|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:Sounds poo poo. How do you colonise an overseas city then? build such a massive military that your borders expand over the ocean obviously
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:28 |
|
|
Glass of Milk posted:One alternative way of dealing with units I was thinking of is to just build a generic "army" that you can then upgrade to add whatever specific bonuses you want: ranged, anti-cav, siege, etc. It would also follow logically that early armies are assorted rabble and only when you build at a barracks do you get trained professional units from the get-go. And it would make sense that your army is not spread across hundreds of miles of being terrain, instead being contained within one hex. I actually like this a lot. It still gives you the flexibility that you get from having multiple unit types, while preventing the need of having to build multiples of each unit and physically move them into combat. It would also be interesting to add certain functions like allowing the army to 'refit their equipment' in a city or encampment, which would cost gold and turns but allow you to change your army from anti cav to anti infantry or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 19:52
|
|
|
blackmongoose posted:There's also a sequel called Egypt: Old Kingdom or something similar and a similar style game about Ancient Greece from the same publisher. I like them a lot but the one weakness is that playthroughs start to feel really similar after the first few, especially when you know all the major challenges in advance. Yeah, you're not wrong. They are cheap as chips and one of the best "civ-like" experiences I've had, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 22:15
|
|
|
Borsche69 posted:I actually like this a lot. It still gives you the flexibility that you get from having multiple unit types, while preventing the need of having to build multiples of each unit and physically move them into combat. It would also be interesting to add certain functions like allowing the army to 'refit their equipment' in a city or encampment, which would cost gold and turns but allow you to change your army from anti cav to anti infantry or something like that. An adjoining idea would be that you have some army "pool" that you can draw from that increases over time, so you can have a few large/more powerful armies or many small armies. That's a very Paradox-ish idea, but it could also lead to cool things like hiring out your army as mercenaries during certain eras.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 22:48
|
|
|
Track population in every hex and have your levied army be a % of that. Having too many wars on your doorstep over prolonged periods depopulates the hex. The more levies you have, the lower production and gold is in that hex. Depending on tech levels and policies, you can project your army deeper into territory that you don't own (simulated as hexes being occupied with a shade or hatched lines). You have to sign a peace treaty formally annexing the territory to eventually be able to project further into enemy territory in a later war. As we reach the more modern eras, annexing becomes harder but projecting further from your borders becomes easier. Once you have invented flight and oil-based ships you can project pretty much anywhere on the planet during that turn, because it's silly that an army would need years to travel across an ocean at that point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 23:46
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:Track population in every hex and have your levied army be a % of that. Having too many wars on your doorstep over prolonged periods depopulates the hex. The more levies you have, the lower production and gold is in that hex. Depending on tech levels and policies, you can project your army deeper into territory that you don't own (simulated as hexes being occupied with a shade or hatched lines). You have to sign a peace treaty formally annexing the territory to eventually be able to project further into enemy territory in a later war. That sounds like a super fun Excel file.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 00:55
|
|
|
Some of you sound like you'd be rather be playing the Paradox games, which are great by the way. I don't mind stacks or 1UPT. I do mind the AI being is utterly retarded with 1UPT that stacks is the much better option right now. Maybe they should steal Endless Legend's combat, when two armies fight the combat 'zooms in' on an expanded terrain of the tiles you're fighting on, allowing you to maneuver and flank around and stuff. That way the AI doesn't have to deal with navigating a carpet around and they get a better idea of who/what they're fighting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 01:11
|
|
|
Ah it's good to see another soul who agrees with me about the Endless Legend style of combat. I posted about it yesterday and it didn't really seem like anyone else thought it had any merit. Perhaps a simpler version of it would be the system in Stardocks Elemental game or even the one in Civ Call to Power II.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 01:35
|
|
|
I just don't wanna zoom into each combat in Civ. I like the Total War games for what they are, and I like Civ for it's abstraction of combat. If you must get one step closer towards tactical combat, have there be different tactics sets you could use in combat - aggressive, cautious, etc. Heck, you could even make some of them Civ unique, like a German blitzkrieg or Roman testudo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 01:52
|
|
|
endless legend's combat has no merit because instead of playing against an AI that doesn't know how to control 1upt units, you're on a timer issuing commands to an AI that won't follow them because it doesn't know how to control 1upt units
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 01:56
|
|
|
anyone who thinks stacks were more of a micromanagement nightmare than Civ 5's system should be forced to complete the Samurai Invasion of Korea scenario on Deity until they repent their sins
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 05:47
|
|
|
Francis posted:anyone who thinks stacks were more of a micromanagement nightmare than Civ 5's system should be forced to complete the Samurai Invasion of Korea scenario on Deity until they repent their sins Tbh once you're playing any Civ on Deity you deserve whatever you get, you masochist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 05:51
|
|
|
mitochondritom posted:Ah it's good to see another soul who agrees with me about the Endless Legend style of combat. I posted about it yesterday and it didn't really seem like anyone else thought it had any merit. I kinda liked Endless Legend's combat system, but it certainly does slow the game down somewhat, having to resolve that battle before proceeding to the next turn. Thankfully, because of stacks, battles are less common. I'd love to see Civ give it a try. I really wanna do Endless Legend combat with non-fantasy units. Also i think this is worth noting for people who don't like EL's combat system: whenever a battle happens between two stacks, the player can choose to have it resolved automatically, rather than fiddling around with all the individual unit engagements. So if you like stacks but hate the EL system, you can play it exactly how you want - stacks fighting stacks and being resolved instantly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 11:25
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:That sounds like a super fun Excel file. I mean, that's what 4x games are, distilled to their core. The way some people complain about optimal builds being the only way to play I think they'd rather just play Excel instead. I don't play civ for its riveting combat but for the city building and watching a map get painted by my colours and the pretty farms/cities grow around the land. Abstract combat as much as possible IMO. My ideal civ-like game is a zen garden of watching a country grow and become more complex, like Cities-Skylines but at the scale of a whole country.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 11:27
|
|
|
Glass of Milk posted:I just don't wanna zoom into each combat in Civ. I like the Total War games for what they are, and I like Civ for it's abstraction of combat. If you must get one step closer towards tactical combat, have there be different tactics sets you could use in combat - aggressive, cautious, etc. Heck, you could even make some of them Civ unique, like a German blitzkrieg or Roman testudo. Me neither. I dont want tactical battles on my grand strategy game. They are slow, they detract from the grand game Im there to play, they are almost always tedious and repetitive. They also make PBEM MP impossible, I guess. And EL didint invented that, nor did AoW. Master of Magic already did that way back, I didint liked it back then either I like your idea for tactics
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 12:29
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:I mean, that's what 4x games are, distilled to their core. The way some people complain about optimal builds being the only way to play I think they'd rather just play Excel instead. Feels like there ought to be better games than Civ if this is what you want - so much of Civ is "balanced" by the idea that you should be militarily crushed if you ignore the combat side of the game. You ever play the various Anno games?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 14:55
|
|
|
Gort posted:Feels like there ought to be better games than Civ if this is what you want - so much of Civ is "balanced" by the idea that you should be militarily crushed if you ignore the combat side of the game. You ever play the various Anno games? I did, and they're fun! I'm just surprised nobody made the logical leap yet of having an age-spanning game like civ with production chains like in anno.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 15:27
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:I did, and they're fun! I'm just surprised nobody made the logical leap yet of having an age-spanning game like civ with production chains like in anno. That sounds pretty complex? Could it be abstracted so that it would actually be good? Combat in anno games is terrible, not worth doing in my opinion. Would you want to expand the combat from the Civ side or the anno side?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 15:42
|
|
|
Clarste posted:I am also the person who builds pre-designed ships and auto-resolves combat in any game where I can. War in 4X games is tedious and fiddly and tends to make turns take at least 10-20 times as long as they do in peacetime, and I hate that. I feel like I'd prefer a game where it was streamlined simplified as much as possible. Like maybe if the stack was just a single unit with N power that decreases with attrition. All Civ games have been a melange of minigames. Everyone has preferences among them. When V came out, the 1UPT combat minigame worked really well for me since I played a lot of Panzer General back in the day. I had a lot of fun both with archers skirmishing with barbarians (oddly enough, my favorite thing about playing V was getting a Scout promoted to Archer) and with coordinating Machine Guns, Infantry, and Artillery to conquer defended enemy cities. Incidentally, if you like the tactical gameplay, check out Order of Battle and similar games that are reviving the Panzer General gameplay. OOB itself has just enough content in the base game (free) to let you decide if you like that style of game. The AI can actually play the game for one thing. mllaneza fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Jan 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 15:52
|
|
|
Mayveena posted:That sounds pretty complex? Could it be abstracted so that it would actually be good? Combat in anno games is terrible, not worth doing in my opinion. Would you want to expand the combat from the Civ side or the anno side? Ideally I feel like combat at such a scale shouldn't be a thing that is modeled with individual troops. I'd like to see a game like civ with production chains and trade routes being the main game mechanics, and armies being abstracted as one of several types of resources that require other resources like iron and later oil/niter to build. Your troops would be saved in a pocket dimension of sorts, not on the map, until you actually need them at war and in which case you can deploy them wherever in your civilization (or outside of it if you have the relevant techs). I don't know if that would be particularly fun or interesting but again, if I wanted interesting combat I'd play total war or any other of the many wargames on the market. I want a history game that's more about the silk road and less about shuffling troops around. One where Rome's unique ability isn't its legions necessarily but its system of highways and roads leading to a large single market and easy distribution of goods. That side of history.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
When's the newest civ going to be presented?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 17:27
|
|
|
In the civ board game, you just have army tokens that you put on the field, and then a deck of unit cards which you can add to using production or power up using science. Combat happens when two army tokens meet, and is resolved by playing the cards, and losing might cost you some cards or the army token. I feel like there's something to the system, and a fully-fledged civ game that expands on it might have fun tactical combat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 18:04
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:Also i think this is worth noting for people who don't like EL's combat system: whenever a battle happens between two stacks, the player can choose to have it resolved automatically, rather than fiddling around with all the individual unit engagements. So if you like stacks but hate the EL system, you can play it exactly how you want - stacks fighting stacks and being resolved instantly. The thing with that though is if you auto-calculate everything (which I did) you lose a chunk of game. Like time has been spent making that system which means they expect you to engage with it and if you don't you're missing out on stuff. It's like when I played Total War and just constantly auto calculated and realised that there was no point even playing at that point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 18:33
|
|
|
Taear posted:The thing with that though is if you auto-calculate everything (which I did) you lose a chunk of game. Like time has been spent making that system which means they expect you to engage with it and if you don't you're missing out on stuff. You also run into the issue upthread of stack transparency--EL gives units a million different stats in the hopes of making the tactical minigame interesting, so when you click on the auto-calculate button you have no idea how any of those stats translate unless one side has absolutely overwhelming superiority. A Civ implementation wouldn't necessarily have to be so fiddly, but you still have to choose between streamlining unit statistics (which makes the tactical minigame even more of a boring timesink) or fleshing out unit tactical strengths (which makes stack strength evaluation more opaque.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 19:16
|
|
|
edit: nvm I completely misunderstood the question
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 21:11
|
|
|
Samovar posted:When's the newest civ going to be presented? If the schedule continues - Teaser on Monday - Reveal on Tuesday - Live Play on Thursday Or something like that. Hopefully Mali is good!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2019 23:22
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:I kinda liked Endless Legend's combat system, but it certainly does slow the game down somewhat, having to resolve that battle before proceeding to the next turn. Thankfully, because of stacks, battles are less common. Alright I think I've got it. What if you can build a unit that is anti-melee, that would counter a unit that is anti-horse, and the horse unit would counter the anti-melee unit. Then you could build a bunch of these units and combine them into an "army" adding more of whatever unit you need based on what your opponent is doing. Then when you fight your opponent you are given odds for a how well each unit would do on the attack and how much damage they will take is based on those odds. In order to encourage units to stay around longer and heal up, they could get various promotions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 00:56
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:Alright I think I've got it. What if you can build a unit that is anti-melee, that would counter a unit that is anti-horse, and the horse unit would counter the anti-melee unit. Then you could build a bunch of these units and combine them into an "army" adding more of whatever unit you need based on what your opponent is doing. Then when you fight your opponent you are given odds for a how well each unit would do on the attack and how much damage they will take is based on those odds. In order to encourage units to stay around longer and heal up, they could get various promotions. Yeah but they didn't do that on a hex map, so...
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 10:02
|
|
|
I mean yea, civ4 with hexes would be even better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 10:05
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:That sounds like a super fun Excel file. yeah it's a 4X Game
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 03:16
|
|
|
The guy (W. Morgan Sheppard) who voiced Civ V has died. https://twitter.com/Mark_Sheppard/status/1082129529844449282
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2019 00:35
|
|
|
Bedurndurn posted:The guy (W. Morgan Sheppard) who voiced Civ V has died. That’s a bummer. Of all the narrators in the series he was far and away my favorite. Everything he said had a certain weight to it that neither Sean Bean or Leonard Nimoy captures.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2019 06:52
|
|
|
chaosapiant posted:That’s a bummer. Of all the narrators in the series he was far and away my favorite. Everything he said had a certain weight to it that neither Sean Bean or Leonard Nimoy captures. Absolutely agree. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-Ha2LHxiIA
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2019 17:19
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/civgame/status/1082653154657873923?s=21 UNIQUE DISTRICT – SUGUBA This replacement for the Commercial Hub allows Mali to purchase Units, Buildings, and Districts at a reduced cost, with either Gold or Faith. Also provides additional Gold for adjacent Holy Sites, tiles containing a River edge, and bonus Gold for every two adjacent District tiles. UNIQUE ABILITY – SONGS OF THE JELI Provides City Centers with additional Faith and Food for every adjacent Desert and Desert Hills tile. Mines provide less Production to the city, but grant additional Gold output. Mali may purchase Commercial Hub district buildings with Faith, but suffer an overall Production penalty when constructing buildings or training units. UNIQUE UNIT – MANDEKALU CAVALRY This Medieval-era unit replaces the Knight and prevents Mali Trader units from being plundered, as long as they are on a land tile within four tiles of a Mandekalu Cavalry unit. Combat victories provide Gold equal to the unit’s base Combat Strength. MANSA MUSA UNIQUE ABILITY – SAHEL MERCHANTS International Trade Routes grant Gold for each flat Desert tile within the originating city’s borders, and Sahel Merchants unlocks an additional Trader slot whenever Mali enters a Golden Age.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2019 17:58
|
|
|
Glass of Milk posted:I just don't wanna zoom into each combat in Civ. I like the Total War games for what they are, and I like Civ for it's abstraction of combat. If you must get one step closer towards tactical combat, have there be different tactics sets you could use in combat - aggressive, cautious, etc. Heck, you could even make some of them Civ unique, like a German blitzkrieg or Roman testudo. Yeah, exactly. I feel like that sort of combat also bogs down late game warfare when you're maneuvering several armies around and especially against an AI that might get production bonuses. I want a little less micro and a little more macro. Not to mention that the Endless Legend AI is also pretty incompetent at its form of combat and I would like something that the AI can at least compete with.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2019 18:03
|
|
|
Liking how the civs in this expack are going with the theme of making good use of "bad" terrain.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2019 18:19
|
|
|
Hell yeah! Mali!
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
ixnay posted:UNIQUE ABILITY – SONGS OF THE JELI How much gold do you need to equal a hammer? 2-3? I'm getting the distinct feeling it'll be 1 to 1.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2019 19:16
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:How much gold do you need to equal a hammer? 2-3? I'm getting the distinct feeling it'll be 1 to 1. According to the video: Mines have 1 less production and add +4 gold -30% production speed for units/buildings Commercial hub provides a 20% gold discount on unit/building purchases My gut is that it sounds pretty painful to play as. It seems like a lot is riding on having a good desert city to spam big money trade routes from, which means Petra is probably going to be absolutely make or break.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2019 19:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:28 |
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:How much gold do you need to equal a hammer? 2-3? I'm getting the distinct feeling it'll be 1 to 1. I think it's 6 gold for 1 hammer. Edit: After looking at some samples in the video, it does look like it's closer to 4-1. If that's the case then losing a production from a mine is pretty much nothing. The Human Crouton fucked around with this message at 20:10 on Jan 8, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2019 19:30
|
|