Domination Victories too easy?

[HhTacos]

Ok so here's the deal, two days ago I started my third marathon game (now with the Russians) on a (standard size) random map who turned out to be Archipelago at the Emperor Difficulty.

Since I won my first game by a domination victory (Siam, Large - Pangea, Prince,) and my second one with an almost domination (all but one) but diplomatic victory (Egypt, Small - Continents, King). I wanted something new so I started the game thinking of a scientific or cultural victory.

It turns out that the game made me feel I was able for a domination victory again even though it wasn't my focus. By that I mean, I started expanding quickly (rushing for embarkments then settlers on cities close to fishes (for tons of gold) but I also witnessed how the AI was expanding quickly. By fear of being overwhelmed some day (because the delta between our scores began to be too big for me), I started declaring wars with the usual warmongers, i.e. Monty first, then Wu Zetian and her humongous army of chukonus, finally the Iroquois with their army of archers versus my Riflemens (I felt like Spain when I started razing them but whatever)). But then, I realized, I razed all these civs (except their capitals(no unhapiness please)) with only one production city (the other ones were Gold/Science). Now my game is not finished, I'm aroung 1500 AD and I am wondering if I just go and raze everyone since I have the feeling I would be able to.

So well, that's my story. Am I the only one to think Domination is too easy compared to the other ones? I mean, I keep trying to win by a different way but I end up winning by domination.

[CoryTV]

No.. there are lots of threads on this.. It's not that domination is 'too easy' as much as Domination is absurdly, absurdly, overpowered. To me, to win any other type of victory condition, you have to mount enough of an Army that you could have won a domination game, anyway, you have to chose "not to" which is a fatal, fatal flaw. I'm getting bored of this game after 1 week...

[JoshTheValiant]

No.. there are lots of threads on this.. It's not that domination is 'too easy' as much as Domination is absurdly, absurdly, overpowered. To me, to win any other type of victory condition, you have to mount enough of an Army that you could have won a domination game, anyway, you have to chose "not to" which is a fatal, fatal flaw. I'm getting bored of this game after 1 week...

Sort of a stream of consciousness response... but this can in many ways be blamed on the current tech tree, which makes military units so prevalent. The military-centric branch requires rather little input from other branches to improve the units, and even when it does, those other branches also grant military units. If you want to focus on military, you get lots. If you don't want to, you still get some! Would the problem of always having Domination available as an option be an issue if this was changed? Probably not.

I think the bigger issue is the AI. It is just so abysmally bad at war, which is the only thing it really knows how to do, aside from extortion. If the AI had a better understanding of tactics and ranged units, then the problem would be greatly alleviated, and if we got REALLY exciting and made the enemy Civs get smart and band together against a Civ obviously on the domination path, or contact the player and tell them that there's a need for a coalition of nations against the conquerer (as opposed to just saying "so and so is a threat to the world! help me squash him" when you know full well that India is the weakest military force on the planet. I'm looking at you, ROME.), then it would be even harder to make a domination attempt stick. "You're trying to conquer the world? okay, have a SEVENTEEN FRONT WAR. You try and keep momentum now. Sucker." As an aside to that, make the City States much more efficient when they go to war, especially if they all band together after you conquer a few for their own preservation.

Make Domination something that you would really have to push for and prioritize and focus to the exclusion of other things so you can have an army massive enough to withstand the combined might of every other Civ on the planet. The alternative would be to be very sneaky about your conquests, spacing them out over time and risking another Civ getting enough headway to begin attempting another victory condition. If its time considerations were the same as the others, it would be a great improvement.

[The Rockman]

It possible to get other victories without much of a military but it needs a choke point or a military tech advantage so your few units can chew up their armies without to much trouble. But then again the units you have would be able to go on a rampage in the end (XP and tech advantage).

[CoryTV]

But then again the units you have would be able to go on a rampage in the end (XP and tech advantage).

This. this. forever this. I don't mind having to defend, or even ocassionally having to knock someone down a peg/defend a civ. However, when you've defended against what will inevitably be the most advanced civ militarily, you might as well take your band of units around to the other civs and finish the game quicker, than say, a science victory, which takes FOREVER with the reduced resources in CV.

Fundamental design flaw-- worst balance of winning conditions in any Civ game, ever.

[CoryTV]

But then again the units you have would be able to go on a rampage in the end (XP and tech advantage).

This. this. forever this. I don't mind having to defend, or even ocassionally having to knock someone down a peg/defend a civ. However, when you've defended against what will inevitably be the most advanced civ militarily, you might as well take your band of units around to the other civs and finish the game quicker, than say, a science victory, which takes FOREVER with the reduced resources in CV.

Fundamental design flaw-- worst balance of winning conditions in any Civ game, ever.

[Hakuryu9]

I've only played through the 5th difficulty... was hoping the AI would get better.

So far it's been ridiculously easy to beat them.

Had a fort in a choke point once, with the 3 range cannon... AI just kept sending troops into it's field of fire, or sent them into the water around it where my ships were (instant kill run over).

Took an enemy city on a peninsula, with ships around it, and the AI kept sending melee units that were killed by my ships before they got anywhere near my puppet.

Had 3 enemy units attacking one of my allied city states, and with one nearby cannon, killed them all. Didn't even try to attack my lone vulnerable cannon, and then heal.

It's been a while since I've played Civ 4, but I seem to remember getting whomped now and then when I slacked off and did something like not properly staffing a city with troops. I've yet to see the AI come remotely close to taking one of my cities.

[Murkk]

Well, after about 600AD you need a good army or you will be DOWed by the AI. So with just a bit more effort...

Besides, it's much easier to tech / build cities for the AI than fight.

[Eshme]

To me, to win any other type of victory condition, you have to mount enough of an Army that you could have won a domination game, anyway, you have to chose "not to" which is a fatal, fatal flaw.

Quiet the death sentence to strategy me thinks.

[Davetopia]

I say it's more of an AI issue... 5 units can dominate all difficulties up to immortal in my experience...

[HhTacos]

Well, lets just hope for an AI Update soon ...

I am still on that game, after I'll try Immortal if it makes any differences.

[dexters]

It is too easy. If you're facing a run-away AI who has captured all the other capitals, all you have to do is capture thiers. And capital placement can be real vulnerable in some games. Especially ones at the coast, close to the human players.

The AI shouldn't be doing one half to 90% of the work for you.

One suggestion is all capitals must be under human control. in order to win.

[JoshTheValiant]

It is too easy. If you're facing a run-away AI who has captured all the other capitals, all you have to do is capture thiers. And capital placement can be real vulnerable in some games. Especially ones at the coast, close to the human players.

The AI shouldn't be doing one half to 90% of the work for you.

One suggestion is all capitals must be under human control. in order to win.

I just discovered the advanced setting that makes it so that a player isn't eliminated until EVERYTHING of theirs is eliminated. I'm rather of the opinion that THIS is how Domination should work. You're never safe until you've completely eradicated everything that opposes you from the planet. Going beyond capitals into making sure everything that isn't owned by you (literally or politically, in the case of City States) is either taken, or burned to the ground appeals to me as a way to fix the victory condition. It doesn't matter if you take the last capital if they still have a big honking army ready to beat down your door.

[Black Gate of Mordor]

I just discovered the advanced setting that makes it so that a player isn't eliminated until EVERYTHING of theirs is eliminated. I'm rather of the opinion that THIS is how Domination should work. You're never safe until you've completely eradicated everything that opposes you from the planet. Going beyond capitals into making sure everything that isn't owned by you (literally or politically, in the case of City States) is either taken, or burned to the ground appeals to me as a way to fix the victory condition. It doesn't matter if you take the last capital if they still have a big honking army ready to beat down your door.

This'd be really difficult, even on Prince. On a Huge Earth map with proper start positions, South America and Australia are full of barbarians, and so is central asia and northern siberia. And if the Songhai don't expand really far south (or Egypt) then that's the same with southern africa. ditto with Canada and one of the American civs.

Difficult, but sounds to be very fun. But they'd need to expand to at least 2200 AD, and whilst doing that add in some realistic future techs. In fact, do a BtS-style expansion, except it's Beyond Now eg. rail guns, heat lasers, advanced UAV, UGV, and UUV's.

[HhTacos]

I just discovered the advanced setting that makes it so that a player isn't eliminated until EVERYTHING of theirs is eliminated. I'm rather of the opinion that THIS is how Domination should work. You're never safe until you've completely eradicated everything that opposes you from the planet. Going beyond capitals into making sure everything that isn't owned by you (literally or politically, in the case of City States) is either taken, or burned to the ground appeals to me as a way to fix the victory condition. It doesn't matter if you take the last capital if they still have a big honking army ready to beat down your door.

True that, I'll check this box next time. This way, you are sure that if you want to go domination, you go all the way. Might make the other type of victory shine more.

I like it.

[JoshTheValiant]

True that, I'll check this box next time. This way, you are sure that if you want to go domination, you go all the way. Might make the other type of victory shine more.

I like it.

I hope this didn't cause confusion. The Domination victory condition isn't affected by the option. You will still win the game if you capture all of the capitals, regardless of what else is left on the field. I was merely saying that that option inspired me to say that I think that's how Domination SHOULD work, by being a complete annihilation of every other Civ. Because that's the only way to be sure. The only effect that option would have in the actual game is that if you took all of a Civ's cities, they would still be able to attack you with whatever remaining units they had.

Sorry if that was unclear.

[HhTacos]

Ho it was don't worry, but i'll change my gameplay such that if ever I want a domination victory I should eradicate all their units and cities from the surface of the map :P

But actually, I just finished my previous game and started a game turning off domination victory. Problem solved :P

[Mythdracon]

I too blame the tech tree. Not only does it have illogical sections (you don't need rifling to make modern infantry, and others)--but the tech tree is just very, very fast to tear through. You can be in the medieval age in the BCs, and you can have rifles in the early ADs. When you have rifles and your opponents have longswordsmen (at best), Domination starts to look like a nice easy win (and it usually is thanks to the inane AI's horrible understanding of military tactics).

[skullkandy]

Sort of a stream of consciousness response... but this can in many ways be blamed on the current tech tree, which makes military units so prevalent. The military-centric branch requires rather little input from other branches to improve the units, and even when it does, those other branches also grant military units. If you want to focus on military, you get lots. If you don't want to, you still get some! Would the problem of always having Domination available as an option be an issue if this was changed? Probably not.

I think the bigger issue is the AI. It is just so abysmally bad at war, which is the only thing it really knows how to do, aside from extortion. If the AI had a better understanding of tactics and ranged units, then the problem would be greatly alleviated, and if we got REALLY exciting and made the enemy Civs get smart and band together against a Civ obviously on the domination path, or contact the player and tell them that there's a need for a coalition of nations against the conquerer (as opposed to just saying "so and so is a threat to the world! help me squash him" when you know full well that India is the weakest military force on the planet. I'm looking at you, ROME.), then it would be even harder to make a domination attempt stick. "You're trying to conquer the world? okay, have a SEVENTEEN FRONT WAR. You try and keep momentum now. Sucker." As an aside to that, make the City States much more efficient when they go to war, especially if they all band together after you conquer a few for their own preservation.

Make Domination something that you would really have to push for and prioritize and focus to the exclusion of other things so you can have an army massive enough to withstand the combined might of every other Civ on the planet. The alternative would be to be very sneaky about your conquests, spacing them out over time and risking another Civ getting enough headway to begin attempting another victory condition. If its time considerations were the same as the others, it would be a great improvement.

This is dead on.

[Bear85]

I also keep trying to win a Science victory, I've yet to do it as domination always creeps in.

The problem as I see it is that the AI will always attack you sooner or later, so you need to keep some units for defense, which is fine. But when the AI declares war it throws everything it has at you, so either you get steamrollered, or due to the bad combat AI more often on not you hold and wipe out his attacking force.

At that point you know that he has nothing left, and that he'll only ever send single units at you from that point on.

So at this point you either let the war trickle on until they offer peace, or you go on the offensive and take an easy, easy victory. Then you rinse and repeat with the other nations.

They need to change the AI so they don't go for broke in their war, because at the moment every war (for me) ends up that exact same way.

[eekamouse]

This is a great great thread. I just wanted to call that out. This is really the main problem with the game for me. Really, I love this game. I just think it needs a patch or two.

[Ares42]

I say it's more of an AI issue... 5 units can dominate all difficulties up to immortal in my experience...

This. From my experience playing on anything lower than 6 is basically like playing with handicapped AI. At 6 you'll be facing opponents that will atleast nibble at your heels, while at 7 you'll be facing AIs that are ahead of you.

I've had plenty of games at diff 6 where I've never been able to break out of my starting area (as I've had 2-3 early war AIs around me), and have had to just turtle up for most of the game. Sure, at some point you'll have some overpowered ranged units, but usually at that point it's easier to just finish up a quick tech victory rather than trying spending ages carefully breaking out, making sure they never zerg your precious few units down.

There are many bonuses to defending over attacking (especially with ranged units) so it's wrong to assume that just because you've got enough to easily hold someone off, you can also easily take him down. But as already said, if you find domination too easy, up the difficulty. I can assure you you'll find it hard at some point :P

[General Masters]

I have been dialing down the number of AIs and CSs in my games as I am experimenting with various things and want to limit variables, so even with peaceful attempts I end up with a good-sized military anyway in order to keep the barbarian population down while I expand. This is in part due to the fact there's nobody else around to deal with them, so even though I don't have them set on Raging they still spawn a lot and interfere with my settler deployment if I don't keep beating them down.

I have tried taking advantage of the inherent city defense and building no units, but it doesn't really work as eventually I run into an aggressive AI and end up having to build a military just to keep him occupied while I amass tech and culture points. Annoying, really, as I often end up stomping said aggressor into the ground in order to get him off my case so I can go back to my peacetime building scheme. Doesn't help that they're all arrogant twits, either.

[HhTacos]

. But as already said, if you find domination too easy, up the difficulty. I can assure you you'll find it hard at some point :P

Exactly, Immortal is a lot lot more enjoyable. Sure they sound like russians, totally unskilled. But there are so many of them that it makes the game even.

But yeah, to whoever thinks domination victory is too easy, up the difficulty, that is the solution. The AI doesn't get any better at war. However, their headstart and the fact they makes so many units is pretty rough to handle.

[Bohboh]

Domination seems to be the fastest way to win on immortal and deity level. Then diplomatic. Culture or science seems too cheated for the CPU IMO.
That's how the other civ games went in terms of turns.

As far civ5 goes I think the "level" doesn't match the hover bar thing. Immortal feels like "normal/hard" and the one before that.. "emperor?" feels like "normal"

[JoshTheValiant]

Domination seems to be the fastest way to win on immortal and deity level. Then diplomatic. Culture or science seems too cheated for the CPU IMO.
That's how the other civ games went in terms of turns.

As far civ5 goes I think the "level" doesn't match the hover bar thing. Immortal feels like "normal/hard" and the one before that.. "emperor?" feels like "normal"

I *REALLY* want an AI patch. It would bring this game to a whole 'nother level if the AI knew what a national guard was, or the concept of a defensive position, or choke points, or anything else fancy like that. It would make Prince games actually fair games, and it would make the higher difficulties legitimately hair tearingly difficult. Especially if the AI effectively went about prioritizing victory conditions, which I haven't actually seen any evidence for.

[Jazzterisk]

To me, to win any other type of victory condition, you have to mount enough of an Army that you could have won a domination game, anyway, you have to chose "not to" which is a fatal, fatal flaw.

That's so true.
I decided to go for a cultural victory so I only built 3 cities and focused on that. I played nice with the other leaders. Unfortunately, most of them started to hate me for some reason and attacked me. I ended up building a huge army to fight them off. As you've described I was now stuck with a bunch of military units and nowhere to go other than send them to fight which brought me right back to the domination pathway again.

Hopefully, the victory options can be tweaked to make each one viable.

[cyberchris]

I would appreciate it if the domination victory would only achieved if you are the last person who has their capital and hold it for five turns.

This way you cant just capture the enemy city in case of a coastal city its a thing of one turn and win.

Whenever a player is the last player with his capital a message to all player should be send. So they can try to do something against it. For example recapturing their capital.

[Ares42]

However, their headstart and the fact they makes so many units is pretty rough to handle.

It's not really that they produce that much more (atleast on 6 I'd bet you could make just as much if you really went for it), it's more the fact that they will actually keep up on the tech and structures too. I had never ever seen any Civ have higher tech units than me before I played Immortal.