|
Gort posted:I've always thought Civ 1 had the best stacking mechanics. You can stack infinitely and the best defender defends the stack, but if the defender is killed the whole stack is wiped out. No annoying traffic jams in peacetime, and the system encourages you not to stack without mandating it. You can also do stuff like escorting your catapult with a spearman to protect it from cavalry. I always thought that was too punishing--and collateral damage was a reasonable compromise. If they expanded on the concepts introduced in IV instead of scrapping it altogether for 1UPT I think a really neat combat system would have evolved. SlothBear posted:Welp now I'm being attacked by a friendly civ and I can't attack them back. I've heard of this bug but never experienced it. It's like how you can nuke one of your allies without breaking the alliance. No idea why this wasn't a priority fix, I'm guessing not enough reports on it.
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:13 |
|
|
Hi goons, looking at the GMG sale for Civ 6 atm. Can anyone give me a no holds barred run down of things that might piss me off if I buy this game. I get that this is a good game even with typical firaxis paid DLC patches but I really want to know what if any outstanding problems there are in the game. I only say this because some threads are over eager in terms of recommending a game despite big warts that the existing playerbase might already have learned to live with. In short, if I have Civ5 + core DLCs, is there a reason to buy this game. Also is Beyond Earth with Endless Tides at all playable at the moment. Thats on sale too.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
Yeah buy them. They're nice.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
John F Bennett posted:Who here builds forts and why do you? I've never done it and it seems to me that the tech should come much earlier. Ive only done it like twice, each time on a place that was 1 or 2 tiles wide with a huge funnel to it. Thats about it.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
I don't particularly rate Civ 6 and Beyond Earth. Might be worth it on sale - both have demos on Steam, though, play those and make up your own mind.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
MikeC posted:Hi goons, looking at the GMG sale for Civ 6 atm. It's definitely worth $35. Buy it. By the time you get used to districts (which are good) and some other stuff, they'll have hopefully put out an expansion pack that makes some of the dumb AI stuff better.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:I've heard of this bug but never experienced it. It's like how you can nuke one of your allies without breaking the alliance. No idea why this wasn't a priority fix, I'm guessing not enough reports on it. They certianly had enough reports on the barbarian lag and they haven't fixed that either so meh.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
SlothBear posted:They certianly had enough reports on the barbarian lag and they haven't fixed that either so meh. That's one thing that spiked up considerably in the latest update; and will hopefully be addressed in the more recent patch. The other thing (with alliances) has been around since release.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
True enough. On a non-frustrating note I started a new game on a real world starting locations map as England. First time playing as them since really early on and holy god the buffs to harbor are amazing for them. If you have a map where you can get benefit from their melee unit spawning settlers you can really snowball hard. I had 23 traderoutes at the end of the game and was spamming Archaeological Museums and Archaeologists and buying open borders and listening to the world complain about how I was exploiting their culture. Really fun and a different kind of playstyle from normal that uses a lot of stuff you tend to ignore in more vanilla type playthroughs.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 03:41
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:For those whom I may concern, Civ5 complete edition is currently 75% off on GOG. It's actually Civ4 and 3, but thanks for the information anyway, I much prefer games bought from them to the Steam's ones, so I bought it again.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 06:19
|
|
|
Szurumbur posted:It's actually Civ4 and 3, but thanks for the information anyway, I much prefer games bought from them to the Steam's ones, so I bought it again. You're aware that you can connect your Steam account to GOG and get DRM-free versions of (almost) everything that both services carry, right?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 06:26
|
|
|
Ooh, link on where to do that?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 06:39
|
|
|
Serephina posted:Ooh, link on where to do that? https://www.gog.com/connect
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 07:02
|
|
|
Aerdan posted:You're aware that you can connect your Steam account to GOG and get DRM-free versions of (almost) everything that both services carry, right? I wasn't aware of that, but it's too late now anyway. I might make use of that in the future, so thanks!
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 11:37
|
|
|
Aerdan posted:You're aware that you can connect your Steam account to GOG and get DRM-free versions of (almost) everything that both services carry, right? It's only a limited list of games, and doesn't include the CIV series anyway
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
I suggest you guys trying The Test of Time mod. It's quite a nice conversion mod and it has really good basis for some interesting full conversion mod.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 05:37
|
|
|
The legend lives on 
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
Civ6 Deluxe 40% off, Civ6 43% off through GamersGate, plus discounts on other entries in the franchise.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
Me in Goon Game 3 right now
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
so the 'Test Drive' game is done, right? something like 1,000 hours without a turn? can someone remove me from that game or whatever, please
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Efexeye posted:so the 'Test Drive' game is done, right? something like 1,000 hours without a turn? can someone remove me from that game or whatever, please Shoot, I just noticed that. I tried to kick the offender and the site won't let me. you can just go to the site and surrender and you'll leave the game too.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
Peas and Rice posted:Shoot, I just noticed that. I tried to kick the offender and the site won't let me. you can just go to the site and surrender and you'll leave the game too. 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
Is this game good yet? Did they fix the international pariah problem or is that considered a 'feature'?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
Gay Horney posted:Is this game good yet? Did they fix the international pariah problem or is that considered a 'feature'? It was good all along and will never be good, don't bother.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
Peas and Rice posted:Me in Goon Game 3 right now That's been me in the Spring Goon Game for a while now.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:That's been me in the Spring Goon Game for a while now. Explanation: He attacked Alexander and Alexander didn't like it. I recall the moment when I saw Alexander's passing army. The way he stacks bonuses is crazy. Was it +5 for a general, another +5 for having a general (Macedonian ability), and another +10 for Crusader on top of that? Add some support bonuses and experience on top of that. Not an army you want to fight. markus_cz fucked around with this message at 21:30 on May 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
markus_cz posted:Explanation: He attacked Alexander and Alexander didn't like it. I don't think I ever fought him when he was getting the Crusader bonus, but he has been taking the +10 when defending against ranged attackers promotion on things that can get it. Since my forces were primarily Immortals, this has been a big deal. But yeah. Somehow I wound up on a long path where, despite every step seeming to make sense on its own, I wound up somewhere asking myself "what the hell am I doing?" I really should have just attacked one of my other neighbors much earlier and got big (and had a direction I could expand in; I was penned in pretty severely between two other civs, a city-state, and the ocean) instead of doing what I actually did instead. Oh well, something to consider in the future.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 08:26
|
|
|
This sort of ridiculous. (This is old news, so it shouldn't be much of a spoiler.)
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 15:36
|
|
|
So I finally got around to actually playing a few games of this, and uh, is there really any reason to stop expanding? I'm used to Civ 5 where you got four cities and then stopped or your empire would never ever be happy, but here there doesn't really seem to be any significant negatives to expanding, beyond needing slightly more luxury resources and maybe pissing off an AI. Is it even a good idea to keep expanding in the late game? Hell, in my current game where I wasn't really able to get up more than four decent cities, my low city count is actively hampering me because I'm going for a cultural victory and I'm completely out of places to put my great works.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
Mymla posted:So I finally got around to actually playing a few games of this, and uh, is there really any reason to stop expanding? I'm used to Civ 5 where you got four cities and then stopped or your empire would never ever be happy, but here there doesn't really seem to be any significant negatives to expanding, beyond needing slightly more luxury resources and maybe pissing off an AI. Is it even a good idea to keep expanding in the late game? There is never a time where you'd rather have fewer cities than more (so there's nothing like Civ 4's corruption or Civ 5's empire-wide happiness penalties from having many cities), but the cost of settlers increases each time you build one, and the old Civ problem of "Cities I build in the late game don't have long enough to really become useful before the game ends" is still in full swing. So yeah, expand all you can, expansion is really more throttled by "I'd rather have this building/unit/wonder right now than another city" or "I've run out of room to expand into" than by an anti-expansion game mechanic. Note also that the increasing cost of settlers is completely moot if you expand through conquest. I've seen many high-level players advocate initial expansion through conquest of your next-door neighbour, and late-game expansion of building about 8-10 cities yourself and doing all further expansion through conquest. That's mostly because the AI is still pretty bad at combat in this game, though. Gort fucked around with this message at 17:26 on May 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
Gort posted:Note also that the increasing cost of settlers is completely moot if you expand through conquest. I've seen many high-level players advocate initial expansion through conquest of your next-door neighbour, and late-game expansion of building about 8-10 cities yourself and doing all further expansion through conquest. That's mostly because the AI is still pretty bad at combat in this game, though. If anything starting on higher difficulty levels makes the game easier (or at least less tedious) by giving them more settlers to feed you cities quicker.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
They also build your wonders quicker for you.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
Yeah, Civ's always been weird like that. I remember science victories used to come faster on higher difficulties because the AI having more technology made researching their technologies cheaper. And they had more money for you to swindle them out of by selling them resources they don't need. (Horses in the space age? Yes please! Luxuries when I'm at +68 happiness? Shut up and take my money!)
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 17:57
|
|
|
Gort posted:There is never a time where you'd rather have fewer cities than more (so there's nothing like Civ 4's corruption or Civ 5's empire-wide happiness penalties from having many cities), but the cost of settlers increases each time you build one, and the old Civ problem of "Cities I build in the late game don't have long enough to really become useful before the game ends" is still in full swing. Cool, thanks. I'm honestly not sure if I prefer it this way over Civ 5. Sure, being almost completely pigeonholed into building tall wasn't optimal, but it's usually what I prefer anyway since it's less micromanagement of cities and tiles. I guess it's just different, not necessarily better or worse. I think I would've still preferred it if specialists were about as good as they were in Civ 5, that would give at least some incentive to building fewer, taller, cities. As it is, they kinda just feel like "welp, I ran out of tiles to work, I guess you have to work in the factory".
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:That's been me in the Spring Goon Game for a while now. I'm kinda sorta looking at these games as learning how to actually play Civ 6, kind of like my first 2 years of online Civ 5 PBEM were learning how to actually play Civ 5.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
Mymla posted:Cool, thanks. I'm honestly not sure if I prefer it this way over Civ 5. Sure, being almost completely pigeonholed into building tall wasn't optimal, but it's usually what I prefer anyway since it's less micromanagement of cities and tiles. I guess it's just different, not necessarily better or worse. Yeah, I kinda think that Civ 4 got things most correct when it comes to expansion mechanics. In that game you hit a soft-cap mechanic called corruption, which at first effectively meant your income tanked if you went over four or five cities. You then researched courthouses, which made corruption a lot less limiting, and you could go to something like ten cities. There were then police stations and government types like Communism that you could use to allow you to expand more-or-less indefinitely by the end of the game. I liked it a lot more than Civ 5's "four cities is best" mechanics and Civ 6's "expand all you want" stuff. I do think that all Civ games need some kind of "outpost" mechanic where you can whack down some kind of single-tile town because you want those pearls that are just outside of your territory, though.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Maintenance, not Corruption; Corruption was the 2/3 mechanic that meant late and distant cities would produce no Commerce, but never actively drain your global resources, making ICS a no-brainer. Maintenance actually costing you was the game-changer of 4, and yeah, still the best solution.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
Peas and Rice posted:I'm kinda sorta looking at these games as learning how to actually play Civ 6, kind of like my first 2 years of online Civ 5 PBEM were learning how to actually play Civ 5. I'm only in the Spring game, but I have to agree. The AI (while improved) is bad enough you can be sloppy and still win. Against other people the margin for error really is zero. Of course, only getting 1-2 turns/day means I devote considerably more time to going over and double-checking every little thing. 10-15 minutes per turn, usually. markus_cz posted:This sort of ridiculous.  RJ had told me about all these, but it's another thing to see it. Jesus Christ.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
markus_cz posted:This sort of ridiculous. I must be tired, but I'm not getting it.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:13 |
|
|
62 (64 at full health) is a pretty drat strong classical era unit.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 21:38
|
|