|
Is the general 4X thread gone? I'm wondering if anyone has formed an opinion on Civ5Lite sequel Warlock 2. e: apparently MadDjinn even did previews of it http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLIn-J5vZXOJOpfIK5fHzn-rWSXVdOPRxJ Antares fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Mar 20, 2014 |
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 01:25 |
|
|
http://steamcommunity.com/groups/goonciv#events/1423442114252896932 This is going on in about a half hour. Just join the group chat room on steam if you want to come check it out. As a reminder: the map settings will be tweaked so don't show up expecting a bog-standard pangaea.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:I mean hell, hadn't the USA been at war with Mexico for the last century or something because people kept forgetting to sign the treaty? I seem to recall something bizarre like that going on. Maybe not with those two specific combatants though. The Mexico–American War had to end with a treaty, because how else would the Mexican Cession be ceded? Wikipedia’s lists several wars that do involve exactly what you’re thinking of.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
Antares posted:Is the general 4X thread gone? I'm wondering if anyone has formed an opinion on Civ5Lite sequel Warlock 2. Warlock 2 is a ton of fun for me so far. The multiplayer is a lot better since you can now do anything in your empire that isn't move units while the other player moves his units.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Put a different way, Swords Into Plowshares should only be cancelled if a) you declare war on someone, or b) your units engage in combat, or c) or hostile units enter your territory. Merely being in a nominal state of war because some other civ doesn't like you is no big deal. You may be thinking of Texas's war of independence. The Mexican government refused to ratify the treaty of independence and continued to officially claim Texas for another decade after the revolution, until the mexican - American war.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 01:03
|
|
|
A weird quirk of the game: Two big cities of mine get nuked, cutting each of their populations by about 10. My happiness, which was around 2 or 3, sky rockets to about 30 with the dip in population. Civ V, the game where getting nuke makes you happier.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 09:33
|
|
|
Howards Bellend posted:A weird quirk of the game: Two big cities of mine get nuked, cutting each of their populations by about 10. My happiness, which was around 2 or 3, sky rockets to about 30 with the dip in population. It's obvious, when you think about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgpa7wEAz7I
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 09:40
|
|
|
I haven’t done much city‐state conquering since vanilla since it makes everyone so angry. Consequently, I’m a little fuzzy on the details. Perhaps someone who plays Mongolia can fill me in. I know I can steal one worker for free, and if I remember correctly the second (or is it the third?) declaration of war against a city‐state will drop my influence resting point with a couple of city‐states by twenty. Beyond that, though, it’s a mystery to me. If I stole one worker early in the game, can I get away with conquering a city‐state in the mid‐game? What about conquering a city‐state ally of a civ I’m at war with? Do city‐states in particular frown upon that, or do I only get the normal minor/major/extreme/critical warmongering penalty I’d get for taking any city? Platystemon fucked around with this message at 12:28 on Mar 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 12:22
|
|
|
I started a game two nights ago. Domination Victory only, emperor difficulty. All modifiers randomed with the map on shuffle. I pit myself against 7 computers: Washington, Shaka, Arabia, Atilla, Ghengis, Songhai, Hiawatha. I put myself as random and told myself I'd play whatever the first roll of the map was. Landed as Venice on two continents with 16 city-states surrounded by mountains on the coastline. Now I'm 150ish turns in with Songhai on the ropes, Hiawatha destroyed the Arabs, and now me and Hiawatha are duking it out between a row of city states that hate me. I already lost two city-states to other city-states that bumrushed me with pikemen. I am somehow the greatest warmonger in the game and everyone is at war with me. First election comes up and me and Hiawatha have like 6 votes each and we both vote to embargo each other. All the AIs embargo me and Hiawatha, so now we're fighting piece meal with no units while I try to out-tech him. This is actually pretty fun.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't city-states that are allies with someone you're at war with immediately declare war on you too (and make peace when/if you buy them back or they lose influence, if you have not attacked them)? I've never conquered a city-state so I don't know, but when I have seen the AI get into wars with each other it was a constant stream of "Polynesia has become allies with Malacca MALACCA DECLARES WAR ON AUSTRIA" and then "Polynesia is no longer allies with Malacca Austria has made peace with Malacca".
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 15:29
|
|
|
Finished my first nuke-free Immortal game; Got Barracks and Armoury ASAP, built 7 Galleass and then mass upgraded them to Ships of the Line. Then went after Alexander, who like his usual jerk self was supposedly friendly but plotting against me and trying to get luxuries only I possessed banned in the congress. Took Athens in 1-2 turns and then snowballed over the world. Battleships with +1 range, logistics, and heal every turn are monstrous, I didn't even get close to losing one of the 7 in the game. Subs are also amazing, 5 turns to churn one out at the peak, wolfpack III, and I needed them to cut through the enormous blanket navy of The Aztecs, who I was bribing against other civs until only he was left. I had so much gold that I had nothing useful to do with it. twoot fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Mar 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
twoot posted:I had so much gold that I had nothing useful to do with it. Obviously playing nuke-free was a mistake 
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
So how many of you guys have put civs on your shitlist just for stealing a ruin at the beginning of the game?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
nutranurse posted:So how many of you guys have put civs on your shitlist just for stealing a ruin at the beginning of the game? I've done this over me doing all the work taking a city and having someone else rush in and take it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
Suzuki Method posted:That is all very good advice, thanks! Also, I have never had more than 3 original cities (more only if going for Domination and taking capitals), I usually like to have only 1 or 2. Is there any big reason I should go for 3 or 4, or is my 1 or 2 okay? Four is just because there's a lot of policies and stuff that give you things in your first four cities. 3-5 is what you can support with luxuries and such, but 4 is a good number that gets free aqueducts/culture builds.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
nutranurse posted:So how many of you guys have put civs on your shitlist just for stealing a ruin at the beginning of the game? Man, I turned ruins off and haven't looked back. They're just way too stress-inducing for me. "Awesome, a ruin! Wait, poo poo, the AI's kabillion bonus scouts are all over the map, nevermind."
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
Suzuki Method posted:Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't city-states that are allies with someone you're at war with immediately declare war on you too (and make peace when/if you buy them back or they lose influence, if you have not attacked them)? They do. I’m wondering if I can abuse that. Other city‐states might not see it as aggression if I conquer I city‐state as part of a larger war.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:They do. I’m wondering if I can abuse that. Other city‐states might not see it as aggression if I conquer I city‐state as part of a larger war. I wouldn't be surprised if city-states generally just care about how much you interfere with city-states. After all, you're supposed to be focusing on the actual civs, casus belli or no.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:They do. I’m wondering if I can abuse that. Other city‐states might not see it as aggression if I conquer I city‐state as part of a larger war. Yeah, I didn't have an answer to your question I just wanted to get that clarified is all. I should have worded my post better 
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
nutranurse posted:So how many of you guys have put civs on your shitlist just for stealing a ruin at the beginning of the game? Ruins, barb camps, city locations, and wonders all put civs on my shitlist.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 03:09
|
|
|
"Existing" is usually a ticket to ride with me unless they're on a different continent, then we're good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 03:47
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:"Existing" is usually a ticket to ride with me unless they're on a different continent, then we're good. I've only completely wiped out another civ maybe two or three times in my close to 400 hours of play (on emperor). When you go to hell you will be forced to watch LPs of me playing Civ. As Ethiopia.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
You don't even finish them off in the early game when you haven't met everyone yet? You don't get warmonger penalties with civilizations you haven't met, so in early wars it's best to just finish your enemy off, because leaving them alive can cause additional diplomatic problems if they befriend anyone.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 03:57
|
|
|
You've made an enemy for life for taking my 5th redundant copper tile.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 03:57
|
|
|
Y'all takin this game too personally. Kill the AI if it serves your goals, but getting mad at silicon is lol.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 07:08
|
|
|
I never kill the AI because it's too hard on Deity
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 07:29
|
|
|
Jedi Knight Luigi posted:When you go to hell you will be forced to watch LPs of me playing Civ. As Ethiopia.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 07:47
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:Nah, they can get kind of rich on King as well and that's the lowest difficulty I really see RAs getting offered to me on. On Prince, though, you can ruin anyone's economy selling them a couple luxury resources. There really isn't a bad policy in all of tradition. Wouldn't be a problem if half the other ancient era trees were not trash but they are. I'm doing a shuffle map as Japan where I ended up I a tiny poo poo island of tundra barely suitable for one city. I still ended up regretting liberty.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 14:50
|
|
|
Putin It In Mah rear end posted:There really isn't a bad policy in all of tradition. Wouldn't be a problem if half the other ancient era trees were not trash but they are.  when my GPT jumps up by like 10.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 20:00
|
|
|
I kinda miss when going wide with low pop cities was the preferred strategy. I mean, I pretty much always played tall with <4 cities because I was too lazy to manage a massive sprawling empire, but it was nice to know the option was there, and that that option was way more efficient than what I was doing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
So I had a weird bug, I think? I took over Istanbul early and the Ottomans sat around with just one city, Edirne, for ages. So it was their "capital" for that time. Later, William took them over. Much later, I took it over on my way through to Amsterdam and decided to puppet it as a forward base, then raze it when I captured Amsterdam. So after I capture Amsterdam, I Annex and go into the city screen to raze it... but the button isn't there. Why not? I know I don't get the option with enemy capitals, with my own cities, or with city-states... but this is none of those things. It was, for a while, a "capital" but I didn't think that ever stopped me from razing things before. What gives?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
I think you have to raze a city immediately. I have a vague idea that there is a 'grace period' up to 5 turns, but if you don't do it immediately then you're stuck with the city forever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
Putin It In Mah rear end posted:There really isn't a bad policy in all of tradition. Wouldn't be a problem if half the other ancient era trees were not trash but they are. Liberty wasn't bad when you could get a free settler and worker within three policies and do quick expansion super early. Still not as good as tradition obviously. I still don't understand Honor or Piety. Piety especially which is ostensibly supposed to be about generating faith but doesn't actually help you do that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
Super Jay Mann posted:Liberty wasn't bad when you could get a free settler and worker within three policies and do quick expansion super early. Still not as good as tradition obviously. I may be playing wrong, but I find opening Honour is somewhat useful if you can farm a Barbarian encampment or two for a nice early boost to culture. Whether that's worth the Social Policy or not is up for debate I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
Lord Justice posted:I may be playing wrong, but I find opening Honour is somewhat useful if you can farm a Barbarian encampment or two for a nice early boost to culture. Whether that's worth the Social Policy or not is up for debate I suppose. It's a quick debate. Half border costs and a flat 3 culture in a useful policy line is better. It's hard to generate that much culture unless you've got some great barbarian farms going.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
Oh, I'd certainly take tradition opener as my first opener; I think the question was more whether it would be worthwhile to take the honor opener at some point before completely fleshing out tradition (preferably sooner rather than later, for more barbs to pay back its cost).
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
Super Jay Mann posted:I still don't understand Honor or Piety. Piety especially which is ostensibly supposed to be about generating faith but doesn't actually help you do that. If you're some kind of peace-loving hippie or someshit, though, Honor's opener will be completely useless because the AI is very good at cleaning fog of war. Fur20 fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Mar 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:So I had a weird bug, I think? You can't raze holy cities. Super Jay Mann posted:Liberty wasn't bad when you could get a free settler and worker within three policies and do quick expansion super early. Still not as good as tradition obviously. Piety gives you temples and shrines at half production cost, as well as +1 piety for shrines and temples, which is between a 100% and a 66% boost to Faith generation from buildings, so... it does? Honour used to be a lot better when it gave +1 happiness on defensive buildings. Not sure why they thought it needed nerfed. The White Dragon posted:Honor's opener is fantastic. If you play the way I do, you'll have a fair amount of fog of war and there'll be no AIs around to clear it at all. Barbarians will spawn within spitting distance drat near every other turn and you'll be raking in thousands of gold and even culture. Even without Raging Barbarians, I usually have Tradition completed by the time I pop Civil Service, and that's one of my priority techs. I often have time to pick up two more policies before I even unlock Rationalism; poo poo, I have to TRY not to get policies once I have Honor's opener. There's definitely something to be said for playing the Aztecs and taking the Honour opener to double the culture output of barbarians. Where are you getting thousands of gold from, though? Camps only give like 25 gold, don't they? Gort fucked around with this message at 22:41 on Mar 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Sometimes I feel like the game's out to get me, like when it makes my closest neighbors, in order of way-too-close to still-too-close, Songhai, Mongolia, France, and the Aztecs. I just wanted a peaceful game as Siam. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 01:25 |
|
|
nutranurse posted:Sometimes I feel like the game's out to get me, like when it makes my closest neighbors, in order of way-too-close to still-too-close, Songhai, Mongolia, France, and the Aztecs. Drown them in elephants, that's what Siam always does to me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 22:45
|
|