|
From what I heard the endgame in Stellaris is cool, albeit a bit repetitive. The galaxy gets invaded by different things (other dimension aliens, weird zerg aliens from another galaxy, or an AI uprising) depending on what has been researched up until a certain point. Considering Civ already has set-in-stone victory conditions and this new Civ is gonna treat the AI players less like real players and more like actors to make your game more interesting, I'd like to see a random pool of runaway AI behaviours to mix the endgame up a little. Like sometimes a big Civ in the lategame will get a bunch of bonuses dumped on their lap and kicks off a big world war, that you have to get involved in even if you're turtling up for a space victory or whatever. Stuff to counteract the late game slowing down, and give people more of an excuse to use all the late game units.
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 08:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 02:02 |
|
|
Red Bones posted:From what I heard the endgame in Stellaris is cool, albeit a bit repetitive. The galaxy gets invaded by different things (other dimension aliens, weird zerg aliens from another galaxy, or an AI uprising) depending on what has been researched up until a certain point. Considering Civ already has set-in-stone victory conditions and this new Civ is gonna treat the AI players less like real players and more like actors to make your game more interesting, I'd like to see a random pool of runaway AI behaviours to mix the endgame up a little. Like sometimes a big Civ in the lategame will get a bunch of bonuses dumped on their lap and kicks off a big world war, that you have to get involved in even if you're turtling up for a space victory or whatever. Stuff to counteract the late game slowing down, and give people more of an excuse to use all the late game units. That might be alright as an option or mutator or whatever, but I don't think I'd personally appreciate it in the base game. I don't play Civ with AIs to have my thousands of years of grinding them down into irrelevancy undone by an event giving them a whole heap of stuff  Also, if you do want to play around with endgame units on a roughly even footing with other civs there IS the option to start the game in the modern or information age. I don't know if anyone ever uses it, but it's there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 08:42
|
|
|
New Civ setting: An alien civilization clones history's most influential leaders, and puts them in charge of groups of people sharing a gene pool very similar to the cultures these personalities lead, and dumps them on an earth-like planet with some tools and the knowledge of agriculture. The immortal leaders bicker and fight with each other, until one of them launches the Apollo mission, where they find out that they are being monitored by the aliens. Now they have to become united by any means necessary and overthrow their captors.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 09:35
|
|
|
I looked carefully at the the First Look video this screenshot came from, and I strongly suspect that (at least some of) the footage is older than May of this year: - Most of the people are wearing long-sleeved shirts or hoodies. I haven't researched historical temperatures, but it looks more like Maryland winter clothes than late spring. (Yes, a few are in short-sleeves, but some people wear short-sleeves all year round.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 10:41
|
|
|
It seems as though Firaxis are using the same colour schemes for Civs as they did in Civ V, except for Egypt which for some reason they have reversed (it's now Purple/Gold, like Rome's Civ V colours). Quite why they did this, I don't know. Why might it be relevant? Because Rome would now need a new colour scheme, and I can't see them using Egypt's Yellow/Purple. If I had to guess they would probably use Red/Gold, as those were the colours used on Roman Vexillums (military standards/banners). Who used Red/Gold in Civ V? Persia. This makes me wonder whether perhaps that colour scheme was no longer being used in VI, allowing Rome to claim it. If those colours weren't being used then perhaps Persia is not in the base game, meaning C5 cannot be a Persian leader. *reclines back in chair, puffs pipe*
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 11:57
|
|
|
Thanks for bringing that back up, because I swear I've seen the distinctive form of the wide conical woolly hat like the one I think I see in that picture and now it's going to bother me all night again that I can't remember where.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 12:23
|
|
|
Montezuma! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iw79o14yj6E
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
Early access  "Pre-order for the Aztec Civilization Pack" quote:Starting today, those who pre-order Civilization VI will exclusively gain early access* to the Aztec civ, led by Montezuma I, when the game launches on October 21, 2016. After 90 days, this content will unlock for all Civilization VI players at no additional charge.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:22
|
|
|
Okay, that looks really cool. Build early warriors, go out and kill things, then use your captured slaves to help your civ expand! I mean, it's kind of grim how you work the slaves to death in the process, but I guess that's limited worker charges for you. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
Monty looks like Shaggy
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
Considering that the industry standard is "pre-order or you have to pay for it later", this seems pretty reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
Can't watch the video right now, someone sum up his Uniques? Also post a screenshot of him (and Qin too, for that matter)?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:Monty looks like Shaggy I was just fine with the other leader models shown so far, but I will definitely miss Civ 5 Monty. He looked absolutely mental!
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
Rexides posted:I was just fine with the other leader models shown so far, but I will definitely miss Civ 5 Monty. He looked absolutely mental! Yeah, Monty definitely had the coolest leader screen in Civ5. I like this design too, but it loses something without the dramatic shadows and frenzied mob. Hardcordion fucked around with this message at 15:41 on Jul 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
Senerio posted:Can't watch the video right now, someone sum up his Uniques? Unique Ability: Extra Happiness (Amenities) from luxuries, bonus to military unit power from luxuries. Unique Building: happiness/faith thing in entertainment districts Leader abilities: Early game unit that turns any defeated unit into a worker. Workers can rush districts. Edit: The general theme being that you support early growth through captured slave-workers and support mid or late-game conquest through bonus happiness. Clarste fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Jul 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
Senerio posted:Can't watch the video right now, someone sum up his Uniques? 
Here's Qin:  I'll stick all this in the OP later.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
sarmhan posted:Considering that the industry standard is "pre-order or you have to pay for it later", this seems pretty reasonable. Yeah I wouldn't be surprised if it was a compromise with the publisher.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
I love these cartoony-rear end graphics. Thank you very much!
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
Huh, that's +2 flat combat per luxury, that can scale into a nasty combat edge in the early-mid game, especially if you can pull off some good diplomacy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
I actually really like Monte's model, despite my ragging on some of the other ones. I love the way the art looks for the landscape but it's a bit hit or miss for me on the leaders.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:Early access im 100% fine with this and monty is the best looking leader so far as well
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
I always enjoy Civ's euphemisms for slavery. "You can turn defeated enemies into builder units" is almost as good as Civ III's "Rushing a building will decrease your population as unhappy citizens leave your city"
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:I always enjoy Civ's euphemisms for slavery. "You can turn defeated enemies into builder units" is almost as good as Civ III's "Rushing a building will decrease your population as unhappy citizens leave your city" Brings to mind Call to Power. When you switched to Fascism, every city would lose two points of population as certain elements of society were... dealt with, by the new regime.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:Huh, that's +2 flat combat per luxury, that can scale into a nasty combat edge in the early-mid game, especially if you can pull off some good diplomacy. I think its only a +1 per luxury. At the beginning of the video, it shows a unit with a +1 bonus from luxuries, and then a +2 bonus after the Builder improves the second luxury. Also keep in mind that unit combat numbers seem to be significantly higher in Civ VI - the Eagle Warrior shown there has a base strength of 28. So +1 or +2 to that is nice, but not particularly huge.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
Wasn't it pretty explicit in Civ4, with the slavery civic being straight up described as "sacrifice some population for a production boost"?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:Brings to mind Call to Power. When you switched to Fascism, every city would lose two points of population as certain elements of society were... dealt with, by the new regime. Civ III expansions did that too, although it also used the "unhappy people fleeing" excuse Kassad posted:Wasn't it pretty explicit in Civ4, with the slavery civic being straight up described as "sacrifice some population for a production boost"? Yeah Civ 4 explicitly had slavery as a civic to sacrifice population for production
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
For someone who played it, what's the general consensus on Call to Power? I remember a friend playing it ages ago when we where kids, but I personally skipped it. Ie compare it to 2/alpha/3/etc?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
Serephina posted:For someone who played it, what's the general consensus on Call to Power? I remember a friend playing it ages ago when we where kids, but I personally skipped it. Ie compare it to 2/alpha/3/etc? Call to Power is a weird little game - something on the order of Civ 2.5, and it plays with a lot of interesting concepts and systems that haven't shown up anywhere else in the series. One of the big divergences from the normal pattern is that it goes well past the information age like other games in the franchise and goes straight on into sci-fi territory with space cities, underwater cities, orbital drops, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
So technically the first time the Aztecs aren't included in the vanilla release, although given they're free for all owners (if on a 90-day delay for first day purchasers) it's more of a semantic difference. Civ V had Babylon as a pre-order bonus (that was paid DLC afterwards) and Mongolia (free DLC without a time lockout - but a month after release). And for another observation, Montezuma I is the first revealed leader to be returning from Civ V (though obviously Gandhi's coming). Kassad posted:Wasn't it pretty explicit in Civ4, with the slavery civic being straight up described as "sacrifice some population for a production boost"? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:Brings to mind Call to Power. When you switched to Fascism, every city would lose two points of population as certain elements of society were... dealt with, by the new regime.  Incidentally, I remember a poster in an old thread (possibly one of the early Civ 5 threads) pointing out that there might be a rather sinister reason why the population of a captured city halves upon its conquest: some early empires had a nasty habit of executing all the men in the occupied city
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
Blackshirts were a unique unit available to fascist governments in that game, too. IIRC there were a few others. Fundamentalist governments could create missionaries and their modern era upgrade, the televangelist. Ecotopia governments (radical left-wing ultra-environmentalism, it was the 90s) could get eco-terrorists and this little gem.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
Serephina posted:For someone who played it, what's the general consensus on Call to Power? I remember a friend playing it ages ago when we where kids, but I personally skipped it. Ie compare it to 2/alpha/3/etc? I liked it then, but I'm pretty sure it was crap. What was great about it though was that they denied themselves nothing. Every single idea they put up on the whiteboard went into the game. It was a glorious mess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
So does slavery just mean human sacrifice?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Jay Rust posted:So does slavery just mean human sacrifice? Well, human sacrifice doesn't help you build farms and roads, does it? It's pretty much just working people to death, AKA slavery.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
Well sure it does, if you offer them to the gods of farms and roads.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
However, while talking about Call to Power, the game also had some pretty neat ideas that I'd love to see reused. Once you got to settling underwater cities, you could build undersea tunnels to let non-sea units travel underwater without needing a transport unit and at great speed - they'd even link up directly with magrails on land. However, if you pillaged a tunnel it would flood the network destroying all tunnels not part of a city and drowning any land units caught in the tunnels. Call to Power also had the best tile improvement system I've ever seen in a Civilization game: it's managed empire-wide. You have cities produce Public Works, which is added to a global Public Works pool which you then spend to construct tile improvements anywhere in your empire. You could settle a new city and keep it producing units or buildings while a city back in the core of the empire builds public works to establish all the infrastructure around the new city.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
These Aztecs look fun as hell and also possibly the worst early neighbor to have in the history of the franchise. Monty basically gets a bonus for not producing builders. Every eagle warrior who kills one of your units transfers directly to a gigantic, murder generating city right next to you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Rexides posted:I was just fine with the other leader models shown so far, but I will definitely miss Civ 5 Monty. He looked absolutely mental! I was just thinking while it's a nice design, you're going to be incredibly hard pressed to beat 5's "Insane man with crazy eyes standing behind a huge fire." Like I want civ 5 monty in every game because he looks legit amazing. I also miss his gigantic hat. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Jul 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
I'm really digging how smoothly integrated all the civ's uniques seem to be. You get 5 separate things and they all work together fluidly to make an almost wholly unique method of play. At least so far they do, it's possible we'll get another Indonesia at some point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 02:02 |
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I was just thinking while it's a nice design, you're going to be incredibly hard pressed to beat 5's "Insane man with crazy eyes standing behind a huge fire." The shimmering flame effect as he crazily gazes over his fire thing is a complete FPS killer. In this sense Monty is the true worst enemy in Civ because that drat effect used to make my crappy laptop crash and or overheat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 20:55
|
|
