|
The White Dragon posted:The thing to remember is that if you're doing well (a reasonable number of cities with high population for the era), you're pretty much guaranteed to have happiness problems up until the Renaissance Era--you can trade luxury resources, but there's a hard happiness cap and unless you purposefully throttle your growth, your pop is gonna catch up to you FAST. You still have city states to manage happiness as either a tall or wide empire, although going wide is a huge waste since BNW changes incentivize tall play almost to exclusion. Being allied with a CS that has a different resource than you is a whopping 12 happiness, or 10, I can't remember if you get 2 or 4 for being allies anymore. Combined with coliseums and you should have no trouble with happiness at any point.
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 13:05 |
|
|
That's only Mercantile states, which you may or may not encounter and if you don't have their map luxury or their unique mercantile luxury, allying with them will give you 10  . Due to the distribution of luxuries in every game, however, because they programmed it to stupidly count mercantile luxuries against the map size luxury diversity cap, there's a very high chance that the first Mercantile CS that you buy will have the same special luxury as every other Mercantile CS on the entire map. Add that to the resource overlap if you have a wide empire (and by wide, I mean "even as few as six cities") and chances are that first CS will give you the full 10 and every other one will only give you the +2 from being friends with them.Mercantile CSes were, unfortunately, really interesting in concept, but executed exceedingly poorly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:I loved that feature too. But it's hard to see it ever returning with how expensive graphical content is. Especially because for the cost of 4 era specific leader outfits for say, Shaka, they could probably make 3 whole new 'static' Civ leaders. I don't know who really clamors for having fully 3D animated leaders. Maybe I'm underestimating the cost of 2D versus 3D art, but I would be perfectly happy with static 2D portraits a la the Wonders. I usually turn off those animations anyway because I'm hammering through diplomacy screens, so a static painting is basically as good as an animation anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:That's only Mercantile states, which you may or may not encounter and if you don't have their map luxury or their unique mercantile luxury, allying with them will give you 10 Where are you settling that after getting the first CS, pre-renaissance, you are having happiness problems that can't be solved by just coliseums? Happiness was a huge limiting factor before G&K but it is basically a joke and going wide is barely worth it in BNW, so I honestly have no idea where you are coming from. Even if somehow that wasn't enough, you still have the Circus Maxiums after you build your coliseums, so I honestly don't see how it can be an issue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
Pvt.Scott posted:Idea: have a limit of units per tile that expands per techs. You'd form them into armies. Say you start out with two slots, front and rear. Two warriors would just be a big melee mob but an archer behind a warrior would get to do its damage first and take say, 25% of the damage that the front rank does. Cavalry against this formation would do the opposite, 75% of the damage to the back row, as the two unit formation doesn't have flanking units to protect it yet. Eventually you'd have front, rear, left and right flanks and a support slot or two. Support would be things like medics, engineers (for crossing rivers, building fortifications etc.) artillery, AA, officers and so on. Maybe even have a slot for assigning air units to CAS. You now have some interesting tactical choices to make in force composition without the AI getting bunched up on terrain with its ranged units out of position and you don't have stacks of doom because there's a hard limit on military units per hex. Gabriel Pope posted:This is pretty much how the first few games worked, except combat was to the death. A lucky spearman could take out 100 tanks at once. My understanding is that Civ1 was "defender dies, everything on tile dies", and SMAC was "defender dies, everything on tile takes a bit of damage as its reactor explodes". The latter is a tad more reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
I don't care about 3D leaders, but I do like the languages being used
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
  Hopefully I can actually stick with this one and play it ridiculously far into the future. So much loving uranium and oil.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:
Those poor bastards Arabia stuck in the middle of the only desert on the map. Is there any way to increase the range on caravans and cargo ships to compensate for the increased distance between civs on such a map?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:I don't know who really clamors for having fully 3D animated leaders. Maybe I'm underestimating the cost of 2D versus 3D art, but I would be perfectly happy with static 2D portraits a la the Wonders. I usually turn off those animations anyway because I'm hammering through diplomacy screens, so a static painting is basically as good as an animation anyway. Me. I am a total sucker for that poo poo. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Those poor bastards Arabia stuck in the middle of the only desert on the map. Not to worry. They've got more than enough food. If you look at their coastline, it's basically side by side fish, whales, crab, and pearls, and that's not counting all the sheep and cattle. The resources in the desert are obscenely dense. I doubt anyone is going to be lacking on oil unless it's so late in the game that each turn takes like 3 minutes to load, but if they are, Arabia is the place to get it. I hosed up and realized that loading a scenario won't allow you to just auto-spawn 36 city states, so I'll have to add them in manually. That should help out with the trading. Volkerball fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Oct 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
Athaboros posted:All right, the Quality of Life modpack has been updated for the newest patch. Here's what's in it this time: I tried to use it but it crashed. I don't have some of the secenario DLC but I have all the Civ/Expansion DLCs. Do you know which DLCs are required or is it all of them but the map ones?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
Marketing New Brain posted:Where are you settling that after getting the first CS, pre-renaissance, you are having happiness problems that can't be solved by just coliseums? Happiness was a huge limiting factor before G&K but it is basically a joke and going wide is barely worth it in BNW, so I honestly have no idea where you are coming from. Even if somehow that wasn't enough, you still have the Circus Maxiums after you build your coliseums, so I honestly don't see how it can be an issue. I don't settle, I just take a bunch of enemy capitals that have luxuries I don't own yet. In turn, I get crazy luxury diversity and tend to have access to all but one or two by the time I'm done conquering.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
THE BAR posted:Is this true, or are we talking early cardboard machines like the Mark V? Haha . I have no doubt a sufficiently determined combatant could manage to completely destroy a sword by punching through the "armor" on one of those early armored cars. Anything else is internet neckbeardery and animes. I think there's a post floating around in the ether about how a properly made Japanese blade could cut through anything, ever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
Maybe it's just the tanks all simultaneously malfunctioning and catching fire.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:Maybe it's just the tanks all simultaneously malfunctioning and catching fire. If videogames have taught me anything, it's that if you punch a vehicle long enough, it will explode.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
A dude with a loincloth and a spear is going to win against a tank in the movies. We love an underdog.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
Pvt.Scott posted:A dude with a loincloth and a spear is going to win against a tank in the movies. We love an underdog. I for one cannot wait for Civilization: The Movie. Ghandi tearing apart a tank battalion with a spear and then riding a nuke into London.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
Civ VI had better have some sort of unique Indian MIRV nuke.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 01:46
|
|
|
Hey Gort, your mods also break with the new CiV patch. I'm guessing you realized this already, but if not, well. The most obvious problem is that resources are no longer marked on the map view. Started a new game, went "What? All my capital city gets is some stone?", and restarted twice before figuring out what was going on 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
Holy poo poo why is Quick harder than standard speed? I'm not even really losing, but juggling what to build is so much harder, especially if you make a new city late in the game and have to catch up. Also, is there a way to get your original religion back in your holy city if it gets converted?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 04:47
|
|
|
Vertigo Ambrosia posted:Also, is there a way to get your original religion back in your holy city if it gets converted? Spawn a great prophet and use it to cleanse the city of infidels.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
Vertigo Ambrosia posted:Holy poo poo why is Quick harder than standard speed? I'm not even really losing, but juggling what to build is so much harder, especially if you make a new city late in the game and have to catch up. Quick is harder than standard because the marginal value of turns is increased. Any mistakes you make in build or tech order will cost you more simply by virtue of the fact you will get less turns in a game. You're also selectively disadvantaged compared; it is much harder and more expensive to keep units up to date. You'll have a harder time keeping up compared to the AI since their passive difficulty bonuses usually allow them to keep an up to date military on hand. Exploring tends to be harder too, as units can't travel as far or discover as many ruins in a proportional amount of time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
Quick also reduces the importance of military altogether, since units get fewer turns to go a-conquering with. Since one of the AI's biggest failings is in being totally incompetent at unit management, Quick "plays to the AI's strengths". Meanwhile, the slower game speeds tend to favor the human player(s), for the opposite reason.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Hey Gort, your mods also break with the new CiV patch. I'm guessing you realized this already, but if not, well. The most obvious problem is that resources are no longer marked on the map view. Started a new game, went "What? All my capital city gets is some stone?", and restarted twice before figuring out what was going on Do you have them installed through the workshop, or in the fake expansion method?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 10:29
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:I loved that feature too. But it's hard to see it ever returning with how expensive graphical content is. Especially because for the cost of 4 era specific leader outfits for say, Shaka, they could probably make 3 whole new 'static' Civ leaders. Yeahhhh, man. This just got me pumped about Civ 3 again. Alright, let's take the leaders from 3, the advisors from 2 (or just Elvis), combat & vassalage systems of 4, trade routes, religion, and ideologies of 5. And also it's in space. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFQDeYXq_iw  the cobblestones beneath our feet have more learning than we do, sii-iii-ire.
Bogart fucked around with this message at 14:03 on Oct 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 13:59
|
|
|
Gort posted:Do you have them installed through the workshop, or in the fake expansion method? If it's the latter, I had to update mine to make it work too (even though none of the mods themselves needed updating). PlaceholderPigeon posted:I tried to use it but it crashed. I don't have some of the secenario DLC but I have all the Civ/Expansion DLCs. Do you know which DLCs are required or is it all of them but the map ones? I have all of them but the Scrambled maps. I would think that the only ones that really matter are the ones that include the various civs. If you want to PM me a screenshot of whatever your errors are, I can see if I can figure it out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
Gort posted:Do you have them installed through the workshop, or in the fake expansion method? The fake expansion method. But maybe something's screwy with my install, because I also tried the QoL pack that was posted here and CiV kept crashing on me.  Works fine with no "fake DLC" installed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 15:43
|
|
|
OK, I remade the modpack for the new patch Contents: Active AI in multiplayer Social Policy Rebalance - Buffs up non-Tradition starter social policies to give more of a choice at game start AI Rebalance - Removes AI free techs and cheap unit maintenance, gives them cheaper techs throughout the game and lots of free promotions on their units National College Nerf - Makes the National College a flat +10 Science - nice, but not something to rush to every game Rebalanced Warfare - Gives all infantry +50% strength against cities, rebalances ranged units so that they always have 2 range, and rebalances siege units so they always have 3 range and indirect fire The pack is compatible with multiplayer as long as everyone has it, and if you play it singleplayer you'll get achievements.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:
How did you generate this pretty map?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
Awesome, I'll have to give it a shot after work. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
How hard is it going back to older Civ games? I started with 5 and Im getting tired of "one city challenge" actually being a boon instead of a challenge. My last few games I won just by building a mega city and crushing via trade and science. Oh, you're invading me with 6 spearmen? Let me just purchase a single rifleman and crush you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
1-3 are varying degrees of loving ancient and not terribly good. Civ IV is a good but quite different game, so you have to relearn a lot of stuff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
Yeah, Civ 4 is a good game. Graphics and interface are a bit dated compared to 5, but the mechanics are strong, and it's a game the AI actually knows how to play unlike 5.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
Gort posted:Yeah, Civ 4 is a good game. Graphics and interface are a bit dated compared to 5, but the mechanics are strong, and it's a game the AI actually knows how to play unlike 5. I would say more that it's a game that the AI is more convincing in. Civ4's AI acts more like NPCs in a videogame than equals of the player, so e.g. you can actually get them to vote for you for World Leader if they like you enough, and they won't hate you forever just because you sniped a city from someone else. Which isn't to say that keeping them happy is trivial, but it's possible to get AIs who actually like you in Civ4, even if you're some world-spanning empire, as opposed to just pretending to like you like they do in Civ5. The AI can do warfare in Civ4 better than it can in Civ5, but that's because warfare in Civ4 is pretty simple -- build big armies, mash them into each other, whoever still has dudes left at the end is the winner.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
For those who have played Civ Rev (if you haven't I felt it was quite fun) what did you think of that game's army system? I felt it was a great inbetween solution to allow higher unit density but still keep the concepts of 1upt (limiting stack size, army density issues). An army was a 3 unit stack, you would form one and put in three units of the same type. If a unit was inside an army it could get great general status and give the stack bonuses, but I imagine that in a Civ 5 version of armies you could assign a great general to lead one. It seemed like a really elegant solution and allows for a tripling of unit density while keeping the same mechanics. I was always curious why they didn't mess with it in Civ 5 at all? 1UPT can still work as long as you consider the army 1 unit, and it allows the AI's higher production to be more of a factor in warfare.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:For those who have played Civ Rev (if you haven't I felt it was quite fun) what did you think of that game's army system? I felt it was a great inbetween solution to allow higher unit density but still keep the concepts of 1upt (limiting stack size, army density issues). Civ Rev doesn't limit stack size at all. You can have a thousand units on one tile. It isn't an "inbetween solution", it 100% throws 1 UPT in the bin and the player with the largest number of units wins.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 19:19
|
|
|
Gort posted:Civ Rev doesn't limit stack size at all. You can have a thousand units on one tile. It isn't an "inbetween solution", it 100% throws 1 UPT in the bin and the player with the largest number of units wins. Sorry I was unclear, I wasn't suggesting to implement the Civ Rev combat system. I was just thinking that the "3 units can form an army" system from Civ Rev might be interesting in Civ 5's tactical combat system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
The one thing from Civ Rev that needs to be in Civ VI is the ability of some boats to have shore parties with limited range so you can get ruins and do coastal pillaging.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:Sorry I was unclear, I wasn't suggesting to implement the Civ Rev combat system. I was just thinking that the "3 units can form an army" system from Civ Rev might be interesting in Civ 5's tactical combat system. I think the only thing that would change at that point is that the three-unit army would become the standard unit and nothing else would change.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 13:05 |
|
|
Gort posted:I think the only thing that would change at that point is that the three-unit army would become the standard unit and nothing else would change. Do you not feel that if the computer was able to put say 9 melee units around a player city with 3 tiles open against a player's 3 comp bowmen that this would make them fight more effectively than 3 melee units getting whittled down by 3 comp bowmen while the rest stand around?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 19:43
|
|