|
Civ VI: Fall
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 09:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:09 |
|
|
Civ VI: To follow this thread is to train the mind, the body, and the soul...but where can your people do so?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 15:21
|
|
|
Civ VI: Bitch and Moan
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 15:25
|
|
|
What WOULD be a decent solution for the stacking issue in a Civ 7? Maybe era variable stack limits? Like, at the start of the game you can only stack 3 units per hex, and each era (or certain military techs) increase that by one? Maybe make it so an entire stack fights at once, like Call of Power did, and severely damaged armies retreat a certain number of hexes free? Maybe pops up a little combat resolution box like a Paradox games where your melee, ranged, cavalry units form up and is quickly resolved.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 15:43
|
|
|
Civilization VI- Rise and Fall: What Wat with Angkor Wat in Angkor Wat?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 15:53
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:What WOULD be a decent solution for the stacking issue in a Civ 7? Maybe era variable stack limits? I was a fan of Civ 1's system, where you could stack infinitely and the best defender would defend. However, if you lost the defender, you lost everything in the stack. That was back in the days where every combat resulted in a dead unit, though, so I'd say the stacking for Civ 7 should be: 1. Stack as many units as you like in a tile 2. The best defending unit defends if the stack is attacked (so a spearman would fight an enemy horseman before a swordsman would, for example) 3. The entire stack takes the damage the defending unit takes (so if the spearman takes 50 damage from the attacking horseman, the three catapults it's stacked with all take 50 damage each) 4. If the defending unit is destroyed, the entire stack is wiped out This way you'll never be prevented from moving units around during peacetime due to stacking. No traffic jams on roads or having to leave spare units all over the place. There will also be more interesting strategic choices when terrain is limited. Do I meatgrinder my troops through a narrow front a couple at a time and hope to wear the enemy down, or do I stack everyone and hope that they don't get crushed by a counterattack?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 15:54
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:What WOULD be a decent solution for the stacking issue in a Civ 7? Maybe era variable stack limits? Endless Legend does it based on a limit that increases with certain technologies. I still want a game that expands on what Kohan did all those years ago and let you create little parties so units have support functions in them. The real answer is better AI.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 15:54
|
|
|
Civ VI's failings are in its UI and AI, and the expansion doesn't look set to improve either very much. Thankfully (some bugs aside) its mechanics are actually good which is more than Civ V can say frankly.Fintilgin posted:What WOULD be a decent solution for the stacking issue in a Civ 7? Maybe era variable stack limits? Era-variable stack limits is a good start, with an emphasis on combined arms. I don't see the appeal in having entire stacks fight at once though. I would like individual unit combat roles to be more emphasized, with a series of checks and balances (again, to emphasize combined arms), and that seems incompatible with the "stack is one big unit" approach.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 15:57
|
|
|
First Look at the Mapuche. They have some interesting abilities. Not entirely sure what to make of them yet, but they seem like they have options on how you can play them. I like them at first glance, at least.
Roland Jones fucked around with this message at 16:13 on Jan 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 16:09
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:The real answer is better AI. Nah, this is a non-answer. Games always have flawed AIs - good design consists of making a game that your AI can play, not making a game and then hoping the AI you have can play it. Back when the Total War games were getting slammed for having terrible AI, they had a real problem with sieges. Armies would attack your castles, then just walk back and forward in front of the walls, getting shot to pieces by infinite-ammunition arrow towers. There were siege engines the units could carry like ladders, rams, and siege towers, but the AI was very poor at using them, and took horrible casualties during siege attacks as a result. Then they released Shogun Total War 2 - a game with "excellent AI" compared to the previous ones. The AI was much more competent at siege warfare. The big change was that they ditched the siege engines and gave every unit the ability to scale walls with a rope. The AI could handle "Move unit to wall, unit climbs wall" much better than "Move unit to siege engine, pick up siege engine, move siege engine to wall, deploy siege engine, unit climbs wall" and as a result appeared to be much more competent than previously. They also simplified the layouts of the castles immensely, which helped with pathfinding a lot. If Firaxis ever wants to have an AI that plays the game well, they need to stop thinking AI is just something you throw together after you've decided what features you're going to have, and start thinking about whether their AI can handle a feature and discarding or modifying it if the AI cannot handle it. The Firaxis developers have no idea how to play their own game, though, so I don't hold out any hope for their AI.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 16:11
|
|
|
A tile improvement that gains culture based on appeal sounds pretty strong to me. Depending on how early it comes it could lead to some pretty quick paths through the civic tree.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 16:11
|
|
|
Civ VI, Rise and fall: At last, I can get a little bit Genghis Khan
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 16:13
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:First Look at the Mapuche. They have some interesting abilities. Not entirely sure what to make of them yet, but they seem like they have options on how you can play them. I like them at first glance, at least. Flipping cities has always been my favorite way to play Civ, so I love that we got a civilization that makes it easier to do so.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 16:16
|
|
|
Civ VI: Ruse and Fail
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 16:19
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:First Look at the Mapuche. They have some interesting abilities. Not entirely sure what to make of them yet, but they seem like they have options on how you can play them. I like them at first glance, at least. LMAO he literally has the same sword as Phillip II!  
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 16:30
|
|
|
AI can be dealt by playing Multiplayer. I guess I'll have to wait for the next expansion rip Perú.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 16:32
|
|
|
Gort posted:Nah, this is a non-answer. Games always have flawed AIs - good design consists of making a game that your AI can play, not making a game and then hoping the AI you have can play it. I think this is true--to a degree. The thing is, Civ has never really relied too much on the AI being able to play the game. It's just made up for it by giving the AI massive bonuses, and that worked--for a time. It started to show cracks in V when the AI couldn't handle one-unit-per-tile and no amount of bonuses would make up for that, and I think it's being carried to its logical conclusion in VI where the AI can no longer use its production bonuses and maintenance discounts to build everything in one city due to the district system. If the game is going to grow, the AI will need to become somewhat more nuanced, or else it's going to harshly limit what game mechanics you can introduce, and I don't think that's a good thing. I don't like 1UPT, but I don't think "the AI can't handle it" is a good enough reason on its own to ditch it. I just don't think it suits the kind of empire-building strategy game that Civ is. The maps just aren't big enough for what 1UPT wants, and if they were, I think that'd introduce a whole different set of problems.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 17:29
|
|
|
Yeah. 1UPT isn't an insurmountable obstacle for AI - faster units and a higher non-city to city hex ratio would help a lot. Not breaking your own one unit per tile rules the moment planes show up would help too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 17:34
|
|
|
The bonus against Golden Age civs is apparently +10, which is really strong. Could be quite powerful if higher-level AIs are in Golden Ages often.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 19:57
|
|
|
It's interesting, because it makes the best time to fight Lautaro a Normal Age. Golden Age, and his stuff gets a sizable bonus against you. Dark Age, and he can run through your lands and take advantage of your lowered Loyalty to try to aggressively flip your cities. Not defending them isn't an option, of course, because instead of providing units to kill for Loyalty losses you're just giving him free reign to pillage your lands and possibly take the cities anyway. I'm not sure what his Malon raiders replace, though. They have 55 strength, which is lower than cavalry, even with their +5 strength bonus when near friendly territory, but much higher than horsemen. They're kind of close to knights in strength, and they kind of remind me of knight units, but they're light, not heavy cavalry (though if they do replace knights this wouldn't be the first time a unit was replaced with one of a different type). And they're fighting conquistadors in the video, who don't share an era with any of those things. In the timeline in the video he gets them after using niter to make musketmen, which is Renaissance Era, like conquistadors, so, maybe an early, slightly weaker cavalry replacement? Either way, whenever he has those, you won't want to neighbor him. He could mount a nasty offensive with those if you're close to him and they're getting their attack boost. Overall, he seems like he'll be pretty solid, and could be quite fun to play. He interacts with the Loyalty mechanics in a more interesting way than anyone else we've seen so far.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 20:40
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:Somehow I am not hyped about this expansion, it doesn't seem to address the basic problem of the game. Which I can't even put my finger on, I just feel something's missing compared to Civ5 and can't even say what. It's basically just a bunch of new civs, some wonders you'll never build, some late game units you'll never use, and additional micromanagement that will not change the game much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
Gort posted:If Firaxis ever wants to have an AI that plays the game well, they need to stop thinking AI is just something you throw together after you've decided what features you're going to have, and start thinking about whether their AI can handle a feature and discarding or modifying it if the AI cannot handle it. The Firaxis developers have no idea how to play their own game, though, so I don't hold out any hope for their AI. Basically this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 23:58
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:The Inca suck, and will never be in the Civ series again, and the Mapuche will reign forever. Last year I read a good book about Pizarro's conquest of the Inca, and one of the most memorable parts was the siege of Lima. It was during Manco Inca's rebellion, which had started to gain serious momentum despite the fact that Cusco had been under siege for months with no signs of progress for the natives. He sent his best general and a massive force to clear out the surrounding area and then go wipe out the newly-founded city of Lima on the coast. So this general laid siege to Lima and once again the Spanish were outrageously outnumbered, but some early skirmishing had shown that their mounted cavalry was causing a huge amount of attrition. The general decided one massive assault was what was needed to win the day (also he was under a lot of pressure from Manco to get the job done, because when an Incan leader told you to do something, expediency was of paramount importance). So he gathered all the chiefs and commanders of the army together and said ok boys we're hitting them with everything we've got. However, due to the Incan cultural practice of commanders leading their armies into battle (by being carried on litters) all of the commanders, including the general, sallied forth together. In the vanguard. Picture a large group of nobles on charging litters being among the first members of the army to experience concentrated Spanish rifle and artillery fire. Their early deaths caused a devastating loss of morale that led to the tiny Spanish force not only winning the day, but routing the entire army.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:26
|
|
|
Does anyone know if culture plays any part in loyalty pressure?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:39
|
|
|
When it comes to stacking, EU4's army system is boring as hell, but has some simple mechanics that would be useful here. In it, you can stack units as much as you like, but (a) the longer you keep a too-big stack (as determined by your tech level and the terrain) the more attrition damage it takes, and (b) each fight only involves up to X units at a time (as determined by tech level), but the stack wins or loses as a whole (and if it loses, the survivors retreat to a safe area).
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:56
|
|
|
Europa's attrition wouldn't work in civ since reinforcing civ units is free.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 10:07
|
|
|
Civ VI: Mapuche's made it back to his home planet!!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 10:11
|
|
|
What's the reasonable number of cities to stop at, whether you're playing wide or "tall"? I've turned my slice of the world into Roman metropolis central and can keep pushing for a science victory while still being able to pump out legions at a frightening rate. I'm basically secure against one flank while the other is a bunch of city states (probably shouldn't conquer as it is the Modern Age), and there's still room for some settling. I'm sitting at 8 cities right now, and I heard that district costs start getting bad past that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 23:10
|
|
|
District cost is based on tech level. But every single district helps and there's no penalty for putting them up. The idea of civ6 is if you see an open plot of land or an unclaimed resource you better settle on it asap. 50 cities doesn't hurt you, except that there's no build queue and your turns will take forever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 23:23
|
|
|
toasterwarrior posted:What's the reasonable number of cities to stop at, whether you're playing wide or "tall"? in civ 6? never
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 23:23
|
|
|
Gort posted:Europa's attrition wouldn't work in civ since reinforcing civ units is free. eu's attrition doesn't even work in eu4, since they had to tune it to be toothless or the ai armies would just melt
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 23:24
|
|
|
There is a point where amenities may restrict you from settling cities, but in general you want as many as you can support.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 23:46
|
|
|
Yep, build cities forever in Civ 6. There is no overwhelming and arbitrary mechanic to prevent this, and the only thing really stopping you is the state of board and actions of the other players. It's one of few things I appreciate about the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 00:05
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:What WOULD be a decent solution for the stacking issue in a Civ 7? Maybe era variable stack limits? There is no stacking issue. Go play civ 4 in the retirement home.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 00:11
|
|
|
Rise and Fall will reign that in a bit, in that you won't be able to settle anywhere you want; loyalty can be a problem if you settle a city far from the rest of your empire and close to an enemy, but rather than stopping ICS entirely it more encourages to grow your empire's borders out rather than just settling anywhere you feel like, and governors can still help you get a foothold in some places so you can expand outwards from there, etc. At least, as far as I understand it, I could have some details wrong. Still, from what I've seen it's a much better way of keeping ICS from getting completely out of control, without going the opposite way too hard like how V did. You can still have huge empires, but border cities and colonies on other continents and such will need work to hold or they can rebel.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 00:16
|
|
|
Pewdiepie posted:There is no stacking issue. Go play civ 4 in the retirement home. You know, besides not being able to move across the map because city states seems shifting their vast carpet of units randomly and blocking pathing, Or it being a huge pain to move dozens of individual units one at a time. Or that the AI can't deal with single unit front lines and just shuffles damaged units back and forth forever.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 15:12
|
|
|
Judge Schnoopy posted:District cost is based on tech level. But every single district helps and there's no penalty for putting them up. Oh whoops, guess I assumed wrong. Well, between the mountain range separating me from the rest of the world and my ability pump out units, even 8 cities won me that King game through Romans In Space. Everyone hated me anyway since I was in the lead and not particularly friendly to everyone else, but it's something to keep in mind for next game. Overall I'm kinda liking the district system, though for my next game I probably should start learning how to micromanage better. My biggest problem was letting Rainforest tiles sit way too long (2f2p isn't as good as it seems) instead of chopping them to rush districts. I also should probably think about how I use my trade routes better; internal trade routes become monstrous eventually but I usually ended up assigning them as boosters for my non-capital cities (using the capital), with everything in excess going the opposite way and boosting my capital in turn. One city of mine barely had food to grow by the end and could've used two or more traders helping it out. Now I'm hankering to try an Australia game since my biggest pet peeve is useless tiles and they seem built to alleviate that. Probably ought to do so anyway; Trajan Rome's abilities are so good that I didn't even have to think about building Theater districts nor road planning at all, and that'll probably be a bad habit to develop. EDIT: Also I was overthinking district planning; I was under the impression it was supposed to be Endless Legend-esque chains of districts but it turns out it's just easy stuff like Mountains + Campuses, Rivers/City Center/Commercial Hub/Harbor, and Mines/Hills/Quarries + Industrial Zones. I guess other civilizations have more complex chains thanks to their unique stuff but this works well enough at my level of play. toasterwarrior fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Feb 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 15:57
|
|
|
The game should just get rid of units altogether.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 17:43
|
|
|
John F Bennett posted:The game should just get rid of units altogether. If this isn't a joke post, just go play some Paradox game or any of the other mapgames out there. There's gotta be a better game for the kind of game you want than Civ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 17:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:09 |
|
|
I unironically would like a Civ-like game with EU4-like combat
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 17:48
|
|