|
The funny thing is once those 8 settlers made cities, it also created builders that then chopped 8 more settlers (after a handful of turns growing to pop 2). I could have moved Magnus around to maximize it I think? But I forgot.
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 06:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 20:37 |
|
|
uber_stoat posted:extremely late to the party here but I just started playing this again with the expansion and are my ears deceiving me or is there a version of Rasputin by Boney M on the soundtrack? I'm Russia and I swear that's the song playing. It's Arabia's theme. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evhm8_KEn7g There is a Turkish folk song called Katibim that just happens to sound nearly identical to Rasputin but Boney M denies that they were influenced by it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 06:16
|
|
|
You know, there was some fuss over the Zulu, but after playing the Mongols I feel they may actually be an underrated warmonger Civ. The trading post ability, if used correctly, can be leveraged for a +6 combat bonus over the enemy, and Mongol cavalry will get +3 on top of that. It comes early, and you don't have to wait for the UU, Horsemen are as strong as ever, particularly 5-move horsemen with +9 combat strength. I chopped out a couple of encampments, ran +50% production of cavalry and strategos, popped out Great Generals and just creamed my neighbors in the Classical era, then built a bunch of heavy chariots to upgrade to knights which are supported by keshigs and it's just an unstoppable doom train of 5-6 move units with absurd combat boosts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 10:24
|
|
|
Is it possible to get rid of holy cities as Spain using conquistadors? Can I, for instance, conquer an enemy, taking their cities with a conquistador therefore converting them to my religion, give all their cities back to them and now they will be following my religion? If so, that seems like it would be a fun thing to do everyone once in a while. A sort of cleanse.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 13:13
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:I didn't know anything about XCOM's modability, but that's interesting that two teams can be so different in the same studio. Yeah, when XCOM2 was nearing release they wanted to show off how robust their mod-tools were (btw: pigeons were considered a particle effect by the game so you could very well make pigeon guns). The mod tools were practically the tools they used to build the game, just cleaned up a bit. So they took a group of developers who modded XCOM: Enemy Within to make the popular (if somewhat controversial for balance reasons) Long War mods. Enemy Within was NOT designed, at all, to be modded and it took all sorts of black magic to do what they did: it was like taking a Ford Pinto and somehow twisting it into a Ford Mustang without actually modifying any of the components. Anyways because of them the game actually released with 3 day-0 mods: SMGs (which traded damage for movement distance), Muton Centurion (slightly buffed version of enemy) and Laser Weapons (added a mid-game tier of weapons WITH near-professional level models and effects). So, yeah, XCOM2 has CRAZY levels of mod support, and unlike Civ expects you to use them so the game doesn't turn off achievements hwen you activate mods. I think there's 3.5/4 teams at Firaxis basically. The Civ team (formerly the A team but...well V and VI have had their issues) The XCOM team (the current A team) The C team which made Beyond Earth that has good, creative ideas but screams "WHY DO YOU HATE ME?" whenever you try to bring up the topic of balance in the most gentle, constructive way you can imagine. The interns they give to Sid so that they can keep slapping his name on stuff while he makes Sid Meier's Civilization: Beyond Earth: Starships.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 14:03
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Demands for improved AI are pretty consistent across all recent Civ releases and Firaxis games generally but it's a pretty fine balancing act. The problem is that if the AI was told to win and didn't have to abide by any restrictions it would win 99.9% of the time, particularly in a game as formulaic as Civ. Everybody wants good AI until they have to play against good AI. Haha, what? I'm sorry to be rude, but this is the wrongest thing I have ever read about a computer game in my life.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 14:34
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:So, yeah, XCOM2 has CRAZY levels of mod support, and unlike Civ expects you to use them so the game doesn't turn off achievements hwen you activate mods. Civ doesn't disable achievements when you use mods. As far as I know. I use mods in every single game I play (even my first Rise and Fall games, it didn't break all mods) and have plenty of achievements.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 15:42
|
|
|
this game has the worst loving gotchas i was playing Indonesia and chopping out a Jong with Press Gangs. but the Jong is a medieval unit, not a renaissance one like the Frigate, so no production bonus for me - and i don't even have access to the production card that'd help any longer since i researched the apparently-a-poison-pill civic of exploration. fun stuff.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 16:08
|
|
|
Prav posted:this game has the worst loving gotchas Yeah honestly these cards, when upgraded, should always say "the current era and below".
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 16:10
|
|
|
CompeAnansi posted:Yeah honestly these cards, when upgraded, should always say "the current era and below". When I finish updating my wonders mod I'm intending to do a policy mod that does this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 16:15
|
|
|
CompeAnansi posted:Yeah honestly these cards, when upgraded, should always say "the current era and below". Yeah, this would make a lot of sense. It doesn't make the cards more powerful, really--just helps you from getting hosed with niche cases and the turning of ages. There's no reason why an earlier unit should take more time to produce than a current-era unit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 17:36
|
|
|
Mr. Fowl posted:There's no reason why an earlier unit should take more time to produce than a current-era unit. If you have to train two dudes with no combat training today, which will take longer: training a guy to shoot his rifle, or training a guy to fight on horseback in 100 pounds of armor? How long would it take to get the gun, vs. the armor? As for "game" reasons, they clearly intend the policy taxi squad game to be something you play often if you want to fine-tune, a reward for those who like that level of control. I think they intend us to occasionally be screwed over by the turning of the ages.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 17:56
|
|
|
homullus posted:If you have to train two dudes with no combat training today, which will take longer: training a guy to shoot his rifle, or training a guy to fight on horseback in 100 pounds of armor? How long would it take to get the gun, vs. the armor? Or for a historical example, bowman versus crossbowman.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 17:59
|
|
|
You don't have to train the bowman, he's been training himself every Sunday since childhood. You don't have to train the crossbowman
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 18:37
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Haha, what? I'm sorry to be rude, but this is the wrongest thing I have ever read about a computer game in my life. He is not that far off the spot. MANY goons in here have posted that they wish to have a cinematic experience which counts as them winning while the AI does nothing else but play around them. Do join the MP sessions for more fun tho 
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 18:47
|
|
|
Nah, people just want an AI that poses a respectable challenge in war and does not acts like a complete lunatic in diplomacy Civ 4 manages that, I think. Civ 5, kinda of: its weak at war but not harmless, and in diplo is kinda reasonable enough Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Feb 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 19:14
|
|
|
turboraton posted:He is not that far off the spot. MANY goons in here have posted that they wish to have a cinematic experience which counts as them winning while the AI does nothing else but play around them. No, I mean he's crazy levels of wrong about there being a potentially unbeatable civ6 AI out in the realms of possibility, only held back by Firaxis bravely keeping the player's safe from it. And then he's more wrong that there's some kind of fine line that can barely be balanced on between that and the current civ6 ai. And for your issue, if civ6 did have amazing ai then the people wanting easy wins could simply turn down the difficulty. Mr. Fowl posted:Yeah, this would make a lot of sense. It doesn't make the cards more powerful, really--just helps you from getting hosed with niche cases and the turning of ages. There's no reason why an earlier unit should take more time to produce than a current-era unit. This was super annoying when suddenly my Legions weren't getting the bonus but I hadn't yet unlocked a better unit :/ But, you know, it make historical sense, because as we all remember when the printing press was invented every blacksmith in the world threw out all their sword-forging tools and started work in the powder mills in the hope that one day a useful rifle would be invented. Darkrenown fucked around with this message at 19:32 on Feb 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 19:29
|
|
|
I installed the city-states get walls for free mod to try and keep the AI from taking city-states as often. Playing on Emperor, it seems to hold up in the early game, but in the mid and late game the AI still seems to occasionally roll over city-states. So I suppose the AI can take walled cities now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:Nah, people just want an AI that poses a respectable challenge in war and does not acts like a complete lunatic in diplomacy I want an AI that challenges me, but not one that fucks with me. AIs producing more science and culture than I am one hundred turns into the game challenge me, and push me to play better and more. Pericles showing up with six warriors outside my city for a turn 30 'surprise war' just makes me play other games instead.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
With the news about 10 Crowns, I was mulling over ways to change the base mechanics of a Civ style game, if you weren't beholden to any of the basic Civ rules. I can't help but think the game might be better if they stole the system from Endless Legend, where the world was split into provinces with one pre-placed city apiece, and you conquered those and improved the province as a holistic unit rather then piling buildings into a city square. You could throw out ICS and related issues entirely, lose the worker micro, and move a lot of gameplay decisions to a higher empire management level.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:With the news about 10 Crowns, I was mulling over ways to change the base mechanics of a Civ style game, if you weren't beholden to any of the basic Civ rules. No. Just play Endless games. This is a lovely idea and it's a large part of why I play Civ and not Endless Legend. It's why Fall from Heaven 2 is still a better fantasy 4X than Endless Legend. Just no.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:With the news about 10 Crowns, I was mulling over ways to change the base mechanics of a Civ style game, if you weren't beholden to any of the basic Civ rules. my man have you tried the grand strategy genre
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 20:58
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:With the news about 10 Crowns, I was mulling over ways to change the base mechanics of a Civ style game, if you weren't beholden to any of the basic Civ rules. Have you tried Civ: A New Dawn, the board game?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
If I can't one or two dozen cities on my continent and build them up with the careful balancing act of claiming/improving/working tiles it's not Civ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:I installed the city-states get walls for free mod to try and keep the AI from taking city-states as often. Playing on Emperor, it seems to hold up in the early game, but in the mid and late game the AI still seems to occasionally roll over city-states. So I suppose the AI can take walled cities now. Definitely. Genghis Khan's been rolling over the opposition at a frankly alarming rate in my latest game. (...though when it came to it I still managed to demolish his entire horde with a pair of field cannons and a well-placed redcoat) Fintilgin posted:With the news about 10 Crowns, I was mulling over ways to change the base mechanics of a Civ style game, if you weren't beholden to any of the basic Civ rules. The knots the Civ series has tied itself in trying to avoid ICS look pretty stupid when held against the example of EL, yeah. Though I think my ideal Civ would keep tile improvements, even if territorial control was handled on a larger scale. In fact, I think I'd probably drop buildings before tile improvements. Move the entire economic game on-map.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 21:19
|
|
|
The idea is that you're starting completely from scratch with just the turn-based history theme. You could throw out some of these mechanics and presumably put in lots of interesting strategic choices in entirely new places. I hope 10 Crowns isn't just a straight up Civ clone with a new coat of paint. I'm kinda feeling like one of the reasons Civ 6 might not be all that hot is that Firaxis has been hammering the same core mechanics again and again. I didn't even like Endless Legend very much, I'm just trying to think outside the box, with a chance to start totally fresh in a way that Civ never could is really interesting.  Like, I assume play in a system like that would involve your pop units living spread out around the province in places they could be raided/captured/protected. Building on each province could involve systems like the Civ 6 districts/adjacency, but built from the start rather then grafted on top of the classic Civ 1 style cities. I'd like to keep tiles/improvments, but maybe lose workers and improve things via public works like Call to Power. I keep picturing bits from something like Colonization (but far more automated), where raw materials move along an internal trade route each turn to processing centers where you make goods and stuff. Changing the focus of play to be less about running a bunch of what might as well be independent cities to a level of how those cities interconnect and function as a state. golden bubble posted:Have you tried Civ: A New Dawn, the board game? No. Any board game with 6,000,000 peices and tons of setup we just tend... never to play. Fintilgin fucked around with this message at 21:28 on Feb 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:The idea is that you're starting completely from scratch with just the turn-based history theme. You could throw out some of these mechanics and presumably put in lots of interesting strategic choices in entirely new places. You say "Civ VI isn't all that hot" but it's actually a very good game. Frankly I think Civ VI is in a good place in regards to ICS right now, though Civ IV probably had the best take on it. I never liked how spread out stuff was in Endless Legend. I want to pack my cities in tightly into thriving metropolises. I don't like the vast swathes of empty space in that series (a lot of this stuff is why Civ V is probably the worst entry in the series for me). I also don't like how the land feels so empty and meaningless in EL. Civ has always been about the land and I want to keep it like that, instead of the large-scale approach that Grand Strategy games take or the half-assed system of Endless series. I like the micro. It's why I keep going back to Civ even though I've had fun times in games like CK2, Stellaris, and EL. Civ offers the core gameplay experience I like. The window dressing which is what you call "turn-based history theme" is kinda meaningless to me. It's nice, but I'm here for the game, not the setting. Well, the history part anyway, I do vastly prefer turn-based to the alternatives.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:You say "Civ VI isn't all that hot" but it's actually a very good game. Frankly I think Civ VI is in a good place in regards to ICS right now, though Civ IV probably had the best take on it. Civ IV is for sure my favorite. I just think it's an interesting thought. Civilization is never going to be able to throw out some of the absolute core mechanics. Period. Not going to happen. But a whole new franchise could. Which mechanics are utterly core to a 'civ-style' 4x, and which could be thrown out? Do people want something like 10 Crowns (whatever it ACTUALLY is) to just be "My Favorite Civ Title Cloned With More Polish"? Like is actually placing your cities on specific tiles that important? Most placement choices are no-brainers. I agree it's fun, but I can't help but wonder if it's one of those things that feel more important then it really is. I legit don't know. It feels like a huge change to me, and I actually found the Endless Legend system really off-putting at first, but I can't help but wonder if I'm just being stuck in my comfort zone or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 21:38
|
|
|
Without the Civ name Civ games would sell a fraction of the copies they do. Firaxis are never gonna drop Civ and do a different franchise that's still a 4X. I'd love to see Paradox do Civ, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 21:40
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:I also don't like how the land feels so empty and meaningless in EL. That's definitely one of EL's greatest failings. I mean, I think I see what they were going for- in a fantasy game you want large swathes of wilderness, but the sheer inconsequentiality of terrain that results is depressing. I think it says a lot that I find the terrain in EL close to unreadable sometimes, and that doesn't matter. Is that a forest? Maybe! But it doesn't matter (unless you're Wild Walkers, ofc). Fintilgin posted:Like, I assume play in a system like that would involve your pop units living spread out around the province in places they could be raided/captured/protected. Building on each province could involve systems like the Civ 6 districts/adjacency, but built from the start rather then grafted on top of the classic Civ 1 style cities. This is extremely my poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
yeah, Civ has a built in audience who buy it because when they buy it they know what they're getting. you can't change up the formula radically without alienating a decent chunk of those people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
Gort posted:Without the Civ name Civ games would sell a fraction of the copies they do. Firaxis are never gonna drop Civ and do a different franchise that's still a 4X. How about the game I mentioned, and linked, 10 Crowns? The historic civ-clone(?) by the lead designer of Civ 4, being published by a swedish (not-paradox) company? quote:His new game has a working title of 10 Crowns. Publisher Starbreeze today announced it has picked the game up. In a blog post, the company said that 10 Crowns is “an epic-scale turn-based strategy game that lets players create the greatest dynasty in world history.”
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:How about the game I mentioned, and linked, 10 Crowns? The historic civ-clone(?) by the lead designer of Civ 4, being published by a swedish (not-paradox) company? It's a zillion miles from release. Maybe I'll get more excited when there's basically any information about it at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 21:55
|
|
|
Getting rid of workers would be cool. But honestly what I want the most out of a new 4x game is one where the focus is on Macro. It's ok to start as a single planet with an unknown universe to explore, but as I explore that unknown universe colonizing hundreds of worlds I don't want to spend hours making sure each planet is building an automated factory, then a hydroponic farm, then a robo-factory etc etc. Basically if properly managing a planet takes 15 seconds, that's fine. But it shouldn't take 50 times longer to manage 50 planets.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 21:56
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:I just think it's an interesting thought. Civilization is never going to be able to throw out some of the absolute core mechanics. Period. Not going to happen. But a whole new franchise could. Which mechanics are utterly core to a 'civ-style' 4x, and which could be thrown out? Do people want something like 10 Crowns (whatever it ACTUALLY is) to just be "My Favorite Civ Title Cloned With More Polish"? Well, if your contention is "I hope 10 Crowns does this instead of just copy Civ", then that's a different matter and I may have misunderstood your point. Fintilgin posted:Like is actually placing your cities on specific tiles that important? Most placement choices are no-brainers. I agree it's fun, but I can't help but wonder if it's one of those things that feel more important then it really is. I legit don't know. It feels like a huge change to me, and I actually found the Endless Legend system really off-putting at first, but I can't help but wonder if I'm just being stuck in my comfort zone or something. I don't think they're big no-brainers. This kind of variation is what led to interesting, divergent paths along the lines of cottages, workshops, and specialists in IV. I won't comment on V because honestly there wasn't a whole lot of meat there, but VI has admittedly softened the focus on tile improvement... sorta. The land is still important because of districts, and especially because it feels like there's a lot more limited space to work with now. And I like that, even if I have a laundry list of problems with Civ VI overall I really like what they've done with it. Some other things I love about the Civ series is all the little tricks you can do to squeeze just a little bit more out of each turn. These things tend to not exist in games with less micro. And yes, some of them can seem like exploits or degenerate gameplay, and a lot of them probably are. Certainly I don't think Slavery was ever meant to work in IV like it ended up working, much like how I don't think chopping/harvesting was meant to make as big an impact on VI as it does (and both of those things probably deserve to be toned down). But is it weird that I actually like that things like that exist? Yesterday I chopped out Petra in one turn with three chops + limes/wall/Magnus overflow. It felt drat good. But even the more benign tricks like swapping cottages between cities in IV to keep them growing while temporarily swapping a city's focus are right up my alley. You just don't get that kind of thing in those other genres. Gort posted:I'd love to see Paradox do Civ, though. Paradox doesn't do true turn-based, and that is preventing me from ever truly loving their games. I also don't like how cowardly they are about micro, like, Stellaris was obviously originally supposed to have a more involved tile mechanic based around adjacency bonuses and building your planets in particular patterns, but they pretty much backed away from that entirely. I think because the AI couldn't handle it? Which is understandable from a certain perspective but it makes the game a lot more dull for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:Getting rid of workers would be cool. But honestly what I want the most out of a new 4x game is one where the focus is on Macro. It's ok to start as a single planet with an unknown universe to explore, but as I explore that unknown universe colonizing hundreds of worlds I don't want to spend hours making sure each planet is building an automated factory, then a hydroponic farm, then a robo-factory etc etc. Basically if properly managing a planet takes 15 seconds, that's fine. But it shouldn't take 50 times longer to manage 50 planets. Sounds like you want the "play for a bit, then zoom-out" style of game. You know, a bit like how Spore worked back in the day, when you started as a bacterium, got to be a big bacterium, then you evolved into the tiniest fish ever and saw that the ocean was full of giant fish that wanted to eat you. Predynastic Egypt is a Civ-like game that does that. Start with a few tribesmen, build a village, grow it to a large village, bam, now the map has zoomed out and here are the neighbouring tribes you gotta deal with. I'd certainly advise giving the demo a shot, it's the best Civ-like experience I've had in years, and the full game is £7 so it's not like a huge deal one way or the other.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 22:01
|
|
|
Imperialism did a great job of the macro/micro distinction where you controlled one city directly and all your others indirectly, but part of what made it work was that it fit the theme so perfectly--the way your satellite cities and colonies fed into your main city was a great combination of flavor and mechanics. Not sure it would work on the same scope as something like Civ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:Well, if your contention is "I hope 10 Crowns does this instead of just copy Civ", then that's a different matter and I may have misunderstood your point. I mostly just thought it would be an interesting kick-off to think about what core elements could you change in Civ and still have it be Civ? What could you change in a whole new game where you wanted to make a game with the same goal as Civ (historic turnbased 4x), but you were free to look at the game from a totally fresh perspective mechanically?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 22:23
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:Paradox doesn't do true turn-based, and that is preventing me from ever truly loving their games. I also don't like how cowardly they are about micro, like, Stellaris was obviously originally supposed to have a more involved tile mechanic based around adjacency bonuses and building your planets in particular patterns, but they pretty much backed away from that entirely. I think because the AI couldn't handle it? Which is understandable from a certain perspective but it makes the game a lot more dull for me. IIRC it was because the system heavily encouraged flood-filling planets in one specific type of building and nothing else, which made the whole thing very boring (it's still very boring). Gort posted:Sounds like you want the "play for a bit, then zoom-out" style of game. You know, a bit like how Spore worked back in the day, when you started as a bacterium, got to be a big bacterium, then you evolved into the tiniest fish ever and saw that the ocean was full of giant fish that wanted to eat you. You must be responsible for 90% of that game's sales at this point. They should cut you a cheque.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 20:37 |
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:You must be responsible for 90% of that game's sales at this point. They should cut you a cheque. I heard about it here, so Lowtax deserves his cut
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 22:32
|
|