C3C Easier

Dactyl · November 23, 2003, 10:23

Playing on the Monarch level, it is my experience so far that C3C is easier to win than PTW. The changes that have been made seem to hamper the computer players more than the human. For example, the relative scarcity of resources hurts the computer players. I've played a couple of games and, by mid-game, I've snagged the resources I need while all of the remaining civs are missing iron, gunpowder or horses.

Are others having similar experiences?

pmaura · November 23, 2003, 11:19

hurts the ai player as long as you are the won with out the resources and do not restart if you dont have a good location. I think it can make it easier or difficult depending on what resources tou have

There was an instance where I controlled most the resources on the planet and was just toying with the AI i wanted to bomb there meideval cities with Stealth Bombers. But I never noticed there was no aluminim on the planet. I had to wait ten turns before a surprise stash turned up.

WarpStorm · November 23, 2003, 11:25

They should make a rule that restarts get added to your HoF as a retirement.

asleepathewheel · November 23, 2003, 11:43

Quote:

Originally posted by WarpStorm
They should make a rule that restarts get added to your HoF as a retirement.

vmxa1 · November 23, 2003, 13:59

I have only played Mon and Emp so far, but they are easier IMO.
Some maybe due to resource issues, but I suspect that the extra wonders available in ancient times are hurting the AI. It may tend to try to build all that it knows about and bog down its cities for very long periods of time.
There may be other factors that I have failed to notice, but those two are probably enough.
I suspect that the AI can cope a bit better as you move up the ladder, but it still could hurt it. The pain may be offset at deity and sid as the AI will have so many free units, it can afford the hit and will actually succeed in building many of those wonders. This would give it a pay back. I plan on trying demigod next, so I will get an idea.

Master Marcus · November 23, 2003, 19:02

Me too, I generally play at Monarch my epic games ( occasionally an Emperor warmongering game on smaller maps ), and I'd say that C3C is much easier for the human player BUT ONLY after the mid-Middle Ages when you begin to benefit from gpt deals, actually doubled. In late industrial and late game, I have sooooo much of a cash flow never seen before in vanilla Civ3 & PtW...I can almost rush build everything in every city, every other turn. BUT, the early game through the Middle Ages when the AI just doesn't have the economy to pay you gpt, well then it's at least as hard as before.
The AIs can even benefit from the gpt x2 ( when trading between themselves, of course ) if the human player is in need of a certain luxury or resource ( I'd say I give them a couple of these deals before I'm the dominant force )

So all in all, and so far, G3C ( which I'm in awe with ) is a bit more ''unbalanced'' when comparing the early stages of an epic game with the later stages, next to the previous versions. With more breakers to the specialists, it's almost if the devs wanted to imprint an accelerated end-game, not as easy/tedious endings as other classic TBS like SMAC, but still......

One thing's for sure so far, after having finished 4 scenarios at monarch: they made it a bit more easier than the epic game ( when knowing what to do with the new features and victory conditions ).

Dis · November 23, 2003, 19:15

I don't think it's that easy.

True, I was smart enough to trade for iron ( I have none), and I also had no saltpeter. But it still costs me something to trade for those things. And the ai is relentless if you have a small military. Yes they were always that way, but they seem more so now. I know that is a judgement thing- it's hard to gauge.

vmxa1 · November 23, 2003, 19:46

Dissident saying it is easier is not the same as saying it is easy. Just that given the same settings and a decent start, it will be easier in C3C than it would have been in PTW.
I am playing Demi now, so maybe I can get a feel for it. Nothing to compare it too though as they have less starting units than deity did, but more than emp.

dexters · November 23, 2003, 21:02

Before C3C came out, I had played a Monarch game on PTW where I pulled ahead relatively easily. Statistically speaking, it'll be hard to prove if C3C if easier or harder since it's so subjective and is highly dependent on starts.

My experience is that C3C starts (if you're not picky about the perfect starts that have ivory) are harder. AI has more cash to play with from the gpt bug. While it is true that the human player can accumulate more cash, that just means you have a big wad sitting in your treasury doing nothing.

I suppose it becomes a safety net and you can afford to play all sorts of gambits. But a human player can always play like they normally do and not overspend.

Also, the resource distribution means that I often enter a new age lacking crucial resources, FORCING me to give away valuable techs or go to war. In the past, I could take bites out of my rivals in the early game and be relatively comfortable with having all resoucrs in my territory. In C3C, short of conquering the entire landmass, you'll still usually be short on something. They may not seem like much, but these resources issues open up a lot of windows for the AI that were previously unavailable to them.

Edit: Map size and type may also be an issue. With air power now improved an AI use of navies improved, the late game is a tad more interesting and can be more challenging if you go into it lacking oil, something I haven't had happened to me... yet. Now, if they fix the naval bombard, those stacks of AI destroyers should lay waste to our coastal tile improvements like they used to when the AI had 1/10 the navy they field in C3C.

Quote:

True, I was smart enough to trade for iron ( I have none), and I also had no saltpeter. But it still costs me something to trade for those things. And the ai is relentless if you have a small military. Yes they were always that way, but they seem more so now. I know that is a judgement thing- it's hard to gauge.

AI is more opportunistic. pre C3C world wars tend to start from tangled alliances and AI or human players signing military alliances and MPPs. In C3C, I've witnessed at least 3 times in the 5 games I've played of AI civs bordering another civ that is 'tied-up' in a war with another civ declaring out of the blue from pure opportunism. I've had an AI declare on me once and very nearly broke my back had I not played Japan and the GA not kicked in on time like it did, that war would have been a disaster for me. Probably not an outright loss, but several larger border towns would have been lost for sure.

This works pretty well for the AI. I've also seen Tiny india, relegated to a tiny corney at the top of a continents map make a power play against the Sumerians, after it realized I was at war with Sumeria and I assume, it calculated it had a good chance of grabbing territory. And it did. Think Poland in 1939 and how the Russians and the Germanys shared it.

CerberusIV · November 24, 2003, 07:42

The AI seems to play alliances better. It is hard to judge as I have only played a fair way into one epic game but it seems to hang in better rather than bale out after a few turns and is even more inclined to drag others in where it can.

I had a real problem in the Age of Discovery scenario when I razed the Mayan capital. They dragged in the Iroqois. I made peace with the Mayans. The Iroqois dragged in the Portuguese. I made peace with the Iroqois and the Portuguese allied with the French. I made peace with Portugal and the French just would not stop attacking even with a full scale war with the Dutch on their hands. OK, a scenario is a different set up and I haven't played enough to be sure but I never found the AI in PTW to be this persistent with alliances.
I actually started to wonder if the AI knew I was getting a war weariness problem and kept pushing because I was in some trouble.

DrSpike · November 24, 2003, 11:47

It does seem marginally easier.........I guess it will take a while to make the AI react to the new gameplay elements.

statusperfect · November 24, 2003, 11:56

Quote:

Originally posted by DrSpike
It does seem marginally easier.........I guess it will take a while to make the AI react to the new gameplay elements.

What do you mean??

DrSpike · November 24, 2003, 12:13

Well for example making the AI not get crippled by 2g/turn support in Republic.

Also, stuff that has been fixed previously, like problems with AI demand for redundant non-essential techs seems to once again be a problem.

Tall Stranger · November 24, 2003, 12:47

I'm glad I saw this thread, as I was starting to think I was the only one who felt that C3C is easier. I usually play Emp level on PTW, but figured I should drop a level to get used to the new features of C3C.

I just finished the Mesopotamia scenario, playing as the Phoenicians at Monarch and found it a cake walk. No war until almost 1000 BC when the Hittites decided to play games, sparking my GA. I built 4 of the 7 wonders and probably didn't have more than a dozen land units for most of the game.

I'm now playing the Japanese scenario (which looks mega-cool, by the way) at Monarch and am finding myself way ahead of the 12-13 other clans I've met so far. I'm researching feudalism (last tech of the first era) and some of these guys don't even have some of the second-tier techs yet. (A couple didn't even have Pottery until I gifted it to them.) I don't know if the clan I got randomly assigned has an unusally good starting position, but I'm starting to worry that this isn't going to be much harder than my first game. Guess I'll have to make the jump to emp after this game as well.

Cookie Monster · November 24, 2003, 12:52

In some ways C3C seems easier but in others C3C is as hard if not harder than before.

I have yet to win a monarch epic game with C3C. Sure I am rexing better than ever before but lack of resources seems to be my struggle. The computer definately will war with you when it knows it has the advantage, and this happens more frequently than before. In addtion, in my experience so far, you may be the dominant power on your continent but there is always an ai civ on another continent who grows stronger, faster than you do. My empires are slightly smaller than the ai's yet he is still lightyears ahead of me in tech.

No in sum, for me at least, C3C may seem easier to rex with at first, but there are other challenges that make this game quite interesting.

Dactyl · November 24, 2003, 20:03

In general, I still think it is generally easier to win in C3C. However, there are aspects of the game that are more difficult. In the first place, your success is much more dependent on your starting place. Also, there's a premium on exploration. If you don't have certain resources, you have to find out where they are and figure out how to get them. My favorite civ used to be the Persians because the Immortals are so powerful. The problem with them now is that there's a pretty good chance that I won't have iron or access to it early and that takes away the strength of the Persians.

statusperfect · November 24, 2003, 20:30

The AI seems much smarter when it comes to war. It REALLY wants to kill you now. My second city was warrior rushed by russians - and then they retreated instead of suiciding gainst my last city which had 2 spearmen in it.

It was kinda spooky

Cookie Monster · November 25, 2003, 09:23

Quote:

Originally posted by statusperfect
The AI seems much smarter when it comes to war. It REALLY wants to kill you now.

I agree. He also tends to ask for bribes more often than before too.

Master Marcus · November 25, 2003, 10:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Cookie Monster

I agree. He also tends to ask for bribes more often than before too.

...and they are more aggressive between themselves too, I noticed much more world wars in C3C epic games ( I'm often the instigator, but at the same level than PtW games ) - even at the ''normal'' aggression level in the settings. Perhaps the default aggression level before G3C was something like the actual '' less aggressive'' ( the second choice ) ???

Shogun Gunner · November 25, 2003, 13:38

I just finished an epic game as the Mayans where I cleaned up on Regent. I had made the mistake of trying one level lower than what I usually play expecting the game to be harder. I would agree that the game is easier. I was able to control about 30-40% of the landmass with little trouble.

Interestingly, the Iroquoi were the second level power throughout the whole game -- and they kept a close eye on me. If I stripped troops away from border towns on the Iroquoi border, they agitated or even outright attacked. When the Aztecs attacked me, the Iroquoi's jumped in. I would strongly agree that the AI is more opportuntistic.

Traelin · November 25, 2003, 15:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Dactyl
In general, I still think it is generally easier to win in C3C.

I think it really comes down to the game settings that one uses. I always play Emperor, Huge Map, Continents, 16 Civs. I didn't notice any difficulty differences in my C3C game versus my PTW games. But we'll see.

Dis · November 25, 2003, 16:58

also some scenarios could be easier. Namely Middle Ages. The human has a distinct advantage because it fully realizes all the rules and knows which civs have relics. The AI doesn't seem to know what to do with relics in that scenario (It does a better job in the Three Sisters scenario).

But the other scenarios aren't as easy as that one.