|
Holy crap, they really boosted the amount of military cred that you get for having nukes and nobody else. As soon as I built 2 atomic bombs everyone in the game lined up to suck my cock despite many of them having a far larger conventional force. This is awesome.
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 13:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 19:12 |
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Holy crap, they really boosted the amount of military cred that you get for having nukes and nobody else. As soon as I built 2 atomic bombs everyone in the game lined up to suck my cock despite many of them having a far larger conventional force. This is awesome. Nukes are the pointiest of sticks, so it's only natural to fear them. It feels so good to nuke all of the assholes that hounded you for millennia the turn before you blast off to seed the stars.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 14:23
|
|
|
That happened to me last night but I was still well behind in stick-pointiness. I think nukes must be especially coded to cause fear in the other leaders irrespective of the pointy stick score change.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 14:48
|
|
|
Pvt.Scott posted:Nukes are the pointiest of sticks, so it's only natural to fear them. It feels so good to nuke all of the assholes that hounded you for millennia the turn before you blast off to seed the stars. Hiawatha's Revenge
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 14:49
|
|
|
What is the best way to minimize happiness hits when warmongering? I'm playing as Monty on Diety right now and having a bitch of a time doing it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 14:51
|
|
|
Thanks for all the advice on not being so goddamn poor. I think I may just wipe out my game and start over tonight, as I'm only 100 turns in.Starks posted:Sounds like you just got a little unlucky with other civs' placements because even on large maps, the AI usually settles a city or 2 near enough to me that I can get to it with the first trade route. I think the problem might be that prince AI is much slower to expand so that's actually making it harder. But there are also a lot of buildings you can get that extend the range and yield of trade routes, including the caravansary which you get before trade routes. I'm playing with 6 AI civs (8 total) on a Huge map, and the only things close to me are two city-states that are 14 and 18 land tiles from me (capital to capital) and 18/26 water tiles away. I could reach one of them with the trading boat without any improvements and then a caravanary allowed me to reach the second. I suppose I either have to wait for cities to be settled near me or just deal with it. I was afraid to put more civs in the game as I got a warning about unsupported numbers of civs  . I didn't know that sea>land for GPT from trading, but I did assume civs would be more beneficial. Maybe I should lower the map size a bit, though I am looking for a sprawling area to explore. Is owning a lot of cities harder to do in BNW? I usually do 4 with Tradition but I was wanting to get maybe 8 this game, under Liberty perhaps. I don't know much about expanding cities. I did find that I was gifted units by the one allied CS I had quite often, maybe every 20 turns, so that certainly didn't help the upkeep costs. However, I had 3 cities with a good 5 barbarian encampments around them and I seemed to be constantly fighting, so I needed as much muscle as I could get. While reading up on BNW changes before I played I did run across people saying that trading was the new hot poo poo for GPT which is why I wanted to figure out what I was doing wrong. I'll go with 'too few civs on a big map'. The other civs I did discover wanted to give me some pittance like 3 GPT for a luxury (that I only had one of) so they can gently caress right off. Chomp8645 posted:I think you're either missing or have misconstrued some of the basics here. 1) I saw that basically no land tiles had gold on them anymore. I had maybe two tiles across all three cities that gave me 2 and 3 gold each. Of course there are resources with their 1 gold, but it wasn't much. I may have just gotten really unlucky with map generation, as I was surrounded on two sides by desert so I was limited on where to send my settlers. 2) Looks like I need to expand my trade distance ASAP. Is it best to work on the trade buildings in my capital (highest population) city or just do it everywhere? 3) Answered above 4) Lots of good ways to earn gold here that I'll try to implement when I get a chance. I am afraid to plunder and tribute CS because I was under the impression that it would piss off the other civs, even if they weren't protecting the CS. Is that wrong? I'm definitely working on playing more religiously, though I never really got far enough to start accumulating missionaries to infect other cities. Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:These are all good points. Here are some more tips: Sell your resources. Find some people to make friends with early on and sell them your excess resources. Hell, even sell them your non-excess if you have happiness to spare. On standard speed they'll give you 240 gold for each luxury if they are your friends, or 6gpt if they are not. Strategics are worth 45 gold or 1gpt. Embassies are worth 25 gold or 1gpt. On longer speeds, the lump sum prices are higher but per turn prices are not. I might need to up my game speed from quick to standard, I think it's the reason I am getting such lovely offers. I stated my fears of intimidating CS before but I'm willing to give it a try and see how being demanding goes. This will nuke my favor with the CS, right? I don't want to demand from allies? I only managed to get one road built last night but I will prioritize doing so once the populations can afford it. If capital is 5 tiles from A and B is another 5 tiles from A (10 from capital) would I need to wait for population 10 in the capital or 15?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 15:06
|
|
|
I saw some misinformation or possibly out of date info about removing holy cities. The way to remove them easily and permanently is to capture them then have an inquisitor remove heresy on them. This straight up permanently removes the status (and cannot be brought back in any way as far as I know). It also makes the city majority your religion, although this may be reliant on having some exposure to your religion in the first place. I have definitely seen a 14 pop holy city with 12 their religion, 2 my religion turn into 8 my religion after using an inquisitor. It obviously doesn't have any effect on worshipers in any other cities, aside from remove the pressure generation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 15:10
|
|
|
Yarrington posted:It also makes the city majority your religion, although this may be reliant on having some exposure to your religion in the first place. I have definitely seen a 14 pop holy city with 12 their religion, 2 my religion turn into 8 my religion after using an inquisitor. Inquisitors seem to do this anyway, whatever city it is you control. It's like they have a missionary built into them. Not sure what the math is behind it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 15:13
|
|
|
KKKlean Energy posted:Inquisitors seem to do this anyway, whatever city it is you control. It's like they have a missionary built into them. Not sure what the math is behind it. There's a joke about doing it missionary style in there somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 15:20
|
|
|
I completed wiped out a religion in my last game as Morocco. Alexander founded Confucianism before I decided he needed to die because Alexander*. After I wiped him out I sent Inquisitors to go and remove his religion in all the conquered cities with inquisitors. After I removed the last bit of his religion in the holy city of * I was going to leave him with one little podunk city just as a gesture of kindness, but no. No, he had to go and publicly denounce me the turn after I negotiated peace with him. 9 turns later he didn't exist anymore.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 15:25
|
|
|
The guy who wrote Guns Germs and Steel must be a Civ player. Starting on a narrow continent suuuuuuucks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 15:34
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:The guy who wrote Guns Germs and Steel must be a Civ player. What I would give for a mod based on the concepts in that book. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 15:39
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:They made a Cash for Gold DLC for Civ V? Who's the leader, this person? Once you research currency gold should switch to money with a conversion rate between them based on supply. Once you reach information age you should have the option to purchase bitcoins or waste your hammers producing them. They would of course allow you to trade in banned luxuries and "controversial artworks".
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 15:45
|
|
|
Is there any good reason to keep forests around instead of chopping them ASAP if I don't have anything to enhance them, like the Celts? 1f/3p in the late game seems kind of underwhelming, and as always, hammers now and instantly is better than hammers later and over time. In Civ4 chopping forests gave you a HUGE early advantage, but also resulted in less city healthiness and quicker global warming.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 15:54
|
|
|
DrPlump posted:Once you research currency gold should switch to money with a conversion rate between them based on supply. Once you reach information age you should have the option to purchase bitcoins or waste your hammers producing them. They would of course allow you to trade in banned luxuries and "controversial artworks". Producing Bitcoins would, of course, be less efficient than producing wealth and buying them. New building: Bitcoin‐mining ASIC. Unlocked with Internet. Requires one aluminium. Requires a solar/nuclear plant and negates the production bonus thereof. Can be bought with gold, but takes ten turns to show up anyway. Provides no gold when sold. Bitcoins can be given to ”irrational” states for a large influence boost. Building an ASIC in every city unlocks the national wonder Mining Pool. The mining pool enables you to steal your Bitcoins back after a trade, but you’re given a SCAMMER diplomatic modifier (which does nothing). Platystemon fucked around with this message at 16:50 on Aug 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 15:54
|
|
|
KKKlean Energy posted:What I would give for a mod based on the concepts in that book.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 16:15
|
|
|
wukkar posted:If you don't have cattle somewhere within your borders and pastured, when you meet a new player who does, all your cities lose half their population? Researching the Sheepfucking tech gives you a +25% combat bonus vs. Aztecs, Inca, Iroquois, and Shoshone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:The guy who wrote Guns Germs and Steel must be a Civ player.  What's up, narrow continent buddy. I'm all alone with one CS here, and while there's a lot of decent resources, they're all so *badly placed* that I just know any city I drop is going to be horribly inefficient. Thebes is already kind of meh, though at least I got that marble. No iron anywhere, either. Any suggestions where I should put my first settler?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
LaserShark posted:Any suggestions where I should put my first settler? I'd want coast, so my choice would be that bit that sticks out just south of the fish on the west coast. You can pick up the fish and crabs, and three pastures, and some hills for mining. It won't grow very quick but it looks like the best coastal spot with fairly decent production. Then I'd probably plan my third city further up the coast in the jungle - some more pastures, another fish, and it'll probably make a powerful science city. Microplastics fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Aug 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 16:32
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Is there any good reason to keep forests around instead of chopping them ASAP if I don't have anything to enhance them, like the Celts? 1f/3p in the late game seems kind of underwhelming, and as always, hammers now and instantly is better than hammers later and over time. Sure, chop all your forests if you don't mind having a city with 5 production in the end game. Whether you chop forests depends on how much production you get from other tiles. If you have two or three hills or horses or something else that boosts you to 10+ base production with everything worked and upgraded, chop your forests if you need to. If you don't, +2P is a much better deal than +2F/-1P.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Researching the Sheepfucking tech gives you a +25% combat bonus vs. Aztecs, Inca, Iroquois, and Shoshone. Play as Scotland and get that as a starting tech.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
I think I know why the AI is so bad at seiging cities. They won't attack since the melee units will take more damage then they will deal. This means they will march 10 Warriors and 12 Archers to a city, but never attack it since the Warriors will get hurt more then the city will. This means that they cannot take the city and lose their entire army. At least, that is what happens whenever the AI tries to fight anyone I can see early game. Tyre? Mass units to stand in front of the city, then make peace next turn. My city? Them circle around me to die.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 18:24
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Sure, chop all your forests if you don't mind having a city with 5 production in the end game. You should be chopping all your river adjacent forests ASAP, because you want them for Civil Service. Food is power in the early game, and I would only not chop a forest there if the city had no hammers. Once you farm up those river tiles, I generally go with farms on plains, lumber mills on wooded areas, and trading posts on grasslands. Once you hit rationalism with that +2 specialist ability you will want to be working a lot of those over base tiles, so it is important to get your population up early. I generally find if I grow fast enough I'm never hurting for hammers by the end game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 18:30
|
|
|
Richard M Nixon posted:Thanks for all the advice on not being so goddamn poor. I think I may just wipe out my game and start over tonight, as I'm only 100 turns in. That's a really low amount of civs for such a large map. The game defaults to 12 civilizations and 24 city states on Huge for a reason, and even that is sparsely populated. Once of the problems you'll have to work around with such a weird map setup having no neighbors to trade with. Going a bit crazy with settlers, sending them very far away just to set up "trading posts" might be your only option for generating decent income, but even that will be hard if you can only get access to one other civ doing so. I generally suggest upping the civ count, as the game isn't currently designed to handle low-density maps very well. Richard M Nixon posted:I stated my fears of intimidating CS before but I'm willing to give it a try and see how being demanding goes. This will nuke my favor with the CS, right? I don't want to demand from allies? It's a 15 influence penalty for demanding gold so it's not the end of the world or anything and is something you can manage in order to not fall too far in the negative for them, especially since the game doesn't allow you to do it again right away. If you have a really large influence buffer with an ally you can do it if you're desperate for cash otherwise stick to non-allies. As far as I can tell, there is no penalty with AI civs for doing this unless they're pledging to protect. They will then be forced to decide whether to look the other way and lose influence with the CS or to get mad at you (they'll get mad). Richard M Nixon posted:I only managed to get one road built last night but I will prioritize doing so once the populations can afford it. If capital is 5 tiles from A and B is another 5 tiles from A (10 from capital) would I need to wait for population 10 in the capital or 15? Sorry, I didn't word that very well. What I was trying to say that the city should be larger than the gold cost to build a road to it (one gold per turn per tile). In your example, city B can just be 5 population before you can profit from it. Because you presumably only need to build a road in five more tiles from A to B. This isn't a hard and fast rule, by the way, the actual formula is a bit more complex and takes into account the capital size as well. Just think of it as a rule of thumb.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 18:44
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:I bit the bullet, here is a Steam Group for BNW Goons. Someone said that we make it if there is interest, but we can gauge the interest this way, too. JOIN IN and lets play against each other till the game is Goonified and no one has anymore fun. As someone who plays rather infrequently or in short bursts, would multiplayer make sense? I imagine a game-by-mail style would take an eternity. How do you guys typically handle multiplayer, a quick game for 2-3 hours? Wierd question, what happens if someone has to bolt, just save and hope you can get everyone together again?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 18:44
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:The guy who wrote Guns Germs and Steel must be a Civ player. TraderStav posted:As someone who plays rather infrequently or in short bursts, would multiplayer make sense? I imagine a game-by-mail style would take an eternity. How do you guys typically handle multiplayer, a quick game for 2-3 hours? Wierd question, what happens if someone has to bolt, just save and hope you can get everyone together again?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 19:31
|
|
|
Poil posted:Considering that exploration gives you +3 production, +3 happiness and +3 gold per coastal city I'd say narrow continents are awesome. They could of course have less snow and desert however, and more resources of course. What happens to their civ when they leave? AI take over?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 19:34
|
|
|
Poil posted:Considering that exploration gives you +3 production, +3 happiness and +3 gold per coastal city I'd say narrow continents are awesome. They could of course have less snow and desert however, and more resources of course. Eh, Exploration is decent for making coastal cities slightly less unappealing but they're still to be avoided in general if you already have a good sea trade hub or two.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
TraderStav posted:What happens to their civ when they leave? AI take over? Yes. In truth there are many hurdles to getting multiplayer games to work. One is the turn type. I like hybrid, and will categorically refuse to play any multiplayer match that allows simultaneous turns during war because it turns combat into a clicking competition. It just absolutely ruins it for me. Yeah hybrid will slow things down a bit but I think it's worth it to avoid that poo poo show. Other people may not agree however, and that's ok! It just means I won't play with them! Then you have map script! Some people love/hate Pangaea and will either only want to play it or refuse to play it. The list goes on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
I will quite myself again so people catch this now that EST work day is ending. For anyone worrying about playing time and all that: don't. Let's try to get some quick hybrid games going and if people dro out, so be it, that's fine! They can hop back later if they wan. As long as somewhat most are present, games will go on. If we randomize all the other elements, there should be no fight about scripts. quote:
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:I will quite myself again so people catch this now that EST work day is ending. For anyone worrying about playing time and all that: don't. I will join the group when I get home and will do what I can about getting in some games despite being new to Civ 5 BNW. (veteran of all the other 4 though) I'm Captain Sum Ting Wong.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
BNW added Pitboss, right? I'd be into trying out a PBEM game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
And we could start games on medieval times, or maybe even renaissance. I mean, some purists might oppose it, but we could kickstart the game to eras where we are communicating and trading effectively.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 20:12
|
|
|
Can someone point me in the direction of the Poland quick opening? I saw it mentioned earlier but I can't find the details on the last few pages.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 21:36
|
|
|
Isn't there already a Civ group? Uncivilized Goons? I'd be willing to try a game using Giant Multiplayer Robot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 21:41
|
|
|
Mayor Dave posted:Can someone point me in the direction of the Poland quick opening? I saw it mentioned earlier but I can't find the details on the last few pages. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=501378 Basically, get Tradition and Liberty up quickly with the Oracle. That build is designed for Deity and can be optimized much better for lower difficulties.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 21:42
|
|
God I fucking love Diablo 3 gold, it even paid for this shitty title
|
JayMax posted:Isn't there already a Civ group? Uncivilized Goons? Well yeah, basically. However, the last messages are from 2010 and 2011, with this kind of contents: quote:Kwacks Dec 26, 2011 @ 11:06pm So I don't think it is unneccesary to start over and try again. Especially since BNW is luring many Civ IV purists back into the game. I am going to enable announcements and events for everyone so people can organize matches better. Hopefully no one will troll this ability too hard. I also made moderators out of the early joiners and a couple of admins out of the people with more than 500 hours of CIV time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
 this game is so frustratingTried a Poland expansion plan on King. Huns settle right next to me. Declaration of Friendship done. Trade route going each way between capitals. I carry on expanding, leaving a ruin-upgraded spearman in range of the Warsaw. Turn ~90. War were declared. gently caress. I buy a warrior in a vain attempt at defence but he rolls my capital with rams in two turns. I ragequit. I play EVE. I'm supposed to be used to frustrating.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 23:25
|
|
|
Civs really want to use their unique units, and the Huns' units come early. If there's no one else nearby, you're going to be the one they decide to flatten. Also, the AI is extremely good at knowing if you're overextended (like 2 soldiers and a bunch of cities). You can fend off Hun advances with a couple of archers and a wall (walls are really, really good early game). Warriors are going to be a waste of gold for the most part.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 19:12 |
|
|
twoot posted:
Ill translate to how you played in eve terms. You pretty are in null space the whole time. You put up a space station in 0.0 territory, advertised where it was (Trade routes and etc show that) and then didn't build any defenders...
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 23:33
|
|
