|
Autonomous Monster posted: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). Edit: And that's another area where I think Civ has it better. While city specialization is a thing in more recent entries into the series, in particular Civ IV, you can't really go too overboard in any one area because cities are still dependent on local concerns--on the terrain, in order to truly thrive. You have that balance. Your science heavy-city still needs production from somewhere if it doesn't want to spend a million years to get its university. Magil Zeal fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Feb 14, 2018 |
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 22:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:22 |
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:Edit: And that's another area where I think Civ has it better. While city specialization is a thing in more recent entries into the series, in particular Civ IV, you can't really go too overboard in any one area because cities are still dependent on local concerns--on the terrain, in order to truly thrive. You have that balance. Your science heavy-city still needs production from somewhere if it doesn't want to spend a million years to get its university. The really mad people who're civ robots that can build their cities perfectly just buy everything with gold or other resources.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
Honestly it has been long enough (over 12 years!) that you could basically make Civilization IV HD and it wouldn't feel like a waste of time. Change it to hexes if you must, make espionage and corporations smarter systems if you implement them at all, leave vassal states in the garbage bin where they belong. Leader traits are definitely IV's weakest core feature, so either revamp them to be more in line with V/VI or do something completely new there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 02:29
|
|
|
How do you do a religious civ on deity? You have to stunt your growth and production so much just to get a religion, then what?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 04:12
|
|
|
oswald ownenstein posted:How do you do a religious civ on deity? Then nothing, you won't ever get a religious victory. You waste your production on useless religious wars that always end in stalemate, and some other civ wins a score victory because we all know they'll never take your cities in a war.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 04:34
|
|
|
Russia could probably manage it with Lavras if you get lucky and don't have many other religious Civs in the game. The religious Golden Age dedication seems really, really strong for religious victory, and the governor is probably also helpful.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 04:45
|
|
|
Judge Schnoopy posted:Then nothing, you won't ever get a religious victory. You waste your production on useless religious wars that always end in stalemate, and some other civ wins a score victory because we all know they'll never take your cities in a war. now let's not be so negative! the way to do religious civs on deity is to set up a custom game with only religious victory enabled, and then play duel map pangaea against kongo
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
I wish they'd make religions more powerful, but balance that by getting rid of the religious victory.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 04:48
|
|
|
I think Faith is certainly more powerful now in Rise and Fall . The change so you don't need to stay in Theocracy for purchase land units with Faith helps, it also helps the other Government Plaza buildings for tier 2 are kinda underwhelming, and Monumentality purchasing civilian units with Faith is very strong (especially since Builders and Settlers get a 30% discount, combine with Theocracy for 45%).
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 05:57
|
|
|
I miss how religious affiliation doesn't really mean much to the AI. I went back and played IV a bit and it was pretty jarring how much religion mattered in terms of local alliances and friendships.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 05:58
|
|
|
My experience is that you have to hard rush religion and burn production on holy prayers, then you’re stunted in terms of cities and military and it takes forever to get any reasonable faith coming in You can go military after that but your science and production won’t be great because you didn’t rush campus/commercial/industrial You can just go into normal play but then why bother with religion? If you stick with religion the AI will be pumping apostles out while you’re trickling missionaries Definitely needs an overhaul and frankly they should probably go back to civ 5 style where its just a bonus thing you can pursue
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 06:17
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:No. Any board game with 6,000,000 peices and tons of setup we just tend... never to play. The whole point of Civ: A New Dawn reworked everything so it plays in a fraction of the time of the old 80s Civ game. It's no more complicated that 7 Wonders or Lords of Waterdeep, which makes it far less complicated than any of the computer civ games. How often can you complete a full game of Civ 6 in under 90 minutes? Because that's a perfectly reasonable play time for 3-player Civ: A New Dawn.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 06:22
|
|
|
I actually had fun on an immortal game recently with religious combat. Dedicate every city to faith. Create apostles and gurus. Move them in groups seeking out religious battles, and then manually move them back to a holy site while avoiding enemy apostles. Meanwhile, send out your next group of apostles, who have been healing since their last mission. Repeat this process forever. The key is to surrender to the micromanagement, and sacrifice all of your time and attention to the religious victory. The religious victory in game is not the true victory. Your personal dedication and submission to it is the religious victory. The Human Crouton fucked around with this message at 06:37 on Feb 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 06:31
|
|
|
I remember Civ 5 had the same insane AI until a few patches came in and you could befriend at least somewhat I know the core issue is you have to have civs trying to win the game so maybe they should code the civs to be friendlier towards civs that are weaker if there’s a runaway civ situation I thought emergencies were supposed to do that but so far they’ve only been useful in getting some cash for liberating a city state I enjoy Civ 6 but I have to say that this expansion has felt lackluster - it has some neat features but just doesn’t change up the gameplay in the way I had expected
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 06:44
|
|
|
I give the expansion a C because I like everything they added except for the emergencies. We should see everyone who commits to it before accepting. As it stands, it is a mechanic designed to mediate the stupidity of the AI, that exposes the stupidity of the AI while also giving run-aways a bonus. But my main gripe really is how they never went through and cleaned up their old poo poo. There were so many existing mechanics that needed to be touched on, but they left an ungainly national parks rule set, and a giant bucket of unusable great prophet points just sitting there in the middle of the room.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 06:50
|
|
|
Does anyone here know if Freecol is just abandoned? The last significant effort they had was when they added a bunch of half-baked colonizing countries, and then ..stopped improving the AI.  I need a good Colonization-like 4X to scratch that itch, besides OpenTTD.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 07:22
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:I give the expansion a C because I like everything they added except for the emergencies. We should see everyone who commits to it before accepting. As it stands, it is a mechanic designed to mediate the stupidity of the AI, that exposes the stupidity of the AI while also giving run-aways a bonus. Emergencies are also a thing in MP, though. There, you can't let the player make a decision after everyone else, because there are multiple players.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 07:44
|
|
|
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. Already played it, beat it and got most of the achievements. It's a good game, but extremely formulaic so replayability isn't that high. I also played and beat Marble Age which is good too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 08:09
|
|
|
Expansion not the Beyond the Sword in terms of reworks, but it so isn't that one CIV3 expansion that was so bad that the next CIV3 expansion just flat included everything from it. I am enjoying the new mechanics, and it got me to finally replay the game after beating it a few times at launch and then shelving it for a year. Helps in the year since launch it feels way better in general. The last game I played the other CIVs were pretty nice for the most part, with the only ones who hated me and decided to declare war was Rome and Khemer. Rome hated that I settled on their landmass and after I started building space race parts decided to attack. He lost a city as punishment which kept rebelilng, but I refuse to give it back since it had some very valuable resources. He decided to attack again with Khamer with him, whom is still mad at me for denouncing them after they kept stealing the city state next to my land for the third time. Of course at this point I only had one space race part left and Carl Saigan appeared and went off to space while flipping off Rome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 08:16
|
|
|
Francis posted:Honestly it has been long enough (over 12 years!) that you could basically make Civilization IV HD and it wouldn't feel like a waste of time. Change it to hexes if you must, make espionage and corporations smarter systems if you implement them at all, leave vassal states in the garbage bin where they belong. Traits are awesome and elegant design though. Not every civ needs to play by completely different rules prioritizing completely different terrain and existing on a completely different game board. It's ok for players to be steered towards particular play styles based on the traits of the specific civ they are playing, but still be directly comparable with each other civ in the game. Not to mention balance purposes. In short not every civ needs to be venice, in fact most shouldn't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 08:18
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Emergencies are also a thing in MP, though. There, you can't let the player make a decision after everyone else, because there are multiple players. Doesn't MP have chat?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 08:35
|
|
|
Sounds like a lot of people in this here thread want a Civ game that is not Civ. Civilization is about exploring a map, building lots of cites, researching techs, building armies and fighting. That's it! How it should be. There are other games for what you want but get your monkey paws of my Civilization. Also, Civ6 is really good now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 10:01
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:Doesn't MP have chat? If you're playing live MP, yes. Hotseat or something, no. Either way, my point is that mechanically, what you're suggesting wouldn't work there, since there isn't a way to let every human player who can join see who else is or is not joining before they make their own decision. Obviously they can communicate with each other, which you can't do with the AI, but that's true of all diplomacy. To do what you want, they'd have to make emergencies work differently between SP and MP, and also ditch the idea that joining an emergency is a secret decision that involves weighing the odds and such regarding whether or not other people will join, how much assistance you'll need, etc. Really, what they need to do is make the AI less dumb about emergencies, since they clearly messed up the weighting of their priorities. They are apparently not joining ones they really should; the problem with that isn't emergencies themselves, it's that the AI isn't joining them even when they'd both benefit greatly from doing so and could conceivably win. If it were a bit more willing to join, it'd work a lot better, from the stories I'm seeing. I'm not disagreeing that the AI is responding to emergencies wrong, but that the way to solve it is to change emergencies themselves. Roland Jones fucked around with this message at 10:31 on Feb 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 10:28
|
|
|
edit; removed Endless Legend Derail. So, help a newbie out who's only just bought this game: What the hell am I doing wrong that all my cities seem like huge shitholes that take a million years to get make anything? I've been settling next to resources, but I think this is the wrong priority and maybe I should be trying to settle near chop-able things instead? I'm not going to bother finishing my first game as Trajan; Industrial districts just unlocked and I cried to see how long it would take to build one in my capital, much less new settlements. Serephina fucked around with this message at 11:31 on Feb 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 11:28
|
|
|
Serephina posted:edit; removed Endless Legend Derail. Internal trade routes from the low production city to other cities of yours, save and chop forests or jungles for production boosts on your Industrial (or even Commercial/Harbor) districts, get some mines (or lumbermills on forests by rivers) up. Production is the most valuable yield for most of the game and Industrial districts are probably your most valuable investment. Also, you might want your cities to max out on productive tiles (mined hills, resources, and whatnot) first before even letting them grow to their housing/amenities softcap.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 11:50
|
|
|
Serephina posted:edit; removed Endless Legend Derail. Yeah as previously mentioned. Check out what your citizens are actually doing by pressing the "head" icon in the city screen. In the beginning you want lots of food, I usually put my citizen on 3 food tiles if possible until I have 3 citizen. Then you want at least 2 food per tile so that your city will grow. After you have added some buildings like the granary and water mill you can start focusing on production, build some mines on hills for example.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 11:59
|
|
|
Serephina posted:edit; removed Endless Legend Derail. Mines. Settling on fresh water near lots of hills is the highest priority. Production wins games more so than any other resource. Settle near hills and prioritize building mines with your builders. This is so important that I basically only ever play on maps with the world age set to 'new' so as to have more hills. EDIT: This is a change from previous civ games. In Civ 5, for instance, it was possible to grow your population really high (20-40) so food was actually valuable. The way housing caps work in Civ 6 means that you can almost entirely neglect to look for food tiles when settling cities because you'll be massively capped by housing anyways. Cities rarely get above ~12 pop without a concerted effort. So instead of caring about food at all, just focus on production. You want to start every game planning for where you are going to build Ruhr Valley and ideally Petra as well if there is a good area for it. CompeAnansi fucked around with this message at 12:05 on Feb 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 12:00
|
|
|
Also, make sure you have enough housing for your cities to grow; settling by fresh water if possible, building a granary, making farms and other improvements, etc. Besides that, you can make things faster by increasing your production. Put mines on hills (mines get even better with the tech you just unlocked, the one that also gives industrial zones), improve anything that can be mined or quarried, etc. And, yes, manage your citizens to have them work tiles with high production.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 12:02
|
|
|
Would there be any downside to letting you walk though, or maybe even stack with, neutral units? I had to fight a dude on the other side of a jungle with only a single road through it, and for some reason a local city state really loved shuffling its units on and off of that road which broke my pathing or forced me to take extra turns off the road and around them for every unit in my invasion force. Honestly, it would have been much easier to just declare war and kill them at the same time, which seems to be the answer to many problems in Civ6.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 14:05
|
|
|
toasterwarrior posted:Internal trade routes from the low production city to other cities of yours Especially as Trajan. Instead of going industrial district you can go commercial / harbor in every city and create an army of traders. They get insane gold bonuses along with the food and production bonuses. I usually focus them all within the capital or a single city next to my capital for a while, giving it 30+ production. Your economy will blow up too and then you can just buy everything for every city and focus on builders / troops exclusively.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 14:31
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Would there be any downside to letting you walk though, or maybe even stack with, neutral units? I had to fight a dude on the other side of a jungle with only a single road through it, and for some reason a local city state really loved shuffling its units on and off of that road which broke my pathing or forced me to take extra turns off the road and around them for every unit in my invasion force. Honestly, it would have been much easier to just declare war and kill them at the same time, which seems to be the answer to many problems in Civ6. This is one of those 1UPT annoyances that shouldn't exist. One unit per tile or not you should be able to at the very least stack with neutral civilian units if you're not at war. You can move through them though, as long as you have enough movement to end on the other side, even if the blue hexes around the unit don't suggest this (I find they lie a lot, actually).
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 16:17
|
|
|
Good old  AI still here at times. Cyrus denounced me for being too close to his land....when the nearest city to him is my capital.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 20:35
|
|
|
Rirse posted:Good old Ah that's a Civ 5 classic that is, right up there with "let me just found a city next to all your troops HOW DARE YOUR TROOPS BE ON MY BORDER"
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
Yep. I'd almost defend the capital thing actually, since the AI's denouncements in VI could be a prelude to a formal war, like how the leaders with agendas that make them pick on people who are vulnerable to them will denounce them for their weakness before going aggro, which would fit here since they're clearly expanding at you and them moving from forward settling to attacking makes perfect sense for an aggressive AI, rather than "wow, you rear end in a top hat" for something that's blatantly their fault... Except in that case there's still something hosed here because it's Cyrus who's doing it, and he's supposed to want to do surprise wars, which denouncing you precludes unless he attacks ASAP. So either way something's wrong here. Though, on the topic of the above, since the text of all denouncements is written as the AI being pissed/offended by you, and they're called, well, denouncements, even when it's meant to be them preparing to attack you for your vulnerability or because you happen to be where they want to go or something, it does come off as them calling you a terrible person for not having enough ships or whatever. Even if it makes sense upon stepping back, the immediate reaction is "what the gently caress?" Edit: There isn't any reasonable explanation for the AI getting pissy at you when they settle where you already have troops, though. While it's easy to guess why it happens (AI doesn't consider that it's their fault for there being so many troops near them, it just sees the troops near it), there isn't really any justification for it like other things I've defended. It's just bad and dumb. Roland Jones fucked around with this message at 21:50 on Feb 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 21:32
|
|
|
I had a new one today where I was laying siege to a Korean city, only for Genghis Khan to roll in from the FoW and snipe it from me, and then immediately berate me for having so many troops on his border.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 21:38
|
|
|
Occasionally I get a 'civ X has been targeted by an emergency' in the sidebar but no popup comes up. There doesn't seem to be a way to find out what emergency it is and I don't receive an invite to participate. What is that about?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 21:48
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:I had a new one today where I was laying siege to a Korean city, only for Genghis Khan to roll in from the FoW and snipe it from me, and then immediately berate me for having so many troops on his border. That was just his way of saying "yoink, fucker!!" but that's not in the diplomacy sass list
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 21:49
|
|
|
They need to get rid of the "troops too close to my border" bullshit. It's there to make the AI look like it's smart and on top of things by calling you out on your cunning plan, but it's really just annoying and doesn't do anything except for make the AI look and act stupider.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
I'm fine with it now that they added an option to just not comment rather than being forced to instantly declare war or commit to peace for the next 50 turns.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:22 |
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:That was just his way of saying "yoink, fucker!!" but that's not in the diplomacy sass list It'd be tricky to do and probably a lot of work so I don't expect to see it, but if the AI actually would say different things depending on the specifics of why they're pissed at you, like you forward settling them versus them forward settling you, or the above snipe, it'd make things feel a lot better even if the AI's behavior didn't change much, I think. The AI gloating because it got one up on you or verbally making it clear that it's planning to attack you when its actions already make it obvious that's what it's doing would make it seem a lot more sane than it using the same "how dare you" message it does for when you're busy being history's greatest monster. Obviously not the only thing in the game that's an issue, and really one of the smaller problems with the AI compared to things like how bad at the game it is, but it'd go a long way towards making it seem less irrational and more real.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2018 21:57
|
|