the coast ought to strike fear in the hearts of anyone on the nearby shores.

The Vikings did that quite well.

[Velociryx]

Looks like there's been some good preliminary work done on a staged mod...VERY cool! I'm just back from my cross country trip, and have given the whole notion a lot of thought in the meantime.....here's the direction I intend to take my own mod of the game....ideas posted here to maybe give some food for thought and further the ongoing discussion:

1) Specialists - produce 2 beakers/2 gold per turn - I agree with the thinking that increasing them to three may well break the game, although to a point, making overseas conquest lucrative mirrors history. 2FOP's a turn for specialists seems a decent compromise on that.

2) Age-specific bonus hp's. I'm currently leaning toward 2hp's per age to make the bonus more compelling.

3) Movement rate increase for ships. Will tweak and change on an individual basis, but in general, +1 MP per age seems not unreasonable to me. Hand in hand with this will be to make Ironclads coastal only.

4) Tech times to discovery moved from 4 - 40 to 1-100.

5) All ranged units get a Range-0 bombard.

6) HP's for various soldier ranks to be changed as follows:
Conscript - 2hp
Regular - 3hp
Veteran 5hp
Elite 7hp

This, IMO, more realistically models the differences between the various ranks of soldiers. It also makes Elite soldiers of older ages a little more able to compete with a slightly more advanced civ. The linear 1hp increase per rank seems too cut and dried. With a bit of variance, Barracks become vastly more important considerations.

7) All AI civs will now be flagged to build all types of improvements, and go heavy on both offensive and defensive units. Still haven't figured out a way to make the AI upgrade or disband its troops, but I'm working on it.

8) Most units will require a point of pop to build. This strengthens Expansionist civs, with their cheaper granaries, and makes rivers even more important than they are now. (Access to) A river would be a compelling reason to go to war in the early game. In my testing thus far, the AI does not suffer from having units cost pop points, and it provides a rich strategic tradeoff for the human player. Hand in hand with this, all units requiring pop points will be set up so that they can join a city.

9) Some minor unit cost tweaks thrown into the mix

10) Make a good "no-resource" attacker and defender available in all ages. Nothing specific in my mind here, but I'm thinking....guessing that this will help the AI. This is mostly for the AI's benefit, since they're far more likely to be denied resources than a human player. This should keep the AI building tanks (or whatever the best unit of the era is) even sans resources, which will make them more threatening, and threatening for a longer period of time. Off the top of my head, ideas here are:

Ancient age: Mercenary - same as a swordsman, no resoruce requirements, costs 4

Middle ages: Man-At-Arms - 4/4/1, ATV, costs 7 (IIRC, a knight is six? I'm doing this from work, so that might not be right)

Industrial: Partisan - 5/5/1 No resource rifleman/cavalry combo. Not as good as either on attack or defense, but well rounded, and in proper terrain, can hold its own.

Modern - Light tank - attack and defense are 2 less than a "regular" tank, but costs 1 more than (to reflect a more difficult time scrounging appropriate resources). Same general thought will carry over to MA and MI.

Will also check the flag for Artillery units to see HOW the AI is set to use them. My sense is, having played numerous games and watching the AI's behavior, is that they're set up to regard Arty as a defensive piece only. Will check that, and set it to both offensive and defensive.

11) I wish like HELL there was a way to double the upkeep cost for troops to 2gpt for the human player only, but I don't see it happening. Nonetheless, I'm seriously considering doing just that, and for balance sake, giving Republican and Democracy a *slight* break on freebie units (maybe 1, 2, 2 for demo and 2, 2, 3 for rep). This should kep the overall SIZES of military down.

12) Minor upgrading of defensive values for various things (examples - fortresses = 75%, mountains = 200%, hills = 100%, town (size 1-6) = 25%, river bonus = 50%, etc.

This should make an early game rush more daunting, and when combined with the fact that units cost pop AND have higher upkeep costs, should redefine what it means to conduct a successful war. Rather than conquering a civ outright, a successful war under the new paradigm may well simply mean a raid for some workers and to stop settlement in a given area by ambushing a settlement party.

13) Was giving SERIOUS consideration to making settlers tech dependent....now, before you choke on something, here's what I mean:

At the opener, settlers available. They remain available till the discovery of...I dunno...Philosophy. At that point, settlers "upgrade" to something non-settlerish...perhaps a 0 movement unit that is a remarkably good defender for its age...I dunno...something. At any rate, the point is that for a time, settlers are no longer available, and do not become available again until you research X tech in the next era.

This will mirror history at least to a degree, in that the whole of human history was NOT simply one giant landgrab....there were periods of settlement, followed by periods of building and consolidation. By FORCING the AI to not spew out settlers endlessly, the hope is that it'll balance the AI a bit, and prompt it to focus on infrastructure. It shouldn't really impact the human player much at all....might make colonies actually useful, too, which would be a cool side benefit.

14) Barbs - set the Bowman as the default and special barb unit. Maybe even go so far as to make a new unit modelled after the bowman, 2/2/1, ATV...dunno 'bout that last bit tho.

That's about it for me. It LOOKS like a lot, but in truth, the changes are relatively minor....the hope is though, that they'll improve the overall experience and create a more compelling AI.

-=Vel=-

[lockstep]

Originally posted by Velociryx
2) Age-specific bonus hp's. I'm currently leaning toward 2hp's per age to make the bonus more compelling.

6) HP's for various soldier ranks to be changed as follows:
Conscript - 2hp
Regular - 3hp
Veteran 5hp
Elite 7hp

IMO, the problem of age-specific bonus hp's is that the hitpoint ratio between different ranks becomes smaller and smaller as you move up the ages. With the figures you chose, a modern conscript unit would have 8 hp's and a modern elite unit 13 hp's - not much of a difference.

Instead, I'd suggest a combination of any of the following changes:

• Generally increased numbers of hitpoints, e.g. a 3/5/7/9 scale (and adjusted Rates of Fire),
• Increased A/D rates for industrial and modern units,
• No general 10% defense bonus.

8) Most units will require a point of pop to build ... In my testing thus far, the AI does not suffer from having units cost pop points, and it provides a rich strategic tradeoff for the human player. Hand in hand with this, all units requiring pop points will be set up so that they can join a city.

While this is a very interesting idea, I suspect that it will generate a lot of loopholes:

• Example 1 (already tested): Upgrading from a unit without pop cost to a unit with pop cost, if allowed, will cost only gold but no pop points.
• Example 2 (still in the air): What happens if you draft a unit with a pop cost of 1? Correctly, this should cost 2 pop points, but we don't know if the game engine handles it that way.

Furthermore, I seriously doubt that the AI would use a worker command (join city) for military units.

11) I wish like HELL there was a way to double the upkeep cost for troops to 2gpt for the human player only, but I don't see it happening. Nonetheless, I'm seriously considering doing just that, and for balance sake, giving Republican and Democracy a *slight* break on freebie units (maybe 1, 2, 2 for demo and 2, 2, 3 for rep). This should kep the overall SIZES of military down.

Free units for Rep/Dem combined with upkeep costs of 2 is a great idea (korn469 used it in his blitz mod), but I don't see a reason to weaken Democracy vs. Republic.

Editor hint: Additionally to free units per city of level 1/2/3, it is possible to define free units per civ. You could make Republic more attractive for smaller civs, and Democracy more attractive for bigger civs.

[DeepO]

Originally posted by Velociryx
1) Specialists - produce 2 beakers/2 gold per turn

I posted this months ago, and I can imagine it can't be modded, but has to come from Firaxis, but here's another take on specialists: Make their bonuses like a marketplace behaves to luxuries. I mean, the first 2 taxmen produce 1 gold each, the 3 and 4th produce 2 each, number 5 and 6 give 3 gold, 7 and 8 4 gold. After that, you can either continue the serie, or keep a 4 gold limit.

There are multiple reasons why I prefer this over a fixed gain, the main one being that a progressive gain would mean that those last taxmen really are important (like now the 7th and 8th lux is vastly more important than the first two). Further, it would limit itself, it is not easy to set up a city with enough specialists to really be a big boost, as more specialists mean less food, and they still require food themselves.

The only disadvantage I see is that there are exploits possible, like having one city build a worker each turn, which gets added to a supernaturally grown city of pop 1000, which will only loose one pop each turn even if there is only available food for 10 people. But there are other ways to counter this.

2) Age-specific bonus hp's. I'm currently leaning toward 2hp's per age to make the bonus more compelling.

I heard your argument before, but can't say I have the same opinion on this one. But just so that I understand you: do you mean that all industrial units get a 2hp bonus over medeival ones, or do all units get a 2hp bonus the moment you advance to the industrial age?

I'd like the second option, the first one would unbalance the game, as you simply have to upgrade or you're toast. I play completely the other way around, and keep obsolote units until I win the game, they have some use. I don't want to be forced to spend money on units that are only being kept as a reserve.

3) Movement rate increase for ships. Will tweak and change on an individual basis, but in general, +1 MP per age seems not unreasonable to me. Hand in hand with this will be to make Ironclads coastal only.

4) Tech times to discovery moved from 4 - 40 to 1-100.

I don't know... what about 1-40? I do use the upper limit sometimes... and can't bring myself to call it an exploit. It just changes your tactic, that's all.

5) All ranged units get a Range-0 bombard.

6) HP's for various soldier ranks to be changed as follows:
Conscript - 2hp
Regular - 3hp
Veteran 5hp
Elite 7hp

7) All AI civs will now be flagged to build all types of improvements, and go heavy on both offensive and defensive units. Still haven't figured out a way to make the AI upgrade or disband its troops, but I'm working on it.

I kind of liked that certain AI civs were more focused on certain aspects, even if that meant that not all AI civs perform equally well.
Making the AI upgrade its troops: give them money. In each game I played were an AI had money in abundance, they upgraded far better than I could have. Disbanding however is something different (and can obstruct the upgrade routine), but I guess Soren has to help out here

8) Most units will require a point of pop to build.

9) Some minor unit cost tweaks thrown into the mix

10) Make a good "no-resource" attacker and defender available in all ages.

What different resource-free units you choose is of course something to tweak, don't make them too good

Will also check the flag for Artillery units to see HOW the AI is set to use them. My sense is, having played numerous games and watching the AI's behavior, is that they're set up to regard Arty as a defensive piece only. Will check that, and set it to both offensive and defensive.

That's indeed how it feels... I hope this will be changed with the new patch, so maybe it is not needed to mod it.

13) Was giving SERIOUS consideration to making settlers tech dependent....now, before you choke on something, here's what I mean:

I am choking.... I understand why you'd want it, but I feel this is already inherent on the game as it is now. It might depend on difficulty, but when the time for a republic has come, it is already natural to forgoe on the settler rush, and consolidate your empire. Otherwise, you simply lack the funds to keep up in tech. Making settlers tech dependent would mean that on huge maps, you simply have to keep yourself from researching philosophy, and churn out settlers like crazy (even more then now), right until you either settled all land, or are able to buy the tech which enables settlers again from the AI. It would seriously hamper the playability of huge and custom maps. And from time to time I like those huge builder style maps, with few Civs, so I'm voting against this one (if only this was a democracy )

14) Barbs - set the Bowman as the default and special barb unit. Maybe even go so far as to make a new unit modelled after the bowman, 2/2/1, ATV...dunno 'bout that last bit tho.

Or you could set the defense bonusses different, like the barbs having a 1 on 1 bonus on emperor, 2 to 1 bonus on deity. Same effect...

In general I like the changes you're suggesting Vel, so once you do it give us a yell, and I'll try it out. It would be the first mod I'll try, but this one looks promising.

DeepO

[Velociryx]

Hey hey! Thanks for the comments, guys!

I'm liking the way it's shaping up in my head, although I won't be actually doing any of the changes til Friday (just in case that "copy bic info from one bic to another" feature doesn't work as planned).

Will be toying around with some more ideas to add to the mix between now and then, and will post the results of all that here when it's finished....shaping up to be pretty cool tho, I think!

WRT the comments and such, here are my replies, in no particular order:

The HP ratio thing - Ahhh...thought of that! See, in my head, I'm thinking that a guy with a sword who doesn't really know much about using it (say, a conscript) is out and out toast when he goes up against a guy with a sword who's a master at it (ie - An elite). But in the modern age, any yutz can pick up an automatic rifle, point, shoot, and maybe get lucky. I know, it's not as simple as all that, but killin's a lot easier in the modern age than it is in ancient times, and it takes less skill to pull the trigger and reload than it does to hold your own, steel on steel in a sword fight (at least that's my sense of it from my own limited experience....I got torn to HELL and back when I was messing around with fencing by folks who knew a thing or two about it--and this after MONTHS of practice--but thirty minutes at the target range and I was a pretty good shot). I think the shrinking ratio thing reflects something along those lines.

As to the upgrade thing, here's what I'm planning, generally:

Scouts will be about the only land unit that requires no pop points to make. They won't upgrade to anything. All other land units will cost pop. As you say tho, it's unknown what the effect will be re: conscripting units that cost pop points. UGH....could be a sticking point.

Agreed re: weakening Dem vs. Rep....will rethink that, and likely make them the same wrt to free units.

A pity on the scalar approach to taxmen and scientists! I love the approach, but sadly, it's beyond the capabilities of even the new 1.29 editor, if I'm following the readme....

HP bonuses: The way it works in the editor is that you can establish a bonus hp (1-20) for individual unit types, such that an elite spearman (ancient age defenfender) would have 7 hp (using the scale I'm proposing), while an elite Pikeman (middle ages defender) would have a max of nine hp's. (Riflemen 11, MI's 13). True, it somewhat limits the utility of older units, but they're still good for some stuff (ie - city stuffing to prevent rebellions and flips). Another GREAT use for outdated units would be to haul them along with you as part of an attack, and then have them join a newly conquered city. The city becomes less likely to rebel, cos the pop point you add to the city is one of your "natives." So...it changes the utility of outdated units, but doesn't outright nix it.

The main reason setting the upper research and discovery limit to 100 is mostly to add strategy for the human player. The ai can still outresearch you on the higher levels, BUT, in the latter portions of the early game, it really sets up an interesting tradeoff with units costing pop points....do I really NEED another unit? If I build another (insert unit name here), then I tack on an additional two turns to my discovery of tech X. You don't see as much of that with the discovery times set to 40. Also, it allows for a general slowdown of the early game (a good thing, IMO), as even with 16 civs researching and tech whoring like rutting rabbits, they still can't speed through the tree as rapidly as before.

I too, like the fact that certain civs focus on certain aspects more than others. Trouble is though, it's been my experience that, for example, unless a civ is flagged to build commercial advances, they almost never will.....I can tell ya without thinking about it that ALL my cities (even those worthless ones on yonder continent I just conquered) get most, if not all the infrastructure sooner or later. Many of the cities I conquer late game, that the AI has been running for aeons, still don't have so much as a marketplace in them. Really, really weakens the AI, IMO.

As to the barbs, my plan is to both give them a decent, well-rounded unit AND set the combat bonuses vs. barbs to zero. As it is, walls count double against barbs, and this will provide perhaps a more compelling reason to invest in walls....

-=Vel=-

[DeepO]

Originally posted by Velociryx
A pity on the scalar approach to taxmen and scientists! I love the approach, but sadly, it's beyond the capabilities of even the new 1.29 editor, if I'm following the readme....

Yeah, thought so. Maybe it should be seen by Soren & Co, I really think this progressive specialist thing would be a good solution to the current situation... everybody seems to agree that specialists are not how they should be, while it is also known that simply reinforcing the bonusses would unbalance the game.

HP bonuses: (...) True, it somewhat limits the utility of older units, but they're still good for some stuff (ie - city stuffing to prevent rebellions and flips). Another GREAT use for outdated units would be to haul them along with you as part of an attack, and then have them join a newly conquered city. The city becomes less likely to rebel, cos the pop point you add to the city is one of your "natives." So...it changes the utility of outdated units, but doesn't outright nix it.

I hadn't thought about that... adding outdated units to cities. I do keep them in the back of my offensive force, to hush the rebels, but simply adding them would of course also be possible. But, I have to correct you on one point: more of your own citizens does not mean you have lower chances of flipping, for that you need fewer of the foreign citizens. So I'm still only seeing a decrease of use for old units, not a completely other way of playing with them.

The main reason setting the upper research and discovery limit to 100 is mostly to add strategy for the human player. The ai can still outresearch you on the higher levels, BUT, in the latter portions of the early game, it really sets up an interesting tradeoff with units costing pop points....do I really NEED another unit? If I build another (insert unit name here), then I tack on an additional two turns to my discovery of tech X. You don't see as much of that with the discovery times set to 40. Also, it allows for a general slowdown of the early game (a good thing, IMO), as even with 16 civs researching and tech whoring like rutting rabbits, they still can't speed through the tree as rapidly as before.

I'm not sure. In 16 Civ games, would it slow research for the AI? If I interpret their cashflows correctly, I think that they always have their tech sliders set so they will not go bankrupt while maintaining a reasonable research rate. I thought the 40 turn limit was only included to help human players, and AIs don't use it... and I do like the 1 scientist tactic, even if it means a bit more micromanagement (rewards for those who want to invest more time).

I concur on the even greater importance of units as opposed to tech, but in general with your proposed changes this is already a major issue (a new aspect to the game). I guess the trade off would become: do I plan on building up some military now (and thus having only one scientist), or is it worth it to have no army but better research? I really like that, even with a 40 turn cap.

One of the things that probably should be tweaked is that you'd have to lower the tech costs for ancient techs, as everybody will have a need for some army, and thus fewer research. Or (but I doubt it that you can mod that) make the first unit pop-free.

I too, like the fact that certain civs focus on certain aspects more than others. Trouble is though, it's been my experience that, for example, unless a civ is flagged to build commercial advances, they almost never will.....

Hmm... have you test results on how they build things when everything is flagged? It might be that they will try to build everything at the same time, thus being bad at everything. That is even less desirable then being good in one aspect only And looking at what I bomb away in the MT IV game, AIs will build everything they can in every city, given enough time. I agree that it would be nice if AIs build more improvements, but I'm not sure if your solution is the right one. Testing would be key here.

As to the barbs, my plan is to both give them a decent, well-rounded unit AND set the combat bonuses vs. barbs to zero. As it is, walls count double against barbs, and this will provide perhaps a more compelling reason to invest in walls....

Aha.... you forgot to mention that Killer barbs... yeah

DeepO

[lockstep]

Originally posted by Velociryx
The HP ratio thing - Ahhh...thought of that! See, in my head, I'm thinking that a guy with a sword who doesn't really know much about using it (say, a conscript) is out and out toast when he goes up against a guy with a sword who's a master at it (ie - An elite). But in the modern age, any yutz can pick up an automatic rifle, point, shoot, and maybe get lucky ... I think the shrinking ratio thing reflects something along those lines.

It may be more 'realistic', but I don't think that downsizing the importance of higher unit ranks over time makes for better gameplay.

As to the upgrade thing, here's what I'm planning, generally: Scouts will be about the only land unit that requires no pop points to make. They won't upgrade to anything. All other land units will cost pop.

Even artillery type units?

As you say tho, it's unknown what the effect will be re: conscripting units that cost pop points. UGH....could be a sticking point.

On second thought, draft units that also cost only 1 pop point may not be that far-fetched, but then something needs to be done to rebalance the drafting feature (and please, don't drop it!). Maybe 30 turns of unhappiness instead of 20, but I'm afraid that's not sufficient.

... Moreover, drafting combined with the hitpoint scale and bonuses you suggested really gets out of hand. E.g would you rather build an 11 hp veteran mech infantry for 110 shields or draft an 8 hp conscript one, assuming they both cost 1 pop point?

Agreed re: weakening Dem vs. Rep....will rethink that, and likely make them the same wrt to free units.

I too, like the fact that certain civs focus on certain aspects more than others. Trouble is though, it's been my experience that, for example, unless a civ is flagged to build commercial advances, they almost never will ... Many of the cities I conquer late game, that the AI has been running for aeons, still don't have so much as a marketplace in them. Really, really weakens the AI, IMO.

And as other posters have pointed out, it may be the reason for the AI's outrageous demands when trading for luxury ressources. They simply can't take advantage of the marketplace bonus. I agree, forcing the AI's to build marketplaces is a must.

[Gen.Dragolen]

Vel,

I have prepared a rought draft using the changes you had suggested in your posts.

Most of the unit changes I made were based on suggestions from others and alot of my own view on how combat units should work. I figured that many of them were grossly underpowered considering the technologies involved.

Please go to the Quest for a Deeper Strategy thread and look for the posted file: Civ3Mod.01.071802vel.zip

D.

[DaveMcW]

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis
btw, if you want a killer AI, have you considered lowering the production bonus below 6 (the Deity level)? Has anyone tried it at 1?

AI cost 1 has finally been tried.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showth...threadid=66169

[Theseus]

I scanned it...

Maybe I need to read it again, but I am not blown away. Maybe I don't get it.

But there's something wrong with the AI civs. ("1450-Notice Arabia still lacks currency. A couple civs still lack literature.")

And the key move was an ROP rape.

Uh, where are the mounted units?

And what's the deal with the exteeeeeended period facing Muskets and LB?

Don't get me wrong, I think Bamspeedy is one of the most knowledgable and best players aroung... but that's just a weird, unit-fest game.

And, to DaveMcW's point, I didn't see a KAI, which was supposedly the point of giving the PB of 1... (in other words, Soren's suggestion has not yet been publicly tested, due, I suppose, to some of the limitations that Bam built into the game).

[Aeson]

The main problem is that the AI cannibalizes it's economy with units and improvements. The faster production just means it's supporting more 'useless' improvements and units. Deity suffers from this already to a large extent. The AI builds too many units so fast that it eats up potential income that could be used for research and upgrading. Those units don't really help the AI in most situations, and eat up their gold per turn. Eventually the AI ends up with a slowed tech pace (even though it still can be pretty fast) and a lot of obsolete units. Scaling production bonuses without a similar economic scaling exacerbates the problem.

There is an economic boost associated with faster population growth, but it caps out (size 12) and may be a problem in it's own right. It allows the AI even faster production in timeframes where it can't produce anything of worth.

Certainly giving the AI that much of a production bonus does introduce other problems in dealing with it, but bombardment is so overwhelmingly important in efficient warfare, and the AI so incompetent at using it (as well as military tactics in general), that all it really amounts to is killing more units. You see the kill ratio around 96-98% and it doesn't matter how many units the AI has, all it will change is the length of the warfare.

The limitations on creating a KAI are economic (gold for upgrading) and military tactics (bombardment, invasion routes, valuation of targets). As long as those are kept at the same level, the other changes that we can make in the editor (short of giving it supermen units) aren't going to help it in regards to how the game is going to turn out.

That said, Bamspeedy's game is an amazing, epic struggle. Flaws in the AI affect every game played, and will almost always give the player a route to victory, but there certainly are more difficult scenarios than others.

[player1]

I think that the real problem with that game was that it was played at Huge Map, which crippled AI later due to breaking unit limit.

It should have been played on standard map instead.


P.S.
And that some islands were too small, which made severeal totaly undeveloped civs.