|
Neruz posted:Won't save you from spiders; spiders are assassinations and the target of an assassination is always unscripted. That event has a fairly rare chance of happening, surely? The lesson here is to give your non-combat Pretender a cheap chaff army just in case, even when moving in friendly territory. It won't solve all the dangerous situations, but it may help in 80% of them.
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 16:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 01:18 |
|
|
Turin Turambar posted:That event has a fairly rare chance of happening, surely? Random assassinations on random dudes isn't all that rare at all; uncommon certainly and they'll usually hit something unimportant rather than your PG but still.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
Turin Turambar posted:That event has a fairly rare chance of happening, surely? Give him enough HP in guys set to be really far forward that he'll HP autoroute 100% of the time if they all die. Then have him summon some chaff as his script. Solves most problems.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 16:12
|
|
|
Turin Turambar posted:That event has a fairly rare chance of happening, surely? Things that come to mind which are actually dangerous to a lone/weakly-guarded PG with a couple of gems if you have them set up wrong: - Troglodytes (unless you're bigger than them, at which point pfft) - Knights - Vampires - Teleporting onto other planes because Returning screwed you Most other stuff is pretty trivial because it has limited armour, and won't get to you for a couple of round of casting. e: on destealth mechanics, well there you go, I had no idea!
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 16:15
|
|
|
Neruz posted:Won't save you from spiders; spiders are assassinations and the target of an assassination is always unscripted. Spiders were bugged and used normal scripting. I had a crone retreat from one in a test game. Dunno if it's fixed now. The 4 casts would let you likely squish a potential spider while still giving you time to run away if your pd can't handle whatever it is that's attacking you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:Eloquent and thoughtful analysis of dom4. Everyone else who has put their hours into dom4 has a pretty informed opinion as well. I can definitely see how a particular battle/game can provide strong evidence for one position or another. The reason we love the game is because it's so complex and infinitely variable, so every example has a counter-example. There are so many interactions it's hard to get clear valuations on things, but all of this stems from the fact that the guys at Illwinter don't use formulas to determine costs and they never have. When it comes to modding, the best we can do is to tweak the balance issues that make correct gameplay more about metagame knowledge than tactical thought and/or tweak nations that appear to be underpowered/underplayed. What I would add to that is certain nations are problematic because they have a clear "best practice" that players don't deviate from. Of course someone can always come along and overturn this established wisdom, but in general there are nations where it is clear you are making a newbie mistake if you build most of their national troops. I'm not sure how satisfying the late game battle magic is. At a certain point, the nation with high level communions simply wins because they can use a crystal matrix to make sure the communion master casts battle deciding spells like mass enslave the first turn. At that point, it's an army that literally can't be attacked anymore because if they get the first turn you won't even get a turn before they cast it. Of course there are counters to that, but they're free to counter your counters and you still are back to the problem of every stat but MR being irrelevant. With the current research point requirements it feels like by the time anyone gets to that the game has already been decided one way or the other. I think it would be more interesting if you could get to levels 8-10 more easily but the effects weren't as decisive. As it stands now, players who go in with a specific research strategy from the beginning of the game and stick with it way outperform players who change their research priorities in order to win wars and take more territory. In one game I was in recently, a nation that didn't do the heavy lifting in any wars and just controlled about 20 provinces completely kicked my rear end when I had about 60 provinces, because all they had to do to win was hit the research/construction milestones that made their thugs almost impossible to stop. I also didn't understand the threat and my armies were fundamentally not designed to take them on, but that's because I foolishly spent my money on troops instead of dredging through dom3 forums for the right battle-magic combos. I think turtling is a viable strategy, but I'm not sure it's good for the game if the person who usually wins is the one who focuses all their energy on researching precise spell combos that work with their national paths while their neighbors fight. This is not only for battle magic but also for globals--there are several goon games that were won by Pelagia who defeated between 0-1 opponents in the ocean and then spent the rest of the game researching to wish engine. On the other hand, the thrones mechanic is already in there to punish that behavior. It's unfortunate that the vast majority of games continue to set thrones needed to win at 100%, when something like 2/3rds needed to win is going to produce a better game and a more representative winner most of the time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Smerdyakov posted:As it stands now, players who go in with a specific research strategy from the beginning of the game and stick with it way outperform players who change their research priorities in order to win wars and take more territory. In one game I was in recently, a nation that didn't do the heavy lifting in any wars and just controlled about 20 provinces completely kicked my rear end when I had about 60 provinces, because all they had to do to win was hit the research/construction milestones that made their thugs almost impossible to stop. I also didn't understand the threat and my armies were fundamentally not designed to take them on, but that's because I foolishly spent my money on troops instead of dredging through dom3 forums for the right battle-magic combos. I think turtling is a viable strategy, but I'm not sure it's good for the game if the person who usually wins is the one who focuses all their energy on researching precise spell combos that work with their national paths while their neighbors fight. I think you need to look at these two things together. The example you give is not so much a problem of gameplay as it is poor settings on the win condition. The value of taking lots of territory and adopting a fluid research pattern should be reflected in the objectives you have captured to potentially end the game - which of course only works if thrones are set to less than 100% (51%-75% probably being the most reasonable configuration depending on the map size and if you're using all 1-point thrones or varying throne values). In both examples with reasonable throne configurations, your opponent who has prepared only for the endgame should obviously have an advantage if the game drags on - they were, after all, running a strategy that sacrificed objectives for the sole purpose of having a good endgame, and that should clearly work at producing devastating effects if the researching player is allowed to keep a respectable number of territories (which, in this case, they did. 20 territories is more than enough to be a major player in any game). You, on the other hand, have sacrificed jamming your time and resources into having an EZmode endgame for the purpose of claiming objectives and expanding your options in the mid and early-lategame. There are tons of low-research spells to help you take advantage of this and use your advantage to claim the last several thrones... assuming the settings aren't awful and requiring 100%. The long and short of it is that making the choice to take 60 provinces to your opponent's 20 is a consequence-laden action as well. Why are you taking more provinces instead of simply jamming specific research for the endgame? There should be a reason for this too, since you don't win by taking 60 provinces: you win by completing one of a few different victory conditions. Taking 40 extra provinces when you neither have a major use for the gems you'll gain nor a good research goal for the endgame when the player in charge of the last 20 provinces moves out is a bad play by any stretch of the imagination - it's France taking 2/3 of Russia for no reason and having no plan for taking the last 1/3 and no plans for how to survive winter. Now, if you were capping that turtling player's provinces, or specifically attacking areas that had thrones that could lead to a victory, then yes, you are making a good strategic choice, and it should come down to execution and planning. But simply taking provinces to take them should not, on its own, be better than researching specific magic to beat your specific armies since a province does not, by nature, really do anything in the great scheme of things. Please note this whole argument falls apart with bad map settings (100% thrones generally). But it's very possible to win a game with worse research and even worse armies by simply fulfilling important map objectives and making smart strategic decisions. I Love You! fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Apr 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 19:19
|
|
|
Thrones definitely make a huge difference; strategy in dom4 is more midgame, as opposed to endgame focused, as compared to dom3. It is perfectly reasonable to win before turn 60, and I have done so multiple times, all off of focusing on thrones above all else along with the mentioned short term research goals and some clever diplomacing. Really, strategy in dominions has way too many moving parts to focus on any one and say "this wins game". Of course, we all know the most important factor to winning games is demoralizing your opponents.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 20:09
|
|
|
The major issue i have with thrones is that with their map placement it can be really really lovely at times and cluster a winning amount in one small area. Though fixing this seems like it would be a complete pain.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
LordLeckie posted:The major issue i have with thrones is that with their map placement it can be really really lovely at times and cluster a winning amount in one small area. Though fixing this seems like it would be a complete pain. Yes, this happens sometimes, though it's mostly a problem on very large maps. It's why I favor closer to 75% to win, because it's possible for 50% to cluster in a tiny area and ruin everything. Moreblood and Goodmusic were both games that were decided by super-tight throne clusters where half the players basically had no impact on the game as a whole because they could not reasonably contest them. Often it's a non-critical number of thrones however, or could be mitigated by people simply contesting the thrones and/or being more aggressive toward the throne-holders. Starting in an area with an extra few thrones is an advantage, but not really any better than simply starting in an area with high-income properties. You simply need to be able to adapt your strategy based on your start position and what resources/objectives are available to you. I Love You! fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Apr 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
It would be nice to have more more-equitable maps. Most of the ones that come with the game are terrible for balance, and made in Dom3 when there was no throne-pref terrain mask. Having 4 or 5 maps that don't have big terrain + choke problems and do have evenly-spaced throne terrain set would go a long way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:It would be nice to have more more-equitable maps. Most of the ones that come with the game are terrible for balance, and made in Dom3 when there was no throne-pref terrain mask. Having 4 or 5 maps that don't have big terrain + choke problems and do have evenly-spaced throne terrain set would go a long way. I would definitely agree that the dearth of good maps is the number one issue in playing games. Most of the maps that come with Dom4 are unplayable and the random map generator almost always leaves something to be desired. Compounding that is how annoying and limited the map editor is. There's no reason for a map to be "perfectly balanced" and the maps that do that are usually awful, but every starting position should have interesting possibilities and approximately equal potential for expansion. Right now my map editor is really wonky and unable to even save maps correctly, but if I can fix that I'd definitely be interested in a Goon map project to create a dozen or so playable maps with preset thrones.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
Am I the only person who never plays with thrones? It seems like nobody else even acknowledges the other victory conditions, let alone ever tries them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
Thrones are the best thing in the world, they make the game actually work
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:33
|
|
|
I Love You! posted:Thrones are the best thing in the world, they make the game actually work I thought the AI was terrible at tracking them down and claiming them, though? And what about them is so good?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:42
|
|
|
Jabarto posted:I thought the AI was terrible at tracking them down and claiming them, though? And what about them is so good? Oh
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:45
|
|
|
Don't Play Singleplayer
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
He has a point, half of the players are AI within a week of the game starting generally.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
Jabarto posted:I thought the AI was terrible at tracking them down and claiming them, though? And what about them is so good? what are you on about, the AI is pretty much the fuckin Kool-Aid Man when it comes to going for thrones
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
Jabarto posted:I thought the AI was terrible at tracking them down and claiming them, though? And what about them is so good? The truth is revealed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
MrBims posted:The truth is revealed. I never covered it up? And is it really such a pants-making GBS threads surprise that someone might not like playing online?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:57
|
|
|
The AI is terrible about direction. It doesn't do long-term planning. Like, people have run AI vs AI games in Dom3 where one AI player will get the other down to 3 provinces vs 40, with all the economic advantages that entails, then 30 turns later it's literally reversed because the AI is literally incapable of ordering more than "attack the province adjacent with what I have next door this very turn". It is completely incapable of planning offensives. If it takes a throne, it does prioritize it and claim it, which believe it or not is better than its normal. The other victory conditions are actually pretty bad. Conquer All used to be the default, and is 100% of provinces. You can imagine how that's a billion times worse than thrones, and why changing the default from that between Dom3 and Dom4 is so appreciated. 99% of Dom3 games ended in concession, while many more Dom4 games actually see the victory screen. Victory Points is literally thrones without special sites. Cumulative Victory is so cumulative that the game is basically over at say, year 3, but won't end until say, year 5. Victory by Dominion heavily favors certain nations, and is redundant as you can already win by Dominion regardless of victory condition, with those same heavily favored nations, by eliminating all enemy candles. In addition, the "Dominion" score is a derived formula from your actual number of candles, and so doesn't really accurately reflect the ingame situation. Research has the same problem as Cumulative VPs, that it's over way before the game declares it so because momentum is impossible to interdict. The only real competitor to thrones or regular VPs is provinces, carefully set to a reasonable percentage. There'd be more, but unfortunately you can't, through the interface, set multiple victory conditions. I think it might be possible through the command line though. If it is, each individual condition still has the same problems outlined above; you can't use the momentum-based ones (Research and Cumulative VPs) because they're too difficult to race or disrupt, you can't use the Dominion victory because it's already too easy to get a domkill victory... you'd be left with thrones and provinces. In addition, thrones or VPs encourage fighting over specific points, which encourages troop battles and sieges and lines of supply, where if you go with provinces you're plagued by thugs and SCs and bloodless territory grabbing, like in the Dom3 metagame. Going for provinces as a victory really marginalizes national troops, even moreso than anything else. Basically, there's a lot of reasons why thrones or VPs are appreciated, while the strike against them is basically biased maps. Maps can be solved.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
Jabarto posted:I never covered it up? And is it really such a pants-making GBS threads surprise that someone might not like playing online? Well it's kinda like saying you play Unreal exclusively against bots
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
amuayse posted:Well it's kinda like saying you play Unreal exclusively against bots What are you getting at here...?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 05:31
|
|
|
Dark_Swordmaster posted:What are you getting at here...? The AI does not provide a challenge in Dominions 4; once you know how to play the game there is no actual point to playing against the AI because nothing it ever does will be able to prevent you from winning under any circumstances. Playing against the AI in Dominions is like reading a book; the outcome is never in question. Some people might like that (people like strange things) but it seems kind of pointless.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 06:57
|
|
|
Neruz posted:The AI does not provide a challenge in Dominions 4; once you know how to play the game there is no actual point to playing against the AI because nothing it ever does will be able to prevent you from winning under any circumstances. I love turn-based strategy games, but playing one in multiplayer sound like the most dreadfully boring thing imaginable. You either spend half your time waiting for other people to take their turns, or play for five minutes at a time once a day if you do a PBEM thing. Then when it become clear that you're losing, you can either drop out and ruin the game for everyone else or try to stick it out even though it's completely futile. Single player might be easy, but at least you're actually doing poo poo for the whole time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 07:36
|
|
|
So, given the chat about thrones just now (and apologies if i've missed it as i've only managed to bookend this 300-page thread) what do you all suggest as the throne score to win and throne numbers per player? I've been trying little games with 2-3 friends, and it seems like someone always gets their capital spawned next to a level 2 or 3 throne and completely screwed by the invincible blockage in their starting expansion.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 07:40
|
|
|
Jabarto posted:I love turn-based strategy games, but playing one in multiplayer sound like the most dreadfully boring thing imaginable. You either spend half your time waiting for other people to take their turns, or play for five minutes at a time once a day if you do a PBEM thing. Then when it become clear that you're losing, you can either drop out and ruin the game for everyone else or try to stick it out even though it's completely futile. Single player might be easy, but at least you're actually doing poo poo for the whole time. At least you actually do lose in multiplayer games: Like I said while I can understand that some people enjoy playing a game with a definite outcome I personally don't see the point in playing a game with zero risk factors that you are guaranteed to win.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 07:48
|
|
|
Ceebees posted:So, given the chat about thrones just now (and apologies if i've missed it as i've only managed to bookend this 300-page thread) what do you all suggest as the throne score to win and throne numbers per player? I've been trying little games with 2-3 friends, and it seems like someone always gets their capital spawned next to a level 2 or 3 throne and completely screwed by the invincible blockage in their starting expansion. Two or three thrones per player. Somewhere between 50 & 75% needed to win.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 08:15
|
|
|
Jabarto posted:I love turn-based strategy games, but playing one in multiplayer sound like the most dreadfully boring thing imaginable. You either spend half your time waiting for other people to take their turns, or play for five minutes at a time once a day if you do a PBEM thing. Then when it become clear that you're losing, you can either drop out and ruin the game for everyone else or try to stick it out even though it's completely futile. Single player might be easy, but at least you're actually doing poo poo for the whole time. I thought so too, once. But the added challenge of playing against living human beings makes up for the waiting. Besides, the stupid and crazy poo poo a human can think of is a lot more funny and enjoyable then anything the AI could do. I mean, you could make a stupid gimmick map for example for your gimmick mod and play it yourself with your modded nations. But then the AI would literally run into walls at every little hick-up and take out a lot of the fun. Actual humans would try working around poo poo like absolutely impassable mountains, not having any scouts and so on. Also I should point out playing a turn a day or less is incredibly relaxing and allows me to play other games in my spare time instead of drowning hours in Dom4. Smerdyakov posted:I would definitely agree that the dearth of good maps is the number one issue in playing games. Most of the maps that come with Dom4 are unplayable and the random map generator almost always leaves something to be desired. Compounding that is how annoying and limited the map editor is. There's no reason for a map to be "perfectly balanced" and the maps that do that are usually awful, but every starting position should have interesting possibilities and approximately equal potential for expansion. Right now my map editor is really wonky and unable to even save maps correctly, but if I can fix that I'd definitely be interested in a Goon map project to create a dozen or so playable maps with preset thrones. I have a nice little island-map lying around. I've made the map with the random generator on a lazy afternoon and I remember the map having weirdly evenly spaced thrones. This map was made by essentially re-doing and tweaking the poo poo I got back from the generator again and again for a few hours. Maybe I could give the map another look-over. It would be at least one playable map more.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 13:02
|
|
|
Jabarto posted:I love turn-based strategy games, but playing one in multiplayer sound like the most dreadfully boring thing imaginable. You either spend half your time waiting for other people to take their turns, or play for five minutes at a time once a day if you do a PBEM thing. Then when it become clear that you're losing, you can either drop out and ruin the game for everyone else or try to stick it out even though it's completely futile. Single player might be easy, but at least you're actually doing poo poo for the whole time. It's not so bad, you join a few games and they become the highlight of your day when you wake up/come home from work. Until one dude keeps staling for the full period of course, that is always annoying.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 13:29
|
|
|
Jabarto posted:I love turn-based strategy games, but playing one in multiplayer sound like the most dreadfully boring thing imaginable. You either spend half your time waiting for other people to take their turns, or play for five minutes at a time once a day if you do a PBEM thing. Then when it become clear that you're losing, you can either drop out and ruin the game for everyone else or try to stick it out even though it's completely futile. Single player might be easy, but at least you're actually doing poo poo for the whole time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 13:34
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:I dunno, it's one of those where actually playing Dominions MP kinda spoils the SP experience by being so much better and more interesting. It's pretty good larks! Yeah, I kind of stopped playing SP after starting in MP because of this. The AI is just too bad, which turns every game into a dull slog sooner or later.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 13:48
|
|
|
Ceebees posted:So, given the chat about thrones just now (and apologies if i've missed it as i've only managed to bookend this 300-page thread) what do you all suggest as the throne score to win and throne numbers per player? I've been trying little games with 2-3 friends, and it seems like someone always gets their capital spawned next to a level 2 or 3 throne and completely screwed by the invincible blockage in their starting expansion. For thrones, 60 to 70% to win, at most 2 throne points per player, probably less in most games. Mostly, the key is to vet your map so thrones spawn in appropriate areas. I don't think there are any maps that have this by default, but it's something we should start doing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:It would be nice to have more more-equitable maps. Most of the ones that come with the game are terrible for balance, and made in Dom3 when there was no throne-pref terrain mask. Having 4 or 5 maps that don't have big terrain + choke problems and do have evenly-spaced throne terrain set would go a long way. I know I've been absent for the last few months (blame World of Tanks), but if this is really an issue I could get back into mapmaking again. My main problem is always that I don't actually play Dominions that much, and I'm not very good at it when I do, so I don't know enough about how to design a map that's fun to play. If there were a few experienced players who would be willing to be map designers in a scrawl-with-MSpaint sort of way, I'd be up for translating that into something pretty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 14:45
|
|
|
Neruz posted:The AI does not provide a challenge in Dominions 4; once you know how to play the game there is no actual point to playing against the AI because nothing it ever does will be able to prevent you from winning under any circumstances. I meant about Unreal, I'm aware Dominions' AI cannot fathom the game it is present in. Also: Playing in an MP game is hardly boring. In between turns you should be talking. Like the OP says, if someone isn't they're a threat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
I get the appeal of TBS vs AI. It's formulaic. It's about execution, and the variants you present yourself at the start of the scenario (nation, victory conditions, restrictions, research speed, randomization). Dominions doesn't really have difficult formulas, but something like say, Civ 4 or 5's Deity difficulty level is basically the same thing pumped up to 11. Telling people not to play single player is dumb. If I can enjoy Civ 4 Deity, I'm sure someone can enjoy Dominions 4 vs AI. The problem is, it's very difficult to derive balance suggestions from the Dominions single player experience, because the patterns the AI uses don't include commonly effective tactics. For example, we were talking save or die spells earlier, and also the disproportionate effectiveness of SCs and thugs. In single player, you can cream infinite AI troops with a single full gear SC. You won't ever run up against Soul Slay spam that a human player would throw up against that, or Leech assassins (a no-save or die spell), or anything else in the range of SC counters. And you never get to see the necessity of such spells from facing real SCs yourself, nor the difficulty in executing said counters. I've put a MR 31 SC up against an 8-master Soul Slay communion and come out on top. I was lucky, but not unreasonably so. I've trounced Petrify (another no-save spell) by using holdx5 scripts. I've gotten my pretender assassinated out from under a 500-man army because I didn't give him a chaff item to absorb a leech assassin. I've countered Magic Duel with a 50-gem fire magic empower. Against the AI you will never be on either end of any of these situations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 15:12
|
|
|
Yeah unlike some people I don't give a poo poo if you play vs. the AI. But any sort of balance suggestions go out the window at that point since it's a completely different game that you play against people. Against the AI it's really a matter of "make good troop/SC, attack provinces, guard against flanks" and that's it, and nothing else really matters or works.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 16:07
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:I get the appeal of TBS vs AI. It's formulaic. It's about execution, and the variants you present yourself at the start of the scenario (nation, victory conditions, restrictions, research speed, randomization). Dominions doesn't really have difficult formulas, but something like say, Civ 4 or 5's Deity difficulty level is basically the same thing pumped up to 11. Telling people not to play single player is dumb. If I can enjoy Civ 4 Deity, I'm sure someone can enjoy Dominions 4 vs AI. The difference is that the Civ AI might actually win the game if I don't try to stop it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 01:18 |
|
|
Jabarto posted:I love turn-based strategy games, but playing one in multiplayer sound like the most dreadfully boring thing imaginable. You either spend half your time waiting for other people to take their turns, or play for five minutes at a time once a day if you do a PBEM thing. Then when it become clear that you're losing, you can either drop out and ruin the game for everyone else or try to stick it out even though it's completely futile. Single player might be easy, but at least you're actually doing poo poo for the whole time. I gotta say, I totally understand not wanting to play multiplayer. It took more than a year of hearing about Dominions 3 and then 4 before I ever wanted to try it; I'm usually not a multiplayer guy. Hell, I don't even have a guild on Guild Wars 2. (I'd join the SA one, but they're on a different server.) But the time required is a poor argument in this case. Dominions games can sometimes take a couple months to finish, because everybody sends their turns once it's complete, and when everybody has done that, it's the next turn. It usually goes something like this: Phase 1) In this early stage, several turns a day are completed as everybody does early stuff and is all excited about the new game. Phase 2) Now there's usually about a turn a day, wherein you expand and watch for competitors, and maybe send some messages to other players. Phase 3) Still about a turn per day, but now everything's so huge, you might spend as much as half an hour on your turn, making sure everything's juuuuuust right. And remember, playing a multiplayer game like this doesn't mean you can't still play singleplayer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 18:08
|
|
