|
Kurtofan posted:Pretty sure that's the Pueblo. And it wasn't the leader the Pueblo elders had a problem with, it was the language. Pueblo view their language as sacred, not to be recorded.
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 12:53 |
|
|
I really like that they honoured the request not to include the language- it sucks that no alternative solution was possible though. It would be pretty jarring in the context of a game where all the leaders speak their native language.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
 Tune in ~15 minutes early to hear some Civ VI music.  Also, from Gamescom, the details of Religious Victory have been said- Your religion must be dominant in every civ and city-state in the game; at least 50% of their cities must be following your religion. Apostles convert citizens to your religion, unlock religious beliefs, and may also engage in "theological combat" with other religious units. Missionaries convert citizens, but can only defend in theological combat.  Looks like major adjacency bonus is +2, standard adjacency bonus is +1, and minor adjacency bonus is +½. Also first look at "Specialist (Citizen)" yields? A Shrine in a Holy Site provides +2 faith, +1 Great Prophet points, and +1 Citizen slot  Ruhr Valley is a new world Wonder. +30% Production in the city it's built in, +1 Production for each Mine and Quarry in the city. Must be built adjacent to a river and an Industrial Zone district. There's also a UI feature to click on the selected unit name and open a list of your units that you can scroll through; units that haven't used their turn yet are highlighted, units that have are greyed out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Unless there's been so major retooling in how religion is spread that sounds loving miserable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Theological Combat lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
JVNO posted:I really like that they honoured the request not to include the language- it sucks that no alternative solution was possible though. It would be pretty jarring in the context of a game where all the leaders speak their native language.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:Unless there's been so major retooling in how religion is spread that sounds loving miserable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:Theological Combat My god can beat up your god
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
Civ VI is humanity's perspective from Black & White.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
Raserys posted:Weren't they planning to add the Inuit, but the latter objected to whoever they chose as the leader? I love that people keep tossing this story around and mix in a new native civ in each time
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:I love that people keep tossing this story around and mix in a new native civ in each time This was the case with the Kawahiva.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:Theological Combat Oh man, they stole my idea for a Yugioh Egypt mod
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
Imam used "Issue Fatwa".... it's super effective!!! ... Missionary fainted!!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
Flagrant Abuse posted:All but three. Ramesses in Civ speaks Arabic, when they could've at least used Coptic; Attila speaks Chuvash, when he actually would've spoken either Hunnic or possibly Gothic (the latter of which we at least know what it sounds like and have a few decent speakers); and Gandhi should more accurately be speaking Gujarati, though he at least did know Hindi so it's not as inaccurate as it could be. Interesting- the more you know eh? I wonder if it was laziness, expense, or availability of those language's speakers that caused the disinclusion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
JVNO posted:Interesting- the more you know eh? I wonder if it was laziness, expense, or availability of those language's speakers that caused the disinclusion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
Out of curiosity is Civ 4 Colonization worth playing?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Out of curiosity is Civ 4 Colonization worth playing? It's a revamped version of colonization that's a bit harder but also clunkier. It does have some insane mods and if you get it cheap it's worth trying them out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
Colonization is fun but it suffers from the fact that it's an economic simulator which has a military win condition
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 00:48
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:Colonization is fun but it suffers from the fact that it's an economic simulator which has a military win condition It's a weird dichotomy but it works okay it's just the military win condition takes way too long to actually play out. It does make the game a micromanagement mess.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 00:50
|
|
|
the modding community is not going to have Frederick Barbarossa leading Germany and running around with U-Boats for one second the question is will the Hitlers seeking to fix that outpace the Trumps that obviously would run rampant
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
Gyra_Solune posted:the modding community is not going to have Frederick Barbarossa leading Germany and running around with U-Boats for one second Well, it's really more a question of who comes second after the Equestria civilization mod.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
Hitler should have the blitzkrieg bonus, +50% on attack. This is realistic because
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Hitler should have the blitzkrieg bonus, +50% on attack. This is realistic because Lebensraum bonus for integrating conquered cities by killing off the natives faster, you mean.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
Obviously Hitler should immediately enter a half-duration golden age for surprise declarations of war.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
I would prefer Herman Goering. Gemstone resources give no benefits but increase the number of rings worn by Herr Goering in the diplomacy screen. Actually, speaking of that: Bring Back the palace! Bring Back the Palace! Bring back the Palace!
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
the current Highest-Quality Hitler kind of works, by way of 'he pretty much can't do anything special until you get to Atomic at which point he kind of goes apeshit'. even though GGs giving double attack to infantry is kind of fun, infantry sucks early on where archers and horses rule the day, and generals having the scientist bulb is pretty much wasting a general until you're rather late on (this is why AI Babylon always seems to do really badly, they almost always just expend their free scientist for a one-time boost of like 60 science instead of using it for Academy and surpassing that amount in like 10 turns). but then infantry starts getting easier to use once you get railroads up and running and they're more competent in attacking cities while tanks tear apart standing armies. the AI usually uses them as basically turbo Montezuma, denouncing everyone basically immediately and being a hostile son of a bitch but probably the most powerful way to play them is by being chill early on, amassing a war chest, aid in building up a worldwide rail network, and then just go nuts once your UUs are online of course, heck knows what military strategy is going to be like in VI. i hope it's a lot better! ideally the plan for conquest would be that the bulk of your offense is infantry and horsemen (why do horses suck against cities but bows and arrows don't?) which would make super-early Blitz on them really broken
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Out of curiosity is Civ 4 Colonization worth playing? Whenever I start up Civ 4:Col, I always end up installing the original (GOG version) instead. The mechanics are more or less the same, but the original has a more cohesive artistic direction that I can't play without. Unless you find that slavery mechanics are really important for your verisimilitude, in which case you should get Civ4 :Col with any slavery mod.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 07:02
|
|
|
Thanks for all the civ 4 help. Another thing: how do you reliably build world wonders in cities with poor production? Anything beyond great engineers?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 07:27
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:Obviously Hitler should immediately enter a half-duration golden age for surprise declarations of war. this would unironically be a really fun civ ability to play with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 07:51
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:Thanks for all the civ 4 help. Civ 4? Forest chopping is the way and the light. Anything can be built out of wood.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 08:03
|
|
|
Groke posted:Civ 4? Forest chopping is the way and the light. Anything can be built out of wood. Woodhenge The Great Pyres of Giza The Carving of Liberty Hollywood 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 11:58
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:Woodhenge And the alternative, of course, which is dead people under slavery. The Great Pyramid of Skulls, etc. (Both options show up with Bronze Working which makes that a ridiculously central tech in the early game.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 12:40
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:Woodhenge That one's a real thing too. E: I was thinking of the one at Cahokia, but there's one near Stonehenge too, heh. Groke posted:And the alternative, of course, which is dead people under slavery. The Great Pyramid of Skulls, etc. Real pros have pyramids of wood and skulls. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 12:53
|
|
|
Omnicarus posted:Actually, speaking of that: Bring Back the palace! Bring Back the Palace! Bring back the Palace! This is the one feature I'd most like to see return in a future Civilization game. This and live action advisors.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
Leaders that change with the eras were rad as hell. Unfortunately this game seems to have had a slashed budget for such things, so you just get leaders floating in the void in front of a jpg
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
The new leader portrait styles are an order of magnitude or two more labor intensive to produce than a Civ 3 portrait plus all of its era variants put together. It's a shame about the lack of backgrounds though, but a lot of people had issues with those taking forever to load in Civ 5. Still you'd think they could have something more dynamic than the still image they're going with now yeah
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
I mean the III portraits changing with the era wasn't exactly high-budget but it'd be a ton of work put in for full animated 3D models for a fairly minor effect. I'd rather they not actually put too much of the budget on leaderscreens because a) ultimately it's not that important of a feature and b) I usually set them to just be static images anyway. Besides I much prefer the option of literally just changing leaders (i.e. you go from playing Arminius of the Germanic tribes, to Charlemagne of the Franks, to Barbarossa of the HRE, to Bismarck of Germany, though I suppose you could opt out of doing so if you wanted to keep HRE bonuses through to the endgame) and so I'd rather they put effort into making switching tags and abilities easier for future modders to work with, since in V everyone was hard-loaded into the game and couldn't be changed in the middle of one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
I'd probably be quite happy if they went to still images that updated with era. Games like Endless Space and Stellaris do a lot with a few 2D images, maybe take more leaves from their books.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
I wish they'd refer to the civ's map color whenever I'm in negotiations. It's annoying as hell when there are 3 or 4 different titles for a civ and I have no idea which one the AI want's be to declare war on. Especially in 4 where a civ pops up and says "Declare war on X" but I have no idea if "X" is my trading partner, or someone that I was planning on declaring war on anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 12:53 |
|
|
Koramei posted:The new leader portrait styles are an order of magnitude or two more labor intensive to produce than a Civ 3 portrait plus all of its era variants put together. maybe they also took out the backgrounds for... multiple leaders for each civ
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:50
|
|