|
Pillowpants posted:Are there any civ like games that combine civilization with internal politics?
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 23:57 |
|
|
The White Dragon posted:The Paradox-brand games do, right? You can do poo poo like assassinate rival family members if you don't want an idiot to take the throne, and then they have stuff like industrialization later on. You might need multiple games for that, though; I only know 'em, never played them myself 'cause I think I'd be awful at them. There's four major Paradox flagship titles: - Crusader Kings, covering the medieval period - Europa Universalis, covering the Renaissance up to just after the Napoleonic period - Victoria, covering...the Victorian period - Hearts of Iron, covering WWII Hearts of Iron has effectively no internal politics, so that's not worth bothering with. Europa Universalis 4's internal politics mostly consists of how to deal with rebels and who to hire as advisors - not terribly deep, but the external strategy is a lot of fun. Victoria 2 unsurprisingly has a fairly detailed internal politics system, but it's also something of a complex black box that's hard to affect sometimes. Same goes for the economy. I enjoy it myself, but it does require a much more hands-off attitude than Civ games. Crusader Kings 2 is the go-to title for Paradox internal politics. Since you play as a single nobleman/woman in the middle of a feudal chain of command, even within your own kingdom you are constantly squabbling with your vassals, your overlords, and your fellow lords for power and prestige, but overly and covertly. Plus, since the system details each individual character to some detail and has tons of events to react to, leading to organic storytelling like "The blind, club-footed genius who took Normandy from a mere dukedom to the royal demesne of France, before his handsome but idiotic heir lustful heir hosed it all up by sleeping with his vassal's wives and pissing them all off." That said, all of these titles are fairly focused treatments of specific historical periods, and none of them try to capture the whole sweep of history the way Civilization does. They have a lot more moving parts, so to speak, and the focus is less on elegant gameplay design and more on historical simulationism. Still, you wanted internal politics, and Paradox does offer that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:The Paradox-brand games do, right? You can do poo poo like assassinate rival family members if you don't want an idiot to take the throne, and then they have stuff like industrialization later on. You might need multiple games for that, though; I only know 'em, never played them myself 'cause I think I'd be awful at them. If you can play Civ at a high level, there's no reason you wouldn't be able to play Paradox games at a high level too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
To tell the truth, I can only play Civ 5 at high levels in particular because of how I exploit the AI. Civ 4? My Prince victory rate was about 50% 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:To tell the truth, I can only play Civ 5 at high levels in particular because of how I exploit the AI. Civ 4? My Prince victory rate was about 50% You can exploit the AI just as effectively in 4, you know, and in Paradox games too. Half of any strategy game is working out how the brain of the opponent works.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
Civ 5 Complete Edition is on sale today on Steam for £12, in case there's anyone on the planet who doesn't own it yet. It also runs on SteamOS.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
I don't have it, I was playing BNW on my boyfriends account because I only have vanilla Civ on my own.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
What was the bug with the CN Tower again?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
Ah Venician Autocracy  Haven't played Venice at Immortal before, didn't expect to run away with it so easily. I could've got diplomatic victory ~15 turns earlier but where is the domination in that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
For some reason when I try and start up Civ V the loading screen stays even as the main music progresses and the game then crashes. Used to work fine. No idea what changed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 03:12
|
|
|
I have Civ 5 Complete Edition for Windows, do i have to buy the game again to play the new Linux version currently on sale?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
Just Another Lurker posted:I have Civ 5 Complete Edition for Windows, do i have to buy the game again to play the new Linux version currently on sale? No. Should be available on the Linux version of Steam.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
Just Another Lurker posted:I have Civ 5 Complete Edition for Windows, do i have to buy the game again to play the new Linux version currently on sale? It’s a Steamworks game, so no.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
Hey OP, you should really update the... OP, so that it reflects that the new thing to get is the Complete Edition, now that Gold doesn't exist anymore
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 06:30
|
|
|
Thanks all, new to this addiction and am glad i don't have to shell out for a second copy. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 07:43
|
|
|
So has there been any word of further patches to come out for this game? I'm hoping Firaxis will do something to fix the policies before they totally abandon the game. I did try some of the policy mods, but I keep running into issues with them breaking the menus/other poo poo so I'm kinda giving up on them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 20:06
|
|
|
HappyHelmet posted:So has there been any word of further patches to come out for this game? I'm hoping Firaxis will do something to fix the policies before they totally abandon the game. Nope, complete edition is out and they've moved on to Beyond Earth by now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
HappyHelmet posted:I did try some of the policy mods, but I keep running into issues with them breaking the menus/other poo poo so I'm kinda giving up on them. I'm a big fan of this one and haven't experienced any problems with it yet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
Is the Mac steam version moddable?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
Yes, but if you want to use something that isn't in the Steam Workshop, you're going to have to find where it stores the mod assets. I'm pretty sure it's in /User/Libraries/Application Support, like most things.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
Gort posted:I'm a big fan of this one and haven't experienced any problems with it yet. Hmm... I haven't tried that one yet. Maybe I'll give it a try.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
Gort posted:I'm a big fan of this one and haven't experienced any problems with it yet. That mod is ridiculous. "Balance" just means making the game incredibly easy, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
Like, some of the dudes might release an official patch in their spare time for funsies or whatever, but I would just assume that official support is DeadTM at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
Does the community have a good grasp of just how warmongering works yet?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 04:09
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:That mod is ridiculous. "Balance" just means making the game incredibly easy, I guess. Hahahaha! Goddess of Protection got changed to a 50% buff! I hope you like not conquering the AI until nukes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 04:16
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:Does the community have a good grasp of just how warmongering works yet? The warmonger penalty formula was posted at some point. It's different in BNW than how it used to be. I can't remember the exact details, but basically the fewer cities in the world there are overall, and the fewer cities there are that belong to the civilization you're attacking, the greater the penalty. What this means in practice is that early game conquests are more diplomatically costly than late game conquests, and taking cities from a smaller civ is also very costly. If you want a certain city from a civ, it may be best to let them build a few other cities first before taking it in order to reduce the penalty. This includes the capital. There is no specific extra penalty for finishing off a Civ anymore, it all just relies on that formula (so obviously taking a city from a civ with just that one city left will incur a large penalty).
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
The game will actually tell you (roughly) how much of a warmonger penalty you'll get for capturing a city when you mouse over it (if you're at war with that civ). Early game conquest is very heavily penalized, although I guess it's sort of counter-balanced by the fact that any warmongering penalties are only applied to civs you've met. It still seems to kind of screw civs like the Huns who are based around very early era conquest.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:That mod is ridiculous. "Balance" just means making the game incredibly easy, I guess. Nothing really stands out as crazy easy. It's just a mild rebalancing mod from what I can tell. Things that are usually the One Right Choice (Tradition, NC Rush, archer blobs, Tithe, Rationalism, Great Scientist spam) and nerfing those, and buffing some of the weaker options. No maintenance on monuments and shrines may be going a bit far, but shrines have always been weak outside building one for a pantheon, and no maintenance monuments will be a buff to non-Tradition starts. Piety and Honor get huge buffs, but they may need it more than others.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:Nothing really stands out as crazy easy. It's just a mild rebalancing mod from what I can tell. Things that are usually the One Right Choice (Tradition, NC Rush, archer blobs, Tithe, Rationalism, Great Scientist spam) and nerfing those, and buffing some of the weaker options. No maintenance on monuments and shrines may be going a bit far, but shrines have always been weak outside building one for a pantheon, and no maintenance monuments will be a buff to non-Tradition starts. Piety and Honor get huge buffs, but they may need it more than others. There's some good ideas in there, but like most mods the guy takes a few things too far.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 06:30
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:Nothing really stands out as crazy easy. It's just a mild rebalancing mod from what I can tell. Things that are usually the One Right Choice (Tradition, NC Rush, archer blobs, Tithe, Rationalism, Great Scientist spam) and nerfing those, and buffing some of the weaker options. No maintenance on monuments and shrines may be going a bit far, but shrines have always been weak outside building one for a pantheon, and no maintenance monuments will be a buff to non-Tradition starts. Piety and Honor get huge buffs, but they may need it more than others. The modified warmonger penalties to make conquest easier is something that only really affects the player. Also, the lack of free techs and reduced free units to start with for the AI is a pretty big deal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 07:24
|
|
|
Ah hadn't noticed the second point. Lack of free techs definitely shouldn't be cut out, the game is meant to get slightly asymmetric at the start on higher difficulties anyways. Though warmonger penalties suck. They have a paralysing effect, and the huge ones from BNW make the game all about preserving the status quo. And it's not like it purely affects you, nothing like a Genghis or a Attila in the room to take all the heat and get denounced, so you can get positive modifiers with everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 07:56
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:Ah hadn't noticed the second point. Lack of free techs definitely shouldn't be cut out, the game is meant to get slightly asymmetric at the start on higher difficulties anyways. I take issue with that point. I'd say that one of the flaws of the current difficulty system is that at higher difficulty levels the early game is very hard but if you can survive it the late game gets easier and easier. If you select Deity difficulty, the game should be "Deity hard" throughout, not "Deity tending towards Settler as the game goes on".
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 08:52
|
|
|
The start of civ v is already the most crucial time. Taking away the AI's bonuses at the start just makes things easier. The only difficulty thing I can think of that would work all game without changing a bunch of stuff would be to give the AI combat bonuses vs the player.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 09:35
|
|
|
Gort posted:I take issue with that point. I'd say that one of the flaws of the current difficulty system is that at higher difficulty levels the early game is very hard but if you can survive it the late game gets easier and easier. Well, that's fine and all. But the mod doesn't make the game harder in in the mid or late game to compensate for giving the AI fewer early game bonuses. And there's also the snowball effect you're forgetting about where the removal of those bonuses affects the AI throughout the entire game, not just the early game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 09:41
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:The warmonger penalty formula was posted at some point. It's different in BNW than how it used to be. I can't remember the exact details, but basically the fewer cities in the world there are overall, and the fewer cities there are that belong to the civilization you're attacking, the greater the penalty. What this means in practice is that early game conquests are more diplomatically costly than late game conquests, and taking cities from a smaller civ is also very costly. If you want a certain city from a civ, it may be best to let them build a few other cities first before taking it in order to reduce the penalty. This includes the capital. There is no specific extra penalty for finishing off a Civ anymore, it all just relies on that formula (so obviously taking a city from a civ with just that one city left will incur a large penalty). One other thing. If you capture a previously conquered city and then let it go to the original owner/city state, not only do you not get a warmonger increase, you actually have your existing warmonger level reduced.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 10:41
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:Well, that's fine and all. But the mod doesn't make the game harder in in the mid or late game to compensate for giving the AI fewer early game bonuses. And there's also the snowball effect you're forgetting about where the removal of those bonuses affects the AI throughout the entire game, not just the early game. The AI benefits significantly from the heavy nerfing of the Tradition-National College combo. Makes it a lot harder to leave them in the dust science-wise. The nerfing of city combat strength also means the AI is actually capable of taking cities in war, which means you more often come up against "runaway AIs" who have eaten a couple of their neighbours.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 12:10
|
|
|
Speaking of warmonger penalties, how bad is sacking a city-state these days? I always used to think of that as forbidden since you got the genocide penalty for it pre-BNW, but is it doable now? I'm playing a Spain game and all the good natural wonders are taken by city-states.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 15:10
|
|
|
It seems to be about on the level of taking a civ's last city. Possibly with some icing on top for denying them a city-state. In other words, the AI really doesn't like it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 15:18
|
|
|
Vil posted:It seems to be about on the level of taking a civ's last city. Possibly with some icing on top for denying them a city-state. From what I understand pre-BNW, this was the case, since you got an extra genocide penalty for taking an AI's last city (and city-states weren't considered any different). With the new BNW rules though, the genocide penalty is gone, and even taking the last city of an AI, while still a large penalty, isn't as bad as it used to be. Basically I have a game with 22 civs, and I want to take over 2 city-states. I'm wondering if that will make everyone hate me. I'm probably also going to have to sack Ethiopia's capital, since I'm playing a religion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 15:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 23:57 |
|
|
SlightlyMadman posted:From what I understand pre-BNW, this was the case, since you got an extra genocide penalty for taking an AI's last city (and city-states weren't considered any different). With the new BNW rules though, the genocide penalty is gone, and even taking the last city of an AI, while still a large penalty, isn't as bad as it used to be. Basically I have a game with 22 civs, and I want to take over 2 city-states. I'm wondering if that will make everyone hate me. I'm probably also going to have to sack Ethiopia's capital, since I'm playing a religion. If your still in the early game you can get away with taking 1-2 city states. Late game it's not worth it. Taking out Ethiopia's capital should be fine so long as you don't wipe them out entirely. Warmongering pro-tips: - It's better to kill stuff early before other Civs know about them. If the AI never met that city state before it was under your control them no harm no foul. - Saying "no" to peace deals adds to your warmongering penalty. This can add up when an AI is asking every turn for peace. - You can't win by joint victory anyway so gently caress it, embrace the penalty, crush anyone who disagrees under your jackboots and nuclear hellfire 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 16:05
|
|