|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:As Venice? I guess you could puppet a coastal city-state, but that isn't gonna help your trade routes any. It's a  sort of invitation.
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 03:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 06:09 |
|
|
rhoga posted:It's a Again, as Venice, you only get direct control over a single city, including for running your trade routes, which is huge for Venice since they get twice as many as usual. You can take over as many other cities as you like, but only as puppets. Albeit, puppets that you can rush-buy in.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 04:21
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Again, as Venice, you only get direct control over a single city, including for running your trade routes, which is huge for Venice since they get twice as many as usual. You can take over as many other cities as you like, but only as puppets. Albeit, puppets that you can rush-buy in. You can set up trade routes in puppets. You can still make tons of money by trading from a coastal puppet. The biggest disadvantage is that you won't be able to do coastal domestic trade. As venice, the best strategy is to have every single one of your puppets trade food to your capital non-stop. Over land, that's only half as effective.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:As venice, the best strategy is to have every single one of your puppets trade food to your capital non-stop. Over land, that's only half as effective.  drat, now why didn't I think of that?Hm, question: do Unemployed "specialists" get the Rationalism beaker bonus or the Statue of Liberty hammer bonus? I mean, eventually you're going to run out specialist slots and worthwhile hexes to work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Hm, question: do Unemployed "specialists" get the Rationalism beaker bonus or the Statue of Liberty hammer bonus? I mean, eventually you're going to run out specialist slots and worthwhile hexes to work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
He means the ones that don't occupy building slots and produce just 1 hpt. And no, they do not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 06:59
|
|
|
There are something like 19 or 20 specialist slots. You need either a really lovely city location with few workable tiles, or really massive city growth before you start running out of places to put your population.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 07:28
|
|
|
Unemployed citizens used to get specialist bonuses, but that got patched out somewhere along the way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:04
|
|
|
This was out a while back, but I saw it just now: Do you ever move your settler? Answer that one before you read it and find out how wrong you are about everything in your life Also I wish I could get my hands on that tool: Firaxis posted:Ed Beach is the lead designer and lead gameplay programmer for the Civ V expansion packs, Brave New World and Gods & Kings. He was on the gameplay team for the base game, where he developed a tool that lets him automate Civ V gameplay. For a designer, this tool is crucial for checking balance and feeling out rough ideas with gameplay changes. Ed’s tool takes Civ, and spits out spreadsheets showing the course of a game for each of the AI players over many, many turns. Hundreds of turns, in deep detail for each player – a cold chronology of the alternate history of thousands of games of Civ.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
Advert posted:[...]Brazil had been beaten to a World Wonder around Turn 30.[...]
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
Cowcatcher posted:This was out a while back, but I saw it just now: Seems to reinforce the common wisdom prevalent in the Civ community: If you see a better spot, move to it. If you waste those turns without getting anything better, though, you'll be way behind. There's nothing particularly shocking about that article. Also note, that study was done with a sample size of one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
Dirty Frank posted:So he only ran his simulation once and learned nothing at all, great! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:Seems to reinforce the common wisdom prevalent in the Civ community: If you see a better spot, move to it. If you waste those turns without getting anything better, though, you'll be way behind. There's nothing particularly shocking about that article. The "way behind" was more due to the turns wasted on trying to build a wonder, not solely due to wasting a turn at the start. Which just reinforces that the early wonders are typically not worth trying to build, at least not on the higher difficulties (King on up). I guess it's heartening to know that the AI does get harmed by trying and failing to build wonders though. So while the player can safely ignore trying to build the Great Library, practically every AI is going to spend some hammers on it and thus knock themselves back a bit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
Dirty Frank posted:So he only ran his simulation once and learned nothing at all, great! That's not true at all. We learned that it's bad to waste turns building a wonder if you don't end up getting it first. What a revelation!
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
It's amusing to find out that the designers are Firaxis are actually pretty poo poo at their own game. Moving your settler is often all about getting that early game advantage. Especially onto hill tiles, because you pay off the production deficit in 5 turns or so. And sure, you might lose a turn on science or food, but that's extremely random anyway: that's always been about getting a 2/0 or a 2/1 or a 3/0 tile in your initial ring, and settling in place doesn't guarantee that either. If anything, settling on a hill tile was even more important in Civ4, because that game's opening meta was all about building out your initial worker as fast as possible, and a plains hill city in that game was the difference between a 15t and a 12t worker. Edit: oooh, they didn't play themselves, they got the AI to play for them. In any case, it's always been about a case-by-case basis, and a human player had better be able to justify their decision in words to demonstrate why they did this or that. Phobophilia fucked around with this message at 23:31 on Apr 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
Jummy posted:That's not true at all. We learned that it's bad to waste turns building a wonder if you don't end up getting it first. What a revelation! Sometimes I choose to build wonders based on the fact that even if I fail to build them first, the consolation gold will push me over the threshold for a settler or a composite bowman upgrade.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
I've never played a multiplayer Civ V game, how long do they usually go for and how good is the goon group for them? Also this MSF Big Boss mod is the best. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 03:57
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:I've never played a multiplayer Civ V game, how long do they usually go for and how good is the goon group for them? The "live" MP goongame is done two sessions a week, each session about 2-3 hours. It lasts several weeks. What side of the Atlantic are you? Currently the live goongames take place in the early evening for US goons, which for people in Europe is about midnight. There's no goongame going on at the moment - the next one has yet to begin. I think rear end-Putin is working on that. Alternatively if you are willing to do play-by-email type goongames, there's a discussion thread on the steam group which has everything you need to know about it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 09:33
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:I've never played a multiplayer Civ V game, how long do they usually go for and how good is the goon group for them? The Steam Group is here. I'm personally hosting a game on Saturdays, which is listed here. You're free to join if you want! Lord Justice fucked around with this message at 11:14 on Apr 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 09:59
|
|
|
Oh awesome, that's definitely a better time for me, being in the UK. I'll comment later to sign up 
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 10:52
|
|
|
Thanks for setting that up, btw. Anyone is free to organize games using that group. I'll be putting up details on some new games soon. We'll likely run separate games on Tuesday and Thursday so that more people can play.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 14:07
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Sometimes I choose to build wonders based on the fact that even if I fail to build them first, the consolation gold will push me over the threshold for a settler or a composite bowman upgrade. Yeah, and if I have a science-city or some other city that already has all the buildings it needs and can't produce anything fast (perhaps because I'm food-focusing it) I may intentionally fail to build a wonder because it gets me more cash than if I choose to produce cash directly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
OK, I'm confused a bit about warring. I've been playing a game with several modded civs. I joined in a war on the leader everyone hates, took a city I didn't want, and then ransomed it back in return for peace. There were no negative modifiers for war on the diplomatic screen, and a few turns later she popped in asking for a declaration of friendship. Is giving things up really the secret to warring and not having people hate you, or is something up here?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 15:58
|
|
|
Rogue 7 posted:OK, I'm confused a bit about warring. I've been playing a game with several modded civs. I joined in a war on the leader everyone hates, took a city I didn't want, and then ransomed it back in return for peace. There were no negative modifiers for war on the diplomatic screen, and a few turns later she popped in asking for a declaration of friendship. Is giving things up really the secret to warring and not having people hate you, or is something up here? Could be she's now frightened of you (and all the other civs that were warring with it), and is trying to get on your good side so you won't pulverize her. Problem being, if the other civs still hate her then making a DoF with her will piss them off.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
It helps a little bit, but it's not a magic bullet. There are a few other factors here; sometimes the AI really does smarten up after getting a good punch in the face. Also, diplomatically isolated civs seem to be more desperate to secure DoFs and will ask you even if they don't seem to like you very much (which is why you shouldn't click yes on every DoF offer, because you'll probably wind up getting everyone pissed off that you're buddying up with the world's villains.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 16:15
|
|
|
So it struck me today that a major Civ title has been released every 4-5 years since the first game 1991 I 1996 II 2001 III 2005 IV 2010 V I wonder if we'll see Civilization VI next year...
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:I wonder if we'll see Civilization VI next year... Firaxis is announcing a new game at PAX on saturday. Might be.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
I'd like a Civ VI. Civ V is feeling kind of stale at this point, even with GaK and BNW. My wish list is for them to rethink how happiness works and reconsider how domination victories are achieved. Also promote more wide play.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
twoot posted:Firaxis is announcing a new game at PAX on saturday. Might be. Did not know that! Now if they do, I'll look really smart. Could be XCOM 2, also!
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
Is it that time again to dump our wishlists into the thread? In that case I'll start: A gloooooooooobe
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
Doltos posted:I'd like a Civ VI. Civ V is feeling kind of stale at this point, even with GaK and BNW. I'd like to see one-unit-per-hex reworked. There's lots of ways it could be done: * More hexes so there's more room for maneuver * Stack as many units as you like but when you get attacked all the units in the stack take damage (ala Civ 2) * Make non-military units exempt from one-unit-per-tile (it's so stupid that workers and great people cannot coexist) It has to be done though, the AI really doesn't know how to play the game as it stands. I'd also like to see workers disappear as a unit. Just have improvements straight-up cost gold. It feels like in a peaceful game 90% of my time is shuffling workers around. Finally, I'd like to see a proper implementation of Mutually-Assured Destruction where if someone launches a nuke at you, you can launch one back, and a modern era that I don't just rush through as quickly as possible to get the space techs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
Gort posted:I'd also like to see workers disappear as a unit. Just have improvements straight-up cost gold. It feels like in a peaceful game 90% of my time is shuffling workers around. The main things Civ6 needs are an AI that can roleplay properly (basically, bring back Civ4 diplomacy and we're good to go) and one that can actually handle the combat rules. I'm fine with one military unit per hex but the AI really needs to be able to cope with that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:The main things Civ6 needs are an AI that can roleplay properly (basically, bring back Civ4 diplomacy and we're good to go) and one that can actually handle the combat rules. I'm fine with one military unit per hex but the AI really needs to be able to cope with that. The way I see it, AI is incredibly difficult to program. It seems far simpler to change the game to fit the player, rather than make a game and then attempt to construct a player for it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Or make tile improvements something you can build in the city, maybe parallel to the normal building/units queue (or maybe not!). So you could just queue up a bunch of tile improvements and leave it to go. Or if you have more gold than time, you could rush-buy them. Dunno how such a system would handle roads which sometimes need to go outside your territory though. This is pretty similar to the CTP method and while it certainly cut down on worker tedium, it made me realize how much I rely on worker tedium to make the beginning game interesting. Basically workers are there to give you something to do in the early game other than click "Next Turn" over and over. What would be great is if the automation was actually decent so you could automate them in mid-game where it turns into a distraction from the fun stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
I say bring back palaces/throne rooms! Even if they've already been ported to Civ V it's just not the same.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
Zeron posted:I say bring back palaces/throne rooms! Even if they've already been ported to Civ V it's just not the same. While you're at it, bring back Joan of Arc in a punk hairdo so we can tell when France has entered the Information Age.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
Gort posted:I'd like to see one-unit-per-hex reworked. There's lots of ways it could be done: I agree 100% with all this. The one unit a hex fucks up so many wars, even ones where I'm doing the honor code with human players and we each take a turn attacking with one unit. It turns the military aspect into a ranged snooze fest where each side takes turn throwing a hapless unit into a meat grinder of archers. Workers are great early on because of barbarians checking their power but later on in the game I can't give two shits about a worker. I end up automating them after a while because I'm just bored of using them, even if it means I'm going to get a trading post set up on my river grassland. And yes, MAD would be great. The modern era seems to go by so quickly that I end up not building or using half the stuff I research. I can't even contribute that to AI either, players blow through it too. They should expand MAD and UN Sanctions/Embargoes to even the playing field late game so super powers can't just squash underdeveloped players without losing a unit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 21:14
|
|
|
I need to admit that I've been playing Civ V since it came out and still have yet to even attempt a war victory. I love tech and diplomacy too, too much. I don't know why I can't do it. Ought I play as Genghis and just force myself to play the violence game? Is that "pillage = tech" guy a viable tech/war option? Also on the topic of "what we would change," I really would like to see a more fleshed out version of Alpha Centauri's society management system where you got to choose various types of ways of organizing your society. The bonus system of culture is good, but I have no options to rock, say, a heavy-socialist worker's democracy, or a communist state that transitions into late-capitalism like China. Impermanent fucked around with this message at 21:29 on Apr 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:Is that "pillage = tech" guy a viable tech/war option? Assyria is not only viable as a war option, it's probably my goto conquest Civ. Get your few essential techs, then beeline military techs on the bottom. Steal the rest. And siege towers kick so much rear end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 06:09 |
|
|
Impermanent posted:I need to admit that I've been playing Civ V since it came out and still have yet to even attempt a war victory. I love tech and diplomacy too, too much. I don't know why I can't do it. Ought I play as Genghis and just force myself to play the violence game? Is that "pillage = tech" guy a viable tech/war option? Hey, if you're having fun, then go to it. My favorite warmonger civ is probably Shaka, because you can get hilariously overpromoted units, and the reduced unit maintenance makes a big difference to your economy. But honestly you don't really need warfare bonuses to commit warfare. Sejong and Nebuchadnezzar would make good warmongers for example just because their science game is so ridiculously strong, and out-teching your opponents is the surest way to win a military competition. As for the CVI wishlist, I think the one-unit-per-tile, hex-based warfare can be made to work well, and certainly I find it to be preferable to CIV's stacks-of-doom where you just dedicated a few cities to churning out military units nonstop for centuries and then slam your stack into the opponent's stack until one side rolls over. A big part of the issue is simply the overwhelming superiority of ranged units. You shouldn't be able to have 4+ units making free attacks on an enemy unit with no realistic possibility of response. Making ranged units always have a range of 1 would make a huge difference, as would making Cover be a rank-1 promotion (i.e. accessible with just a Barracks in the city). Possibly making attacks not require the unit to have movement remaining, so that a unit could e.g. move into a forest and still be able to attack an adjacent unit after moving (though not be able to move into their tile if victorious). I would like to see the more specialized cities from CIV return. In CiV you just have good city sites and bad city sites; in CIV you could have sites that were good for production, sites that were good for population, sites that were good for science (i.e. commerce), etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 21:51
|
|