|
What's the best way to go for a science victory? One spaceport, and build all the projects in one city? Or spread it out?
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 03:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 21:34 |
|
|
Peas and Rice posted:What's the best way to go for a science victory? One spaceport, and build all the projects in one city? Or spread it out? 3 spaceports in high production cities are the most you'll need. The satellite and moon lander have to be built in order, and they have to both be done before the Mars ones unlock. But then you can do the three Mars projects at the same time in separate cities.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
El Disco posted:3 spaceports in high production cities are the most you'll need. The satellite and moon lander have to be built in order, and they have to both be done before the Mars ones unlock. But then you can do the three Mars projects at the same time in separate cities. That's pretty much how I did it. Also make sure the cities with spaceports are boosted by as many industrial districts as possible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
Nukes are so much fun to use. BOOOOOOOOM!
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
I know I'm an rear end in a top hat for wading in here and asking this, but is this substantially better than Civ 5? I know the near universal opinion of Beyond Earth was that it sucked, but wht's the major improvements of Civ 6 over 5? I can't seem to find any clear cut reviews that talk about it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
I really hate the religious victory. I'd turn it off but it's one of the only ways the AI has the ability to win with. I think religion should be important and impact your Civ but spamming missionaries and apostles is boring. Would much rather see an "Economic Victory" added to the game. Control a certain percent of all the gold and you win.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
Niwrad posted:I really hate the religious victory. I'd turn it off but it's one of the only ways the AI has the ability to win with. I think religion should be important and impact your Civ but spamming missionaries and apostles is boring. Would much rather see an "Economic Victory" added to the game. Control a certain percent of all the gold and you win. That'd just mean certain AIs would get mad at you for ever trading, and enough of the game is locked off behind that already. E: "That" being Agendas, not trading.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
AlphaKretin posted:That'd just mean certain AIs would get mad at you for ever trading, and enough of the game is locked off behind that already. E: "That" being Agendas, not trading. Very true. Has there been any word about the first patch? While there are some systemic issues, I do think balancing the game a bit and some tweaks to the AI could make it much more enjoyable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 05:26
|
|
|
gfsincere posted:I know I'm an rear end in a top hat for wading in here and asking this, but is this substantially better than Civ 5? I know the near universal opinion of Beyond Earth was that it sucked, but wht's the major improvements of Civ 6 over 5? I can't seem to find any clear cut reviews that talk about it. It will be better once they patch it up. Right now I'd still recommend 5 over 6.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 05:41
|
|
|
CAPTAIN CAPSLOCK posted:It will be better once they patch it up. Right now I'd still recommend 5 over 6. Well that's disappointing to hear. I guess I'll wait for a major patch or expansion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 05:44
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 05:51
|
|
|
It'd be nice if there were prompts to say when someone else is getting close to winning. I just lost because I, as Mvemba, spread religions around my city. I figured some bonuses are better than no bonuses. I made a huge mistake.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 05:57
|
|
|
gfsincere posted:Well that's disappointing to hear. It's by no means a bad game, but there are some baffling design choices like the UI, terrible diplomacy system or just lacking functionality the other games already had(trade route / spying automation, build queues, etc). The base is there for a good game they just need to fix it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 06:03
|
|
|
CAPTAIN CAPSLOCK posted:It's by no means a bad game, but there are some baffling design choices like the UI, terrible diplomacy system or just lacking functionality the other games already had(trade route / spying automation, build queues, etc). Basically this. It's a very solid civ, most solid release civ too. It's just got a horrible UI and needs a bug/QoL pass or five.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 07:05
|
|
|
Ugh the AI is so atrocious at combat. I just rolled an immortal game with brazil by just building dudes and scooting them to the nearest city, repeating till victory. I'm not a very good civ player, but the AI just shuffles their units back and forth letting ranged pick them off forever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 07:31
|
|
|
At the very least, the AI seems to possibly understand what the Science victory entails. I went for that victory last night, and as soon as I started prepping for Mars I had a flood of spies from multiple nations constantly trying (and sometimes succeeding) in breaking the buildings in my Industrial Zones.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 07:39
|
|
|
gfsincere posted:I know I'm an rear end in a top hat for wading in here and asking this, but is this substantially better than Civ 5? I know the near universal opinion of Beyond Earth was that it sucked, but wht's the major improvements of Civ 6 over 5? I can't seem to find any clear cut reviews that talk about it. It's different enough from V that if you are looking for a twist on things, it is certainly worth playing, and I've enjoyed my time with it so far, complaints notwithstanding. But if you haven't put 500 hours into Civ V yet you might as well start there
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 08:57
|
|
|
I played an online match with a friend and some AI, we never seem to start on the same continent and I always seem to be the one who has to deal with more AI. We've dropped a few games due to out-of-sync/crash issues, but finally got one finished tonight. I had a tough time of it and got religion rushed and then fell behind in science and culture. So apparently when somebody else wins you just get a video of your cities in ruins and then a screen that says that you lost? They couldn't give you any more information than that? Nothing says who won instead or how, the best you get is a different tab with some line graphs. I had to ask my friend to know that he won a tourism victory. I don't think there was even one of those things where it shows the whole map in a timelapse. Also, am I alone in wishing for a checkbox to hide the army icons like you would the resource icons? There isn't one, is there?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 10:25
|
|
|
Has anyone actually lost a game on anything that isn't Diety? I'm not a skilled Civ player and there hasn't been much of a challenge outside the first couple games when I was learning the nuances.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 13:30
|
|
|
Niwrad posted:Has anyone actually lost a game on anything that isn't Diety? I'm not a skilled Civ player and there hasn't been much of a challenge outside the first couple games when I was learning the nuances. There's a few times I've started and had the AI rush me with a very large force at JUST the wrong time. Maybe twice. Five warriors turn up and a bunch of barbarian horsemen and I get womped.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
Niwrad posted:Has anyone actually lost a game on anything that isn't Diety? I'm not a skilled Civ player and there hasn't been much of a challenge outside the first couple games when I was learning the nuances. Seconding Taear. I've been rushed down a couple of times in the first 20 turns or so. I completely agree about the difficulty though, I won my first Deity game last night and I have never been anywhere close to Deity in any previous civ game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
Taear posted:There's a few times I've started and had the AI rush me with a very large force at JUST the wrong time. Maybe twice. Every time I've left a game, it has involved barbarian horsemen/archers. You can pretty much murder infinity AI controlled units with a warrior and a slinger or two near your city.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
Fossilized Rappy posted:At the very least, the AI seems to possibly understand what the Science victory entails. I went for that victory last night, and as soon as I started prepping for Mars I had a flood of spies from multiple nations constantly trying (and sometimes succeeding) in breaking the buildings in my Industrial Zones. They do that anyway. Their favorite missions seem to be siphon funds and sabotage industrial zone, with the occasional steal tech boost if they're behind. Incidentally if you sabotage the AI's spaceports they never seem to repair them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
I'm currently playing a game on Immortal as Rome. After finding and Archer rushing France who spawned next to me I've since just sat back on my laurels (heh: ) and focused on building myself up. My next two neighbors are Norway and Egypt. Egypt was kept happy though most of the game by my large standing army and Norway from my building two galleys. England and America are the other two civs who I've been more or less neutral with and traded luxuries with. While I could be expanding on my side of Pangea even more I feel like it would be more trouble than it's worth and so now I'm just coasting towards a science victory, as I've already nabbed Korolev, Von Braun and Sagan, and also have 3 citites with +100 production before trade routes. So once I just the research done I can just rush everything easily.After this game I think I'll uninstall as while there are a bunch of problems with this game, I really can't be doing the "just one more turn" thing until 3-4am. Really I feel at this point that Civ as a series needs a rehaul, rather than iteration of it's core mechanics. The AI can't fight wars which removes a huge part of the tension of playing it. If you set out to attack an enemy on standard speed, by the time you have produced and assembled your army you've got to upgrade your units again. The change in unit movement makes traffic jams a nearly constant occurrence. Unless you go a full cavalry army, of which you can't anyway as you need to have siege units to take cities so what's the point if you still have to wait for them? I've disabled the Cultural and religious victories on my games because Cultural has the same problem of the diplomatic in Civ5, that a player on the other side of the world can just game over you with no real way to retaliate because moving an army over to kick them down is sometimes next to impossible, especially if other civs are in the way. Religious is disabled because I find the religious warfare to just be an annoying chore and again, the fact that another player can convert a bunch of other players and there isn't much you can do about it if you aren't also pulling for religious is to eliminate them. Both types to me aren't that fun to play against, or satisfying to win with. My first game as Peter the great was a cultural one and it was just "eh, I guess".
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:Every time I've left a game, it has involved barbarian horsemen/archers. You can pretty much murder infinity AI controlled units with a warrior and a slinger or two near your city. Yea it's the combo of the two that gets me. It's fine if it's just one. Does anyone know how I can make a hotseat game into a normal multiplayer one or visa versa? Where I need to put the files and where the saves actually live!
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:Really I feel at this point that Civ as a series needs a rehaul, rather than iteration of it's core mechanics. The AI can't fight wars which removes a huge part of the tension of playing it. If you set out to attack an enemy on standard speed, by the time you have produced and assembled your army you've got to upgrade your units again. The change in unit movement makes traffic jams a nearly constant occurrence. Unless you go a full cavalry army, of which you can't anyway as you need to have siege units to take cities so what's the point if you still have to wait for them? I will once again point out that the primary problem here is one unit per tile, it hampers the AI and makes movement a bitch. Civ doesn't need an "overhaul" it just needs an abandonment of a failed concept. It won't happen though because V was insanely successful and VI is also a very good game despite the problems.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
Niwrad posted:Has anyone actually lost a game on anything that isn't Diety? I'm not a skilled Civ player and there hasn't been much of a challenge outside the first couple games when I was learning the nuances. The AI is very easy, even on diety. At some point in the early game you go alright I've got, 5 archers a spearman and I'm researching swordsman, time to conquer the world. At that point you just walk over the nearest ai and take their 6-8 cities and use that production to take out the rest of your continent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:I will once again point out that the primary problem here is one unit per tile, it hampers the AI and makes movement a bitch. Civ doesn't need an "overhaul" it just needs an abandonment of a failed concept. It won't happen though because V was insanely successful and VI is also a very good game despite the problems. Stop trying to make doomstacks happen again. They're not gonna happen again. The actual problem with 1UPT is that the AI's unit commands are still generated randomly; it needs a decision tree that prioritizes the sorts of things a human would prioritize. (e.g. it should prioritize attacking over movement when near foes. This alone would probably make it less poo poo at war.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
Aerdan posted:Stop trying to make doomstacks happen again. They're not gonna happen again. This assumes the only options are "doomstacks" and "one unit per tile", which is a false assumption to begin with. They're already trying to break the mold with "support units". They just haven't taken it far enough, there aren't very many support units and corps/armies are a half-baked concept. And there's no good reason why your military units can't share a tile with civilian units from a non-hostile Civ, or vice versa. As for your statements on the AI, have you actually looked into the AI coding to confirm this? Because their tactical behavior seems like it's based on decisions, the decisions just don't make sense. It seems to me that they listened to people who complained that the AI in V was suicidal with its units and would run in wave after wave to be demolished by the human player, such that the AI is now incredibly timid and retreats units about to die and refuses to attack cities in most situations. Magil Zeal fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Nov 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
DAD LOST MY IPOD posted:Nukes are so much fun to use. BOOOOOOOOM! My first modern Era war was a nuclear war and my units kept taking damage and I thought, "gently caress I didn't bring AA to defend against their aircraft." It wasn't until those died too that I noticed the green specs and remembered about radiation. It is shown much clearer on the strategic view, at least with my settings. Also I'm dumb.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
uPen posted:The AI is very easy, even on diety. At some point in the early game you go alright I've got, 5 archers a spearman and I'm researching swordsman, time to conquer the world. At that point you just walk over the nearest ai and take their 6-8 cities and use that production to take out the rest of your continent. It's funny that with V everyone complained the only way the AI could compete was with massive bonuses, starting with two warriors and an extra settler. In VI deity AI starts with 2 extra settlers and 8(!) warriors, and it's utterly hopeless to do anything with it. Edit: And they spawn a free builder when they settle a city. Lol way to go steve fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Nov 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
way to go steve posted:It's funny that with V everyone complained the only way the AI could compete was with massive bonuses, starting with two warriors and an extra settler. In VI deity AI starts with 2 extra settlers and 8(!) warriors, and it's utterly hopeless to do anything with it. That's appalling. They basically knew their AI just straight up can't play, and gave it such unbelievable structural advantages that they hoped it would put up a fight anyway. And it still can't. The AI can't even do basic tasks like properly expand, maintain an army, or execute wars that make a shred of sense. It's a joke, even by the standards of Civ AI. edit: the AI even gets a combat bonus just for being AI, so its units are slightly better Periodiko fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Nov 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:That's appalling. They basically knew their AI just straight up can't play, and gave it such unbelievable structural advantages that they hoped it would put up a fight anyway. It's deity. I'm not sure the hardest difficulty level, 4 levels above "normal", can be fairly characterised as appallingly, unbelievably asymmetric 
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
Deity's always had ridiculous bonuses, this isn't some new thing. Difference is deity is winnable now without having to know everything about the game and which systems you have to break to exploit the CPU.Magil Zeal posted:As for your statements on the AI, have you actually looked into the AI coding to confirm this? Because their tactical behavior seems like it's based on decisions, the decisions just don't make sense. It seems to me that they listened to people who complained that the AI in V was suicidal with its units and would run in wave after wave to be demolished by the human player, such that the AI is now incredibly timid and retreats units about to die and refuses to attack cities in most situations. Might help if ranged units could share spaces with melee units, or if units could sacrifice themselves to heal a similar adjacent unit without eating the healed unit's movement points. Or maybe even just allow corps/armies to form immediately (but you have to build the units one by one), kinda like CivRev.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Germany attacked me out of nowhere. They had 8 heavy chariots and four catapults. I was in the industrial age - the chariots were oneshotted by my city which fought them all off alone. Why can't the AI loving upgrade, it just doesn't make sense.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
Taear posted:Germany attacked me out of nowhere. They had 8 heavy chariots and four catapults. I was in the industrial age - the chariots were oneshotted by my city which fought them all off alone. The barbarians certainly seem to be able to. I've had several games where barbarian warriors have moved into the fog of war one turn, and had barbarian horseman ride out of the fog the next turn to stomp my lovely little warriors and archers to death.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Taear posted:Germany attacked me out of nowhere. They had 8 heavy chariots and four catapults. I was in the industrial age - the chariots were oneshotted by my city which fought them all off alone. The first official AI patch will give them double the chariots and double the catapults.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Yeah, like with the AI talk here, maybe I can understand how diplomacy is super complicated and hard to make work right, but it seems like seeking resources and upgrading units would be more straightforward
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
I do think it's been pointed out that that maybe the strategic resources being necessary for the mainline units and also appearing at a ridiculously low rate has an effect on the AI's military performance.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 21:34 |
|
|
Gimnbo posted:I do think it's been pointed out that that maybe the strategic resources being necessary for the mainline units and also appearing at a ridiculously low rate has an effect on the AI's military performance. It has but they don't make cavalry and DO make knights. They also make mechanised infantry but I very rarely see them with normal infantry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 21:05
|
|