|
This has kinda been touched on earlier but I want to clarify - is four cities your best bet for a domination victory too? Should I raze everything I conquer? A lot of this advice is making it sound like a four-city culture victory or science victory is the best/only way to play at the challenging difficulties. e: though I guess you could just nuke everyone for domination if you're way ahead in science. What I'm trying to ask is if it's ever beneficial to sail around the world colonizing everything in the early-mid game. runoverbobby fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Dec 31, 2013 |
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 00:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 17:00 |
|
|
runoverbobby posted:What I'm trying to ask is if it's ever beneficial to sail around the world colonizing everything in the early-mid game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 01:06
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:All I can really go on is your text, which sometimes reads like whining about the game being bullshit (in ways that it is not). If that's not the case, then carry on. I randomed the Maya and started off on my own island with two city states and spread out to claim an absolute gently caress-ton of silver. Building mints right now while looking for trading partners. King kamahameha found me and set up a second city and that's just fine. In this no-wonders challenge can I still go for the local wonders everyone is allowed? Writer's guilds and circus maximus?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 03:22
|
|
|
Guigui posted:Also, when you found a new city and incurr the 3% science penalty, do you get that percentage back if you give that city away? I’m pretty sure you do. I’ve traded cities away and watched the beaker requirement for my next tech fall. One thing I can say is that you’re paying the penalty even if the city is in resistance, which can really hurt in a domination game, especially if you’d like to be bulbing great scientists. You have to either pop them before taking the city or wait the number of turns the city is in resistance + eight turns to get as much science as you deserve out of them. Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:The penalties can not be mitigated. Buildings alone are not enough to keep yourself happiness positive, as those happiness bonuses from common buildings cannot exceed city population. Unless you're India, there's no way to actually infinitely expand and grow. That's not entirely true. Any policy that decreases unhappiness rather than increasing happiness (Monarchy, Universal Suffrage) is gold, because local happiness is limited to the city's population, not the unhappiness the city is actually generating. The Forbidden Palace, and yes, Gandhi's UA, have the same effect. If you go specialist‐heavy there’s no reason you can’t cancel out the per‐city unhappiness with happiness buildings. Protectionism and Cultural Diplomacy have a cap because their are a finite number of luxury resources, but between them, mercantile city‐states, the discovery of natural wonders, certain religious beliefs, and +happy world wonders, you can get more global happiness than you’ll ever need even if you carpet the map in cities. Indonesia deserves special mention for global happiness it gets with its unique luxuries.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 03:23
|
|
|
Krinkle posted:I randomed the Maya and started off on my own island with two city states and spread out to claim an absolute gently caress-ton of silver. Building mints right now while looking for trading partners. King kamahameha found me and set up a second city and that's just fine. In this no-wonders challenge can I still go for the local wonders everyone is allowed? Writer's guilds and circus maximus? National wonders and writer's guild are fine in the no-wonders challenge. They all provide very nice benefits.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 03:30
|
|
|
Yeah, the point of playing without wonders is to prepare you for higher difficulties where you do not have the luxury of building any wonder you want. You’ll always be able to build national wonders, so there’s nothing to prepare for there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 03:37
|
|
|
Is a holy city wherever you pop the first great prophet, not the capital by default? If my capital was land locked and I intended to have a sea trade based city, I could move the prophet there, make that the holy city, and then the grand temple would make all my sea trade routes spread the faith twice as fast?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 04:05
|
|
|
Krinkle posted:Is a holy city wherever you pop the first great prophet, not the capital by default? If my capital was land locked and I intended to have a sea trade based city, I could move the prophet there, make that the holy city, and then the grand temple would make all my sea trade routes spread the faith twice as fast? Yeah, it's wherever you pop your first great prophet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 04:08
|
|
|
Krinkle posted:Is a holy city wherever you pop the first great prophet, not the capital by default? If my capital was land locked and I intended to have a sea trade based city, I could move the prophet there, make that the holy city, and then the grand temple would make all my sea trade routes spread the faith twice as fast? Yes. The downside of making another city your holy city is that your capital is usually your fastest growing city, and if its population grows faster than religious spread from your other cities can keep up with, you might have to buy a missionary to help it out. The holy city pressures itself and is basically immune to outgrowing religion. That said, I’d make the trade hub my holy city. Being the holy city will also counter the reverse religious pressure you get from all those trade routes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 04:12
|
|
|
runoverbobby posted:This has kinda been touched on earlier but I want to clarify - is four cities your best bet for a domination victory too? Should I raze everything I conquer? You should, but the game won't let you raze capitals or holy cities, so you're going to have those dragging you down for a while. quote:A lot of this advice is making it sound like a four-city culture victory or science victory is the best/only way to play at the challenging difficulties. It depends a lot on your game setup, really. Game speed is the big game-changer. Unfortunately they didn't balance game speed at all - someone playing on Marathon gets three times the turns that someone playing on Standard gets. Since experience is still earned at the same rate (EG: 2 XP per ranged attack) on all game speeds, and units still move, do damage and heal at the same rate per turn on all game speeds, military is way more important on longer game speeds. You will also see the overpowered "+1 range" and "attack twice per turn" promotions a lot faster on slow game speeds. There's also the fact that military AI is where this game is weakest. The AI still doesn't really know how to move units or how to mount an efficient city attack, or what units are good (ranged) or what units are bad (pretty much everything else). Generally speaking, though, on Quick and Standard speeds at high difficulty the AI will build such a massive army that you'll be meatgrindering your way through it for an inordinate amount of time, and even if you do win said war, what have you gained? Some cities you don't have the happiness to support, a permanent penalty to your science rate even if you give the cities away, and warmonger points that make other civs hate you. Great. Normal game speed high difficulty war in Civ: The only winning move is not to play.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 07:32
|
|
|
I don't get what all the numbers mean with religion. A Great Prophet does 1000 something, I guess pressure? How much pressure is one person worth in a city? Then there's the "1 follower (+18 pressure)" shown when you hover the cursor over the city name and the +9 Pressure in trade routes. Could someone explain?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 07:37
|
|
|
Gort posted:Unfortunately they didn't balance game speed at all - someone playing on Marathon gets three times the turns that someone playing on Standard gets. Since experience is still earned at the same rate (EG: 2 XP per ranged attack) on all game speeds, and units still move, do damage and heal at the same rate per turn on all game speeds, military is way more important on longer game speeds. You will also see the overpowered "+1 range" and "attack twice per turn" promotions a lot faster on slow game speeds. I think theoretically you’d be using units twice in on average the same number of turns no matter the game speed. Your army would have a half‐life and eventually you’d have replaced all the units due to attrition. As a practical matter, though, a half‐decent player only loses units to the AI once in a blue moon, and units become more powerful and thus less likely to be lost as they earn promotions. Andorra posted:I don't get what all the numbers mean with religion. A Great Prophet does 1000 something, I guess pressure? How much pressure is one person worth in a city? Then there's the "1 follower (+18 pressure)" shown when you hover the cursor over the city name and the +9 Pressure in trade routes. Could someone explain? The missionary strength numbers are the same as the spread numbers, i.e. 1000 points from a missionary is worth 100 turns of 10 pressure from an adjacent city. These points build up over time, and the relative point balance of various religions determines how many followers there are of each in the city. Missionaries are for converting atheists. They’re mostly useless on existing religious followers. A normal missionary conversion is enough to give you a majority in a nine‐population city that doesn’t already have any religious citizens. You’ll need more. Inquisitors can only be used on your own cities (and only after you’ve enhanced your religion), but they remove all traces of heathen religions. All those points that have been built up by natural spread and/or missionaries? Gone. Your points remain, and without any counterbalance, may be enough to instantly flip the city to your religion. Great prophets are a combination of missionary and inquisitor. They add points for your religion and remove the heathens’ points. Additionally, unlike inquisitors, they can be used on foreign cities.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 07:59
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Inquisitors can only be used on your own cities (and only after you’ve enhanced your religion), but they remove all traces of heathen religions. All those points that have been built up by natural spread and/or missionaries? Gone. The exception, I've noticed, is Inquisitors who were created in the Great Mosque city. It seems like those will also inflict 1250 pressure on the target city.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 08:09
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Missionaries are for converting atheists. They’re mostly useless on existing religious followers. A normal missionary conversion is enough to give you a majority in a nine‐population city that doesn’t already have any religious citizens. You’ll need more.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 08:17
|
|
|
How viabie is that strategy, really? Faith is expensive, Shrines and Temples cost alot of hammers to build, and so too are the Grand Temple and other faith-giving wonders. Couldn't that faith be better spent on getting those religious buildings like Pagodas and Mosques out, or banked up for late game GEngineers or GScientists? Not to mention missionaries increase in cost as you advance through the eras, and considering the point of this strategy is to get as much science as possible, isn't it counterproductive?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 08:38
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:How viabie is that strategy, really? Faith is expensive, Shrines and Temples cost alot of hammers to build, and so too are the Grand Temple and other faith-giving wonders. Couldn't that faith be better spent on getting those religious buildings like Pagodas and Mosques out, or banked up for late game GEngineers or GScientists? Just get desert folklore, have more faith than anyone else and don't invest a single hammer in faith buildings!
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 08:42
|
|
|
The only reason I could see taking Interfaith Dialog is if you got Desert Faith and thus massive amounts of faith generation but somehow were last to religion and thus Holy Warriors and all of the good religious buildings were already taken. I’ve never had that happen. It’s more likely on a huge map, I guess, but AIs have really bad taste in follower beliefs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 08:50
|
|
|
I managed it best on a religious-Civ-heavy map, playing as Indonesia. Holy Order is an important tenet, since it gives you a hefty faith discount on missionaries. I didn't have desert folklore or anything, but people kept sending me missionaries so my candi pumped out a pretty solid amount of extra faith per turn. I also had Mosques, and a decent number of cities. The Mayans and Venice were both desperate to make their faith #1 and kept spamming missionaries at me/each other but I just laughed it up and spammed missionaries straight back at them. You need to do it before the industrial age. Otherwise, missionaries are too expensive and the beakers you get back aren't worth it (I think it caps about at maybe 90 per conversion?). It's something you need to start doing and keep doing fairly early. Later on, you let your religion go hang and save your faith for GPs. It's already worked its magic though: if you pull it off right, you've got a solid tech-lead that you can hold onto all through the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 09:00
|
|
|
I was coasting towards a cultural victory, waiting for the last civilization (Russia) to buckle to my tourism, half-assing to the finish line. Since the beginning of the game I'd been friends with my neighbor Poland. It just so happened that the World Congress took place the turn before I would be influential over Russia and, assuming it was a world host vote (it was diplomatic victory), I tossed all my votes Poland's way out of some idiotic sense of comradeship with an AI. Then I saw the statue's head sunk in the sand and assumed it was a glitch. I need to stop assuming things. snoremac fucked around with this message at 13:32 on Dec 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 13:23
|
|
|
snoremac posted:I was coasting towards a cultural victory, waiting for the last civilization (Russia) to buckle to my tourism, half-assing to the finish line. Since the beginning of the game I'd been friends with my neighbor Poland. It just so happened that the World Congress took place the turn before I would be influential over Russia and, assuming it was a world host vote (it was diplomatic victory), I tossed all my votes Poland's way out of some idiotic sense of comradeship with an AI. Then I saw the statue's head sunk in the sand and assumed it was a glitch. Maddjinn did this to himself in his Venice deity LP, miscounted the number of votes needed to get world leader and gave it to himself two turns before he would get a nuke-finished domination victory 
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 14:02
|
|
|
twoot posted:Maddjinn did this to himself in his Venice deity LP, miscounted the number of votes needed to get world leader and gave it to himself two turns before he would get a nuke-finished domination victory Actually, he didn't miscount, per se - he changed the number of votes like two turns before the World Leader vote by taking over a city-state!
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 17:54
|
|
|
Bloodly posted:I hear you. So many things that need building. Hard to find time to build units when your cities and economy take up so much time and need to be done just to keep up. It's not impossible, but it's a pain. GalCiv actually specifically triggers the "random" events when it detects that things have been too passive. They aren't so much random as they are probabilistic; it picks ones that are most likely to shake up the current status quo, by forcing a war between two different civs that have a bunch of different allies so you end up with a WW1 scenario where a bunch of treaties cause a huge escalation of a relatively minor conflict, for example. It's a rather clever way to prevent players from ever getting too passive, since even in peacetime you have to be prepared for things to go to hell at any moment for basically no reason. In Civ V the player is really meant to be the main agent of chaos, but the problem is that the game really doesn't reward being provocative in any fashion. Just turtling with 4 mega cities is way more productive than aggressive settling or warmongering. The best way to play is to interact with other civs as little as possible. On a semi-related note, is there a general 4X thread for non-Civ games? I've been playing a lot of Ascendancy on my phone and it's interesting enough that I want to talk about it, but not so much that it could carry a thread on its own (plus I'm interested in other 4X games I might not have heard of). The Cheshire Cat fucked around with this message at 23:04 on Dec 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 22:59
|
|
|
I'm getting a unit support penalty for a one-city game where it tells me I can't support more than 22 units, is there a way to change this?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 23:53
|
|
|
I believe your unit cap is proportional to your population, possibly with some kind of pop/city factor, I'm not entirely sure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
So I'm playing a multiplayer game with my family and I'm going to get nuked in the near future. How can I defend against it? I won't have nonproliferation in time, can I shoot down the incoming nukes? I don't have uranium myself (there appears to be 4 in the entire game  )
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 05:44
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:So I'm playing a multiplayer game with my family and I'm going to get nuked in the near future. How can I defend against it? I won't have nonproliferation in time, can I shoot down the incoming nukes? I don't have uranium myself (there appears to be 4 in the entire game Nukes have to be carried into range (either by having a city, bombers, carrier, or a sub in range), so your best bet is to destroy them. Otherwise, you're pretty much hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
Besides sinking the carriers/subs you could build missile bunkers from telecommunications which will stop the damage to cities but will leave your armies totally unprotected. The real defense is (realistically) having nukes yourself but since there's no uranium in your game you're basically just hosed!
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
Yeah, he's got cities in range of mine, we're right on the border. I've only got one city and it's protected by a line of units on forts, if he drops a few nukes on my border I'm totally dead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:So I'm playing a multiplayer game with my family and I'm going to get nuked in the near future. How can I defend against it? I won't have nonproliferation in time, can I shoot down the incoming nukes? I don't have uranium myself (there appears to be 4 in the entire game If this is a multiplayer family game, your best bet might be diplomacy - straight-up, actual, in-your-face diplomacy. You don't NEED the UN to ban nuclear proliferation, if you can convince everyone to declare war on or otherwise gently caress with the few who do possess nukes, or else convince the people with uranium that building nukes will result in immediate and unyielding retaliation. Or else bribe the guy going after you to hunt someone else instead, beg for mercy and convince him to go away long enough to organize a coalition to gently caress with him permanently. Fool him into nuking something unimportant. Declare war on his uranium sources, and while he's busy marshaling his entire army around his uranium, get someone else to invade his heartlands. Anything might be possible - use your words and your wits to try and keep nuclear powers off your own back one way or another. Unless of course by this point everybody hates you anyways or likes the nuclear power too much, in which case yeah you're hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 06:27
|
|
|
Yeah, I'd say the best bet is to convince your (?) brother that he's got bigger fish to fry, and he should use his nukes on somebody else. Then get Nuclear Non-Proliferation passed, before he can build any new ones. If there's only 4 uranium and one guy controls all of it, it should be a congressional curbstomp to get non-proliferation through. Especially if "that rear end in a top hat just nuked mom, what a jerk". Convincing him to use them first is important though. Even if you pass NNP, if he hasn't fired them off, he gets to keep them: it only stops players building new nukes, not using old ones. SurreptitiousMuffin fucked around with this message at 06:41 on Jan 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
So a city state just gifted me a Great Merchant of Venice  . Didn't know that was a thing that happened. I really want to use it to puppet the city state that gave it to me, but I don't want to increase my science costs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 09:40
|
|
|
Is there any way to make it so that in multiplayer turns alternate with barbarians all the time in hybrid mode? I get ridiculously incensed when I wait 5 seconds instead of 6 and end up wasting a turn due to Zone of Control, or attacking unintentionally, or losing a worker to a visible barbarian because it gets to move twice now before I do. Also, someone recently said that AI in multiplayer are very passive or possibly cannot declare war, is there any truth to this? I thought I was getting lucky with them being distracted by barbarians and so forth. I also don't play as many games of multiplayer so it's hard for me to estimate just how rare it is for AI to declare war. edit: also, if you assign a path that takes not-a-full-turn to finish, you get the next turn button and it doesn't prompt you to do anything with the unit. How did this get through playtesting? Is it fixable with mods? kaschei fucked around with this message at 09:49 on Jan 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 09:46
|
|
|
kaschei posted:Is there any way to make it so that in multiplayer turns alternate with barbarians all the time in hybrid mode? I get ridiculously incensed when I wait 5 seconds instead of 6 and end up wasting a turn due to Zone of Control, or attacking unintentionally, or losing a worker to a visible barbarian because it gets to move twice now before I do. No. Just wait a couple of seconds after the turn chime sounds and the barbarians will move. quote:Also, someone recently said that AI in multiplayer are very passive or possibly cannot declare war, is there any truth to this? No.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Are those scrambled map pack DLCs any good? They just use a real geographic area and then generate random terrain within that area?
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
kaschei posted:Also, someone recently said that AI in multiplayer are very passive or possibly cannot declare war, is there any truth to this? I thought I was getting lucky with them being distracted by barbarians and so forth. I also don't play as many games of multiplayer so it's hard for me to estimate just how rare it is for AI to declare war. This was true before the fall patch, the AI would sometimes break and play very passive. I have played several multi games post patch and the AI has played as it should - warlike civs declare war a lot, peaceful civs do so a lot less. quote:edit: also, if you assign a path that takes not-a-full-turn to finish, you get the next turn button and it doesn't prompt you to do anything with the unit. How did this get through playtesting? Is it fixable with mods? The multi in Civ 4 was designed in from the start, the multi in Civ 5 was not, and unfortunately it isn't as nice of an experience. I suggest turning on quick movement and quick combat if you play in multi, it helps the turn times a lot. Also you can manually edit the settings to allow you to add 8 AI for a total of 10 players, instead of the default 8 which really helps a lot. 6 AI civs is nowhere near enough to challenge two players. It's unsupported but it works fine with 2 players and 8 AI.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
Vodos posted:Are those scrambled map pack DLCs any good? They just use a real geographic area and then generate random terrain within that area? Your description of them is correct. I enjoy them, but I don't like maps that are totally random in form -- my favorite map type before Scrambled Nations/Continents was Inland Sea. I think it gives the game more of the feeling of a board game, which I really like but some people might not enjoy as much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
Just bought gold and BNW. I liked this game when it came out, but it always felt stale. I think its shameful that Firaxis milked this so much, but oh well. So nukes were being discussed before. Are they still as weak as in vanilla Civ? I recall nuking cities and them remaining relatively productive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
You know, a long long time ago, one of my criticisms of Civ5's design was that the creators deemed it unnecessary to program in research overflow, and that it was only added after community outcry. Well, this is what happens when you hack it in at the last second and don't divide the overflow by your bonus beakers properly: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=517970
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
Oh hey, it’s another reason to rush science techs and catch up on water/military techs later.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 17:00 |
|
|
tl;dr version: Leave a tech unresearched (sailing, usually) and save your great scientists. After the world congress is founded and you get Scholars in Residence passed, pop all of those GSes on that tech, and get a massive amount of bonus beakers. End result: Yes, that's 170,000 beakers stored. You can store up to 210,000 before the game breaks. The one turn research times should last you quite a while and allows you to slingshot up to the information era. This is due to a bug in how some beaker bonuses are applied to overflow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2014 06:30
|
|
