|
Lol wrong thread
Microplastics fucked around with this message at 09:16 on Apr 3, 2019 |
#
?
Apr 3, 2019 09:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 20:31 |
|
|
So they nerfed the Mali free units exploit by nerfing democracy so that they can only get a 95% discount now? ...Not sure what I expected tbh.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2019 11:09
|
|
|
Can't wait to see how Victoria looks like with a beard
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2019 11:56
|
|
|
Civ 5 question: Out of curiosity, did anyone ever go through and put together a definitive list of what each "stat" in the Leader AI files actually mean? There's lists of what they supposedly mean, but there are stats given numbers in the .xml file that didn't get shown on that big "Leader Personalities chart". The list on the Civ wiki here says some things that were claimed inaccurate by someone who says he went through the source code to look at what they actually mean on reddit, but he only goes through a few of the values. The big reason I'm asking is because I'm looking through modded civs, and I like to look at the leader personalities to see if modders might have done interesting, unique personalities for the modded civs. Like, there's a Civilization for Dheginsea leading Goldoa, from the Fire Emblem franchise, and his personality is one of extremes, but fits Dheginsea's attitude quite well. In short, he just wants to be left alone. He's all but guaranteed to completely ignore every other civ, and all the city states, and just build up a small number of big cities and probably pursue either a culture or science victory. BlazetheInferno fucked around with this message at 04:40 on Apr 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2019 21:06
|
|
|
As someone who really likes figuring out in advance where I'm going to put down all my districts and wonders for the most potential, the new map pins are absolutely outstanding.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2019 00:21
|
|
|
For those that want to play Civ 6 with the art style of Civ 5: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1702339134
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2019 06:28
|
|
|
John F Bennett posted:For those that want to play Civ 6 with the art style of Civ 5: I will seriously, for real, make it through a campaign of Civ 6 with this. I can not stand the colors and the fog of war and the text just really drags the whole thing down for me. Thanks for posting this 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2019 06:34
|
|
|
John F Bennett posted:For those that want to play Civ 6 with the art style of Civ 5: Now I need that realism mods for units being less cartoony.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2019 06:48
|
|
|
Gobblecoque posted:Is it just Civ VI or other games? My first thought would be that your GPU or some other hardware is overheating or dying. Nah, it seems to only be Civ. I don't play many other games but I played a few others from my library last night and had no issue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2019 11:59
|
|
`
|
I’m trying Civ 6 again after not having touched it since early release (because my old computer couldn’t handle it) and wondering how necessary the expansions are. I recall they improved 5 a great deal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 00:13
|
|
|
John F Bennett posted:For those that want to play Civ 6 with the art style of Civ 5: I downloaded it. It's real pretty. The only one I liked more (and that only in small doses) was the watercolor map.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 02:42
|
|
|
Glass of Milk posted:the watercolor map.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 03:20
|
|
|
snoremac posted:I’m trying Civ 6 again after not having touched it since early release (because my old computer couldn’t handle it) and wondering how necessary the expansions are. I recall they improved 5 a great deal. Unless you are getting some great deal that makes picking them up a no-brainer, there's no harm just playing the base game for a while. If you don't like the base game the expansions won't fix it for you, they just pile lots more stuff on top.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 03:39
|
|
|
Ah okay. Yeah, they're a bit expensive at the moment so I'll stick with the base game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 03:48
|
|
|
Fleetwood Crack posted:Got a link? I searched steam workshop and can't find this. It was for Civ V I think- sorry, I should have specified.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 03:56
|
|
|
Glass of Milk posted:It was for Civ V I think- sorry, I should have specified.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 03:57
|
|
|
I'm disabling Religious Victory from now on.... The only victory I haven't gotten yet is Diplomatic. I was about 5-6 turns away and Japan suddenly won with religion  Not exactly one of those things you can just go back a few turns and combat, either. You need to care about religion pretty early on to have the infrastructure to keep from being converted, it's not like my keeping Korea from finishing a Science victory by sabotaging all of her Spaceports with spies constantly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 19:38
|
|
|
Religious victory is a very bad win condition because it forces anyone who hasn't founded a religion to fight against all religions. In V, you could spread a religion that you didn't found among your own cities for the benefit it provided. In VI, religion is a virus.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 21:02
|
|
|
And in IV it was "Diplomatic victory but earlier and you can cheat by giving an entire nation only one vote by spreading to only one of their cities". Religious victory has never been good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 21:22
|
|
|
I'm kind of torn on it, because "uniting the whole world under a single faith" is as good of a victory condition as anything else, but it never quite 'clicks'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 22:36
|
|
|
It doesn’t work because not everyone gets to play it to win. Anyone can play to go to space or conquer but on high diff it’s almost impossible to get a religion and so you are at best just a speed bump taking sides
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 22:52
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:And in IV it was "Diplomatic victory but earlier and you can cheat by giving an entire nation only one vote by spreading to only one of their cities". Civ4 didn't have religious victory? edit nvm I see what you're saying
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 23:00
|
|
|
I always shut down religion on small maps. On a large map I just make sure that two religious civ start on opposite corners of the map.It will most certainly cause a stalemate by the mid game and be fine. That said it would be nice if there was better bonuses for late adopters to religions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 00:23
|
|
|
It could be cool if there was some mechanics for the creation of new religions past the early game. Even aside from it being nearly impossible to beat high-level AI to a prophet, it can be a tough sell to invest production and time into holy sites when those resources are at a big premium. And hell, a lot of the real world's most dominant faiths are relatively very young.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 02:44
|
|
|
Trying to spread a religion against the AI on a map that's anything but tiny is absolutely tedious. It's a cool idea and I liked religion in IV but no, no thanks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 02:51
|
|
|
You should be able to get a prophet once all the religions have been founded of you've adopted one and use it to reform the religion into your own with slightly different tenants, entering into a vicious holy war lasting hundreds of years entirely based on two differences in scripture
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 09:21
|
|
|
GodFish posted:You should be able to get a prophet once all the religions have been founded of you've adopted one and use it to reform the religion into your own with slightly different tenants, entering into a vicious holy war lasting hundreds of years entirely based on two differences in scripture How is this different mechanically from what already happens? You get a prophet, you found a religion, you build off the rudimentary spiritualism in place or reform each city to your religion. A bonus to food instead of to housing (or whatever, any of the tenets of the religions on offer) represent those small doctrinal differences.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 14:24
|
|
|
Just turn off religious victory and get that mod that disables building holy sites to effectively remove all religious units.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 14:53
|
|
|
The idea that there can only be X religions does seem pretty arbitrary. Even mechanically
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 15:13
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:The idea that there can only be X religions does seem pretty arbitrary. Even mechanically Seriously. A religion that's founded & not pursued is the same as one that's not founded, except for the city in which it appears. If anything, there should be essentially unlimited religions. Let me found more than one in my own civilization, and start cults in other civilizations. If you're planning on a religious victory, you're going to do that religion stuff early anyway, for greatest benefit -- the game doesn't need artificial scarcity.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 15:21
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:The idea that there can only be X religions does seem pretty arbitrary. Even mechanically Realistically some limit is needed it you have the exclusive belief system. But there's no reason other than making it a race to limit it more on smaller maps
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 15:24
|
|
|
homullus posted:How is this different mechanically from what already happens? You get a prophet, you found a religion, you build off the rudimentary spiritualism in place or reform each city to your religion. A bonus to food instead of to housing (or whatever, any of the tenets of the religions on offer) represent those small doctrinal differences. It's different from what already happens because it allows for great prophets to be gained after the initial primary religions are founded. So you can keep the cap of 5 or 6 main religions and all subsequent great prophets would be able to form a schism/sect of an existing religion (maybe the one present in the founding city). Rather than give these new religions the full selection of founding options, they could inherit most of the tenets of the original and swap out one of the beliefs for something new. This reflects the idea that they are mostly the same umbrella religion with small doctrinal differences and, from a gameplay/mechanics standpoint, makes late religions weaker due to limited choice in tenets. Obviously this game is a simulation/representation of reality and they can abstract it however they choose but it feels a little silly that the battle for religious domination in the year 2000 or whatever is between religions that were all founded before 1000 BC. Religions in game don't change over time very much (with the exception of evangelizing) and I think that feels boring and fails to capture the element of real religions branching into sects and nation-states redefining existing religions to suit their purpose. All that being said, I don't think the game would be made more fun by merely having more religions. They would need to make a lot of changes overall to make this work and be fun.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 16:11
|
|
God I fucking love Diablo 3 gold, it even paid for this shitty title
|
Gobblecoque posted:It could be cool if there was some mechanics for the creation of new religions past the early game. Even aside from it being nearly impossible to beat high-level AI to a prophet, it can be a tough sell to invest production and time into holy sites when those resources are at a big premium. And hell, a lot of the real world's most dominant faiths are relatively very young. Maybe something more like a schism instead of a new religion? It would be cool if you could slow down someone else going for a religious victory by investing later once they have taken over your cities
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 16:12
|
|
|
I agree that the way 5+6 handle religion is dumb. I actually really liked 4's take on it, where it was primarily economic and diplomatic. The ability to convert a nearby civ so that they would be your bro was pretty nice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 16:51
|
|
|
IV's take on religion was really dumb. Religion in Civ in general has been handled pretty badly, though, and it shouldn't be a victory type anyhow because it's not conceptually distinct enough from culture.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 17:58
|
|
|
pogothemonkey0 posted:It's different from what already happens because it allows for great prophets to be gained after the initial primary religions are founded. So you can keep the cap of 5 or 6 main religions and all subsequent great prophets would be able to form a schism/sect of an existing religion (maybe the one present in the founding city). Rather than give these new religions the full selection of founding options, they could inherit most of the tenets of the original and swap out one of the beliefs for something new. This reflects the idea that they are mostly the same umbrella religion with small doctrinal differences and, from a gameplay/mechanics standpoint, makes late religions weaker due to limited choice in tenets. Yeah, this. It'd let you ignore religion if you didn't care about the advantages of founding your own, and then in the medieval era or whenever and someone has converted your cities and you ended up building some cathedrals you could get your own branch of orthodox shinto who think religious art doesn't belong in their mosques.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 18:12
|
|
|
It would be interesting to see a mechanic where religion just happens, rather than is specifically founded by a civ. Then the different civs can vie for control of it, or try to remove it from their territories, or adopt it as state religion, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 18:48
|
|
|
Aerdan posted:IV's take on religion was really dumb. It was a fine mechanic to bolster the Diplomacy meta-game, as well as providing real incentives to founding your own. No it wasn't trying to simulate religion in form or fashion.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 19:25
|
|
|
At least in 5 Religion is just for boosts and benefits, rather than being a victory condition itself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 20:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 20:31 |
|
|
Did nonChristian religions even have missionaries?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 20:36
|
|