|
The White Dragon posted:iirc vassal states is from warlords either way, they really suck
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:00 |
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:Science has always been overpowered, all the way since Civ 1, and there really is no way to make it otherwise. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Did Civ ever play around with getting technology through conquering cities aside from one Civ bonus in 5? That's at least another way to get econ and military based civilizations a step up on their science game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:Did Civ ever play around with getting technology through conquering cities aside from one Civ bonus in 5? That's at least another way to get econ and military based civilizations a step up on their science game. Yeah, in civ 2 each time you conquered a city you got a tech from its owner.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
IIRC, Civ1 had tech spoils as well.Prav posted:either way, they really suck Vassals allow that cool end-game cold war to happen where declaring war on one person causes the entire world to escalate into WW3. End game civ4 owns.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
Wasn't the issue with the vassals that you, or the AI, could just diplovassal another civ? Vassalage by conquest is perfectly fine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
I wanna play Civ but Civ V barely runs on this lovely laptop and Steam won't even download Civ VI 
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 23:37
|
|
|
Keiya posted:I wanna play Civ but Civ V barely runs on this lovely laptop and Steam won't even download Civ VI Fortunately there are numbers smaller than 5.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
Has the CQUI mod been updated yet? The game is a bit of a chore without it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 02:39
|
|
|
Gort posted:Yeah, in civ 2 each time you conquered a city you got a tech from its owner. ate poo poo on live tv posted:IIRC, Civ1 had tech spoils as well. To be clear, Civ 2 is just Civ 1 with an isometric map and a few relatively minor additions. I know in Civ 1 a fun way to play was to go max gold/min science once you hit Writing and spam diplomats. Bring your diplorush up to a city belonging to an enemy more advanced than you, use a diplomat to steal a technology, use another diplomat to subvert the city and get another technology. Then let the AI take it back, season to taste. Nothing in any Civ game has ever been more hilariously overpowered than Civ 1 diplomats with plenty of cash to back them up. Eric the Mauve fucked around with this message at 03:24 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 03:22
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:To be clear, Civ 2 is just Civ 1 with an isometric map and a few relatively minor additions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 03:52
|
|
|
Poil posted:Wasn't the issue with the vassals that you, or the AI, could just diplovassal another civ? Vassalage by conquest is perfectly fine. It's more let's say you're warring with someone, then as soon as they know they can't win, they instantly become a vassal to another civ, pretty much making you do a forced peace dec (at best) or making you go to war with a strong Civ. Pretty much the only way you can get around it is checking the peace deals every turn and seeing if they'll capitulate. I guess you'd fix it by only allowing diplovassal to happen if the civ that wants to become a vassal isn't at war with anyone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 08:46
|
|
|
Yeah, it was pretty lovely when you were about to conquer Luxembourg and then suddenly you were at war with the USSR. (and also Luxembourg)
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 08:51
|
|
|
Chucat posted:It's more let's say you're warring with someone, then as soon as they know they can't win, they instantly become a vassal to another civ, pretty much making you do a forced peace dec (at best) or making you go to war with a strong Civ. Pretty much the only way you can get around it is checking the peace deals every turn and seeing if they'll capitulate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 09:24
|
|
|
Asshurbanipal also had an ability to steal tech in Civ V, too bad he wasn't that impressive except for that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 09:58
|
|
|
Gort posted:Yeah, it was pretty lovely when you were about to conquer Luxembourg and then suddenly you were at war with the USSR. (and also Luxembourg) How dare they not let me steamroll them!
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 13:52
|
|
|
Sperglord Firecock posted:Asshurbanipal also had an ability to steal tech in Civ V, too bad he wasn't that impressive except for that. Also Aki-Zeta back in Alpha Centauri, on top of a native research bonus.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 13:54
|
|
|
homullus posted:How dare they not let me steamroll them! Pretty much, yeah. It had a similar feeling to early Civ 6 where any form of conquest lead to every other civ declaring war on you due to overwhelming warmonger diplomatic penalties regardless of whether declaring that war would actually make them more likely to win the game. It didn't feel like the AI properly considered the wars it would end up in when accepting vassalage requests, feeling instead like the game itself was loving with the human player.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:01
|
|
|
Glidergun posted:Fortunately there are numbers smaller than 5. I never took to Civ IV. It's just not nearly as fun as 5 or 6.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:07
|
|
|
Keiya posted:I never took to Civ IV. It's just not nearly as fun as 5 or 6. every Civ is sacred
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
homullus posted:How dare they not let me steamroll them! It's Not Fun. It's basically the game cockblocking you, even more so if they're the civ that declares war on you in the first place, you manage to turn it around and start carving through them and then the game just holds up a loving stop sign. It's not even what you're suggesting because if said civ bribed another, bigger civ into war with you then that's loving cool as poo poo. Someone correct me here, but Civs in 4 don't tend to actively ask for peace which is also where the problem comes from. Shaka could be ready to become your vassal, give you 2 cities and a bunch of techs/gold and a map if you ask him and go through it, but he'll never just pop up and say it, which is another issue. Chucat fucked around with this message at 14:46 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:40
|
|
|
Keiya posted:I never took to Civ IV. It's just not nearly as fun as 5 or 6. I just started replaying Civ IV for the first time in a *really* long time and I'm actually amazed at how... well, much better I find it to be honest. Different strokes I guess, but even with some of IV's annoyances (of which there are quite a few) I was completely engrossed in it in a way that neither V or VI does for me. One thing that I think is a bit interesting is that I was so happy when V switched to 1 unit per tile. But now I'm like... wow, stacking is actully great. And the world map feel so much more free and "airy" to move around on. Another thing that I really like about IV compared to VI (been a while since I played V now so can't quite remember) is how it really feels like you're moving through eras more. The game "unfolds" much more I think, while VI really feels like you're sort of zipping through the timeline. I dunno, I think if they ever "fix" VI so that what's in there actually works, I would rank it very highly because I like quite a lot of the mechanical changes. But yeah, IV is easily the best iteration for me and with no real competition I have to say.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:46
|
|
|
Chucat posted:It's Not Fun. I thought "I am losing this war, I will be your vassal if you join me in fighting the country that's attacking me" was bribery
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:47
|
|
|
(I have never played IV) If you squint at it, sure, 'bribing' someone with your everlasting servitude could be considered that, but it makes more sense from their perspective just to bribe YOU to stop murdering them, and keep their autonomy. Civ5 was good (or at least not-terrible) at that; when you've carved your way into their capital, usually a turn or two after breaking their armies, they'll suddenly offer your the earth just to get off their back. Which makes sense! I could not imagine insta-vassalage to a 3rd party, that sounds so obnoxious. The only proper 4X game I've played with vassals was Stellaris, which was awful in more ways than I count, but it got the asymmetric empires thing down pat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
Serephina posted:(I have never played IV) People do not want to be bribed to stop murdering. In fact, the thread consensus is that warmonger penalties for refusing peace overtures should be weak or not there at all, "because they started it."
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 15:05
|
|
|
There's difference between a carrot and a stick! Also the "Bribe to stop murdering someone" can only come after you've already started the murdering, effectively rewarding you for being a sociopath, with a satisfying (optional!) payoff at the end. Compared to warmongering... which just shits on you for being in a fight, win or lose. Seriously it's not comparable!
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
Serephina posted:There's difference between a carrot and a stick! Also the "Bribe to stop murdering someone" can only come after you've already started the murdering, effectively rewarding you for being a sociopath, with a satisfying (optional!) payoff at the end. Compared to warmongering... which just shits on you for being in a fight, win or lose. Seriously it's not comparable! Are we talking about the same thing? We might not be. AI Civ starts war with player > player turns the tide of war against AI civ. Players will, unless acted on by another game mechanic (their own economy/happiness, a war on another front, warmongering penalties, vassalage), simply wipe out the opposing civ, and will do so with decreasing challenge as that civ gets weaker and weaker. Mechanical brakes on this -- increases in difficulty -- such as vassalage for the desperately losing, warmongering penalties representing international disapproval for rebuffed peace overtures, and war weariness, are labeled unfun, no matter how realistic they are. Many Civ fans want ahistorical, unrealistic rules for themselves, while AIs are to be bound by historicity and realism, and I just don't think that's possible when those two rulesets engage with each other in war.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 15:40
|
|
|
homullus posted:I thought "I am losing this war, I will be your vassal if you join me in fighting the country that's attacking me" was bribery Okay I'll explain this slowly. Me: Ethiopia, 2nd in power ranking Enemy: England, was 1st but is now loving 5th or something. 3rd party: Rome, 1st in power. If England wardecs me and attacks me and I start rolling them. They could give Rome a large sum of money (and maybe a tech or two, but nothing else) to declare war on me, this is a bribe. This will only work if: - England has a bunch of money - Rome has at least a decent relationship with England. - Rome DOESN'T like me enough to be willing to get bribed into war against me, generally this means if I'm pleased with them I'll normally be good. (Catherine can get bribed in at Friendly because she's a loving psychopath) - Rome doesn't think it's suicide to attack me. With Vassal States, at any loving point once the AI 'gives up', it can just go to Rome and go "Please let me become your vassal." Prior relationships have little to nothing to do with it, if you don't have BUG mod installed you won't be updated on when it can happen unless you go to the diplomacy screen every turn and see if the AI will be willing to sign peace with you and see what they want. Even if you have BUG mod installed the game just goes "Yo England will capitulate". My counterplay is pretty much to end the war on unfavorable terms to me before the clock runs down and the Civ just vassalizes on the interturn and you're sitting there going "Why the gently caress am I at peace? Oh it's because I forgot to turn off vassal states." Chucat fucked around with this message at 16:18 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
Leinadi posted:Another thing that I really like about IV compared to VI (been a while since I played V now so can't quite remember) is how it really feels like you're moving through eras more. The game "unfolds" much more I think, while VI really feels like you're sort of zipping through the timeline. I always like that as the game goes on the map eventually gets painted in loads of colours. There's no empty land other than at the polar caps. Civ5 and Civ6 don't do this and there's always massive gaps in everyone's territory. It's ugly and doesn't feel as real to me. I always loved trading maps with a civ on another continent and having the map all open up to me as well. That now only happens with satellites.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
homullus posted:every Civ is sacred except 3. gently caress 3.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
Taear posted:I always like that as the game goes on the map eventually gets painted in loads of colours. There's no empty land other than at the polar caps.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Poil posted:But the AI loves to spam incredible lovely cities in those gaps as the game goes on, doesn't it? Some AI will, Russia especially. Others don't ever bother. The last game I finished was an Islands game and there were so many totally empty islands that had a reasonable amount of stuff on. I know Islands is sort of an exception as the AI doesn't know what to do with them but it's the same on Pangea or Fractal or whatever as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
I dunno about 6, but in 5 Hiawatha and Kamehameha will not rest until they have covered every single tile in the world with their color. If there's one single unclaimed tile of bare tundra right near the south pole, Hiawatha will settle it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:I dunno about 6 in civ 6 if you have a two-tile-small inland void in your empire and sign open borders with anyone, they will psychically beeline there and poo poo a city into it
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
Bring back culture pressure from Civ IV. I absolutely loved the culture mongers run (win domination victory with an "always peace" setting).
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
PYDT stuff: Brother magneto, where you at? Goon Summer misses you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Gort posted:Yeah, it was pretty lovely when you were about to conquer Luxembourg and then suddenly you were at war with the USSR. (and also Luxembourg) That was actually great. It was annoying true, but it encouraged your wars to be decisive and quick. Also iirc you had a 10 turn window where they couldn't do that. With a cassis belli system (the other civ that was doing the vasselization would get punished for interfering too much) and the ability to divide up the losing civs cities, it would be a perfect system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
OperaMouse posted:Bring back culture pressure from Civ IV. I absolutely loved the culture mongers run (win domination victory with an "always peace" setting). This was also a good thing to keep your borders intact and discourage civs from settling in your territory. Civ4 owns qtiyd.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
Wasn't there supposed to be another DLC? Something about an Asian civ, if I recall correctly? It has been eerily quiet recently...
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2017 09:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:00 |
|
|
Radio silence until it's actually a window of release has been standard operation protocol for Firaxis for pretty much their whole existence. Even when there's a major expansion involved, there'll generally be a whole lot of nothing and then out of the blue, an announcement, media package, and a countdown trickle of knowledge until it goes gold.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2017 10:35
|
|
