|
Marmaduke! posted:I can understand that thing might get in the way when you send a unit halfway around the world. But the thing that gets to me is the pathing, and how the game just doesn't understand its own rules. Especially when it comes to units on the sea and near the coast. Tell a unit to move somewhere that has a bit of land jutting out, and the game will display a path that makes the unit get back onto land and sometimes back out to sea again. Or send missionaries through another civ's territory and kill them (CivV).
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 23:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 14:54 |
|
|
Bring back stacks of doom, but also bring back stack wipes when losing a battle in a non fort or city square. Failing that, I like the idea of abstracting combat in Civ to some degree. Pushing units around the map has always been a staple of the series, but a system that focuses more on army composition, supply, and overall strategy would be interesting and much easier to make the AI less bad at it. Though it could be a challenge to adapt the system to different styles of warfare over the ages. Having front lines and supply chains and abstracted movement feels like it would be awkward when your army is a gaggle of club and short bow wielding cavemen. Kibbles n Shits fucked around with this message at 00:57 on Jan 31, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 00:54
|
|
|
I really dislike military victories / end-game military play. I'll early aggression push but if we're talking wait till bombards+ ugh. poo poo just moves so slow and by then you have so many units it takes 5-10 minutes to just click all of your military units one tile at a time because lol automatic pathing. I'm actually currently in a PYDT I would feel bad quitting out of, but I just skip half my turns at this point because moving 20-30 units is a big snooze for me. Lesson learned to not take over games from people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 02:05
|
|
|
I feel the opposite. If you rush bombers, you can take over the map stupid fast. I don't even worry about military until then and just push science, even on diety. I'd be curious to see what a group like OpenAI could do with Civ.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 02:43
|
|
|
Same. I hate early war, is so loving slow. Ill defend myself but I rarely attack But once I got bombers and artillery and tanks and etc, then Ill start loving around (also because I will be getting bored from the game already)
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 12:42
|
|
|
strangely, i find early war to be the quickest and easiest. enemy options are limited and if you're fast enough you'll get there before they have proper ranged units. the real challenge is getting all your conquering done and then stabilizing as you claw your way up from massively negative happiness from taking control of half the world's capital cities in twenty turns of each other before you even have all the luxury-improving techs researched 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 13:02
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:In my opinion one simple thing that would make 1UPT a lot less aggravating is transport units John F Bennett posted:Also transport ships are just a fun mechanic, imo. The two of you are going to have to explain to me what loading/unloading micro adds to the game, exactly. Or what else you're missing from transport ships. Like I was kinda assuming we could all at least agree that the autoboxing was an unambiguous improvement. onesixtwo posted:I really dislike military victories / end-game military play. I'll early aggression push but if we're talking wait till bombards+ ugh. poo poo just moves so slow and by then you have so many units it takes 5-10 minutes to just click all of your military units one tile at a time because lol automatic pathing. I actually like the military play all the way through, but it's different in SP when you can hold off an ocean of AI trash with, like, a dozen units max. Agree that movement speeds and pathing desperately need a rework.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 16:04
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:The two of you are going to have to explain to me what loading/unloading micro adds to the game, exactly. Or what else you're missing from transport ships. For me it's for role playing purposes. I have fun assembling a fleet, filling them with land troops and then using those transports to go back to the homeland to ferry new troops to the war. It makes a war much more active and I think it feels better, some extra tactics are in play. Yeah, it's a lot of extra micro-management so I get why it's not for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 16:07
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:The two of you are going to have to explain to me what loading/unloading micro adds to the game, exactly. Or what else you're missing from transport ships. I find a major pain in the arse to move a carpet of units across the map, with then all forgetting where they were going every other turn Thats the reason: I much rather load then all on some transport and move just 1
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 16:09
|
|
|
Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater here guys. Just because Civ units can't be trusted to move in a straight line doesn't mean manual transport loading will be fix things. Next you'll be suggesting that units have a drop-down menu to select moving and attacking in order to prevent misclicks *shudder*.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 16:18
|
|
|
Even if they didint cancel their paths all the time, is still a pain to move a large number of units across the map and I rather have transport units like in Warhammer 40K for that Specially in the water, by the way, since the embarked units are very vulnerable and helpless
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 16:36
|
|
|
There are two major AI issues: 1. it has to spend all movement points of all units, period. 2. It cannot commit to any decisions, unlike a human player. The second issue is the biggest one, and it informs all of the behaviour we've seen. Lack of improvements, aimless wandering of AI units, inability to capture cities, ... The agenda system could've done a lot to help focus the AI, but the current implementation mostly seems to affect diplomacy rather than informing the majority of the AI's decision-making as a player's agenda would.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 19:16
|
|
|
Sorry because I'm sure this question has come up before but I searched and couldn't find it. I've got an itch for some civ but I never really got too into civ 6; despite logging about 60 hours into it and buying both expansions I think I only finished 2 games. The past ~20 pages have convinced me to try out civ 5 again instead, what mods would you all recommend?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 06:00
|
|
|
Starks posted:Sorry because I'm sure this question has come up before but I searched and couldn't find it. I've got an itch for some civ but I never really got too into civ 6; despite logging about 60 hours into it and buying both expansions I think I only finished 2 games. The past ~20 pages have convinced me to try out civ 5 again instead, what mods would you all recommend? I think common recommendations include InfoAddict for the UI at the very least. I guess it depends if you want to change the gameplay or leave that untouched and just go for UI/Graphics mods. Personally I'd recommend Vox Populi for quite a different experience (overhaul mod), but I might be the only one in the thread that likes it. Have been tempted to do an LP of it actually, if I can find the time to dedicate to it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 18:11
|
|
|
Starks posted:Sorry because I'm sure this question has come up before but I searched and couldn't find it. I've got an itch for some civ but I never really got too into civ 6; despite logging about 60 hours into it and buying both expansions I think I only finished 2 games. The past ~20 pages have convinced me to try out civ 5 again instead, what mods would you all recommend? I like the one that allows your worker to plant forests. Its not a "remove improvements and restore a hex to it's original state" mod but it works well enough.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 18:23
|
|
|
Starks posted:Sorry because I'm sure this question has come up before but I searched and couldn't find it. I've got an itch for some civ but I never really got too into civ 6; despite logging about 60 hours into it and buying both expansions I think I only finished 2 games. The past ~20 pages have convinced me to try out civ 5 again instead, what mods would you all recommend? Starks posted:Sorry because I'm sure this question has come up before but I searched and couldn't find it. I've got an itch for some civ but I never really got too into civ 6; despite logging about 60 hours into it and buying both expansions I think I only finished 2 games. The past ~20 pages have convinced me to try out civ 5 again instead, what mods would you all recommend? Here's my loadout. I only use two mods that slightly change the rules. Everything else is UI. UI Enhanced User Interface - Adds too many quality of life changes to mention. Reduces clicks massively. Global Relations - Shows a graph of all relations, allows you to see relations from the diplomacy screen manages city-states, and has a great luxury resource trading helper screen. This replaces the Infoaddict mod for me. Quick Turns - Turns off unit animations that are irrelevant to you. Gives you options to select which animations to see. Faster Aircraft Animations - No more waiting 2 minutes per air manuever. Gibraltar, Reef, and Krakatoa Fixes - Stops certain natural wonders from appearing in unworkable tiles in the middle of the ocean. The Timeless Art of Seduction Game Changing Wonder Race - Lets you know if you will be beat to a wonder. No Penalty for Units Near Border - The world will no longer hate you because your warrior is 2 tiles away from your neighbor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 21:20
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:Here's my loadout. I only use two mods that slightly change the rules. Everything else is UI. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 21:29
|
|
|
I've always thought that you could save the 1UPT Civ 5/6 style combat by incorporating a dramatically oversimplified version of Hearts of Iron 4's gameplay. Some key changes, skipping naval combat for now, and with tons of gaps to fill in. Attack / Defense become end-of-turn-resolved front lines Keep the melee / ranged / artillery dynamic, and feel free to keep things like the distinction between anti-cavalry and heavy / light cavalry. Change the way attacks work so that each unit has a choice - move into an unoccupied area, move into an occupied area, or fortify. Fortifying multiple times in a row still increases defensive bonuses. All actions are resolved simultaneously at the end of the turn. Any tile where units come into conflict (both moving into the same tile, attacking into fortifying tile, etc., become a battleground. Both moving into an empty tile is resolved by the unit with the most movement, or more supply, or some other factor, moving in and defending. Ranged units and artillery units target hexes to support and aid their side in that battle. If you try to attack from tile A to tile B, but get attacked from tile C, your attack is cut off and you defend. Resolve all combat roughly as usual via strength, then resolve any units that are lost. Add in a system where units can be "broken" and retreat. This will basically function the same as a regular Civ VI game except by resolving things together it's more of a front-line combat and not just whoever goes first getting a huge advantage. The front line will dynamically move over time. Dynamic supply lines and reinforcements Units heal over time by getting supply and reinforcements from your civilization. Even attacking units can recover, but not as quickly. Supply lines work by drawing a line to your soldiers from your empire's sources of food or industry. You improve supply by keeping the area free of enemy units, building roads, upgrading roads through eras, building railroads, or by supplying via sea, which can't be done over cliffs, and receives a significant negative modifier if not done through a harbor. Make these supply lines visible on the screen, and unlike trade routes, make them raid-able across the entire length, creating a focus on securing and growing supply lines. When you move into a new tile, or into enemy territory, supply in that area starts low and has to grow over time as you occupy it. Low supplies reduce healing (through reinforcements) and combat strength (through ammo, repairs, etc.). Merge this system with the units that consume resources 1 per turn. Pillaging will allow units low on supplies to recover supplies (much as it allows healing now). Disrupting supply routes, by say exerting zone-of-control on a tile with a supply route, encircling an enemy units, or sending raiders into the back lines to raid the supply lines, will reduce an enemy's effectiveness. You can even make a "supply lens" showing a 1-10 score for each tile in your empire measuring how effective supply routes are to it. Rough tiles like hills without roads, snow or tundra, desert, etc., will reduce supply effectiveness, but you can overcome this by building roads / railroads, having routes around difficult terrain, shortening routes with tunnels or canals, etc. Reinforcements grow naturally and can be boosted by an Encampment city project, and are a resource that declines. Policies, buildings, etc., can be designed to increase them. They are required to make units. The number of reinforcements you get depend on your empire's fondness for the war (use the war weariness system but enhance it), grievances (if you have them against civilizations it grows), government type (make it a multiplier unique to each government, higher for warlike ones, lower for democratic ones), and overall empire happiness / amenities. Reinforcements are depleted as units heal in the field and as new ones are created. Create an "aircraft layer" similar to the satellite layer in beyond earth Aircraft work differently, either targeting areas for bombing runs, or setting up air superiority. You can set up overlapping zones of anti-air cover, and where they overlap with enemy zones air combat takes place at the end of the turn and aircraft take damage. An early aircraft may have a range or 3 from its airfield, and maybe apply superiority over one tile. Stealth fighters may have a range of 6 and apply superiority over a hex five across, etc. The aircraft layer shows your level of superiority, bases with aircraft, aircraft squadron strength and experience, current mission areas, etc., so you can plan deployments. Color code the layer for a quick look at where you may need to deploy aircraft to counteract enemy superiority. Bombing missions where you have high superiority are more effective, while bombing into areas with mixed or low superiority results in less or no damage done and significant damage taken. Anti-aircraft support crews are ground-based units that provide superiority into the aircraft layer and reduce bombing effectiveness and enhancing your air superiority in the area, making armies with significant anti-aircraft capabilities difficult to bomb as having full superiority is very hard. This will create aircraft "front lines", and you can more aggressively hunt for air superiority, or play defensively. Locate your opponent's airfields to determine the range they can support / bomb from and focus your ground front lines into areas where you can support but your opponent may not be able to. Re-adjust bombing runs to target areas with good air superiority. Bomb a heavily fortified city with defending fighters at your peril, but if you can sortie enough of your own aircraft there prepare to bomb it at your leisure. You can still use many of the existing elements Forts, when supplied, can become anchor points for defending units, and could actually be useful if combat occurs in a defended region. Combat happening all at once removes the human "first strike" advantage each turn. Units still move the same, exert zone of control, support / attack at certain ranges, etc. Supply lines can pretty easily use some updated code from trade routes, reinforcements gives more purpose to encampments once you have an army, etc. You can have units that are heavily reinforced lose experience, or have buildings at encampments decrease the loss-of-expertise reinforcement penalty. Grievances, amenities, and war weariness become part of a war morale effort, giving more purpose to those adders. A large advanced force can still overwhelm. I think this would preserve a lot of the feel of the combat while simplifying it a bit in some ways and working in more existing elements in to make it more dynamic and potentially hard to conquer an entire continent in 10 turns without dramatically superior forces or technology.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 21:59
|
|
|
Thanks for the suggestions all. I’m actually ok with game changing, not a purist by any means so I think I’ll try Vox Populi on top of the other ones mentioned. Also they should really add the portrait of Susie from the latest Curb Your Enthusiasm to the art of seduction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2020 05:04
|
|
|
Moving from round-robin turns to simulataneous resolution is a pretty big loving change to the core gameplay. You'd need some way of figuring out who 'wins' in cases like when two people finish the same wonder on the same turn, or try to settle cities within three tiles of each other in the same turn, etc. That said, I don't think it's a bad idea per se, though it could certainly be implemented badly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2020 09:22
|
|
|
It would require some thinking around civilian units but making movement or at least combat simultaneous and keeping the rest of the game IGOUGO wouldn't be too difficult.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2020 10:22
|
|
|
Starks posted:Thanks for the suggestions all. I’m actually ok with game changing, not a purist by any means so I think I’ll try Vox Populi on top of the other ones mentioned. VP changes so much that it's easy to get mod conflicts, so be careful with that. I can absolutely confirm Faster Aircraft Animations is a must though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2020 11:01
|
|
|
Boksi posted:Moving from round-robin turns to simulataneous resolution is a pretty big loving change to the core gameplay. You'd need some way of figuring out who 'wins' in cases like when two people finish the same wonder on the same turn, or try to settle cities within three tiles of each other in the same turn, etc. That said, I don't think it's a bad idea per se, though it could certainly be implemented badly. Good point - I imagined just the combat being simultaneous but this would be a big quality of life issue with movement when you’re just reorganizing units. I imagined all the other parts going one at a time
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2020 17:37
|
|
|
how do I maintain loyalty for capturing outlying cities? I've tried doing the ones closest to my empire, I've tried moving a governor in immediately....but they always revert to free cities
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2020 19:54
|
|
|
Defenestration posted:how do I maintain loyalty for capturing outlying cities? I've tried doing the ones closest to my empire, I've tried moving a governor in immediately....but they always revert to free cities
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2020 20:01
|
|
|
Defenestration posted:how do I maintain loyalty for capturing outlying cities? I've tried doing the ones closest to my empire, I've tried moving a governor in immediately....but they always revert to free cities You have to imagine a circle radiating out from your empire, big during golden ages, small during dark ages, and conquer cities that are at least within that rough circle. You get a sense of it, but generally focus on taking cities that are closer to your empire first. If you have to go around the long way, or if you don't radiate enough loyalty, you may just be hosed. Generally speaking during a war you will garrison a unit (this should remove the occupied city loyalty penalty I think?), then use policy cards, and rush buy / repair a monument, and most importantly move a Governor there. If you're REALLY extending use the diplomatic governor with the +2 loyalty in a radius promotion. Good policies are: Praetorium (Recorded History Civic) Governors provide +2 Loyalty per turn to their city. Limitanei (Early Empire Civic) +2 Loyalty per turn for cities with a garrisoned unit. But really the only truly effective way to keep a city that is losing loyalty is to remove the offending loyalty pressure. That means don't stop conquering never stop conquering. Eventually once you conquer enough cities you will discover there is no longer any loyalty pressure, all your cities will be loyal to you, the war will mysteriously be over, and you can no longer talk to the ruler you were at war with! This is the only truly effective way of keeping part of someone's empire. All the other methods are effectively ways of turning a -23 loyalty per turn into a -10 loyalty per turn to allow you extra time to conquer the next city. Tom Tucker fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Feb 2, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2020 20:55
|
|
|
Defenestration posted:how do I maintain loyalty for capturing outlying cities? I've tried doing the ones closest to my empire, I've tried moving a governor in immediately....but they always revert to free cities If the city is getting loyalty pressure from nearby, non-war civs you can also try and start a cultural alliance and that should remove some loyalty pressure. But yeah if you try all your tools and it still doesn't work, consider razing and resettling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2020 21:05
|
|
|
Has anyone else noticed the AI seeming to take pantheons deliberately so you can't have one that would be good in your particular situation? I've been in desert areas and thought about how cool it'd be to get Desert Folklore, but by the time my turn to pick comes up, it's gone. OR I'll have a ton of marshes/floodplains I could use Lady of the Reeds and Marshes on, and that one's only taken when I could make use of it. Same with Dance of the Aurora, if I have a tundra start, it's always gone by the time I can pick, but when I'm not in tundra or anywhere near it, it's available. Obviously I can pick whatever I want with a lucky relic or meeting a religious city state first, but when I have to do God-King policy to pick, it always seems slower, so Religious Settlements is taken almost every time, as well as whatever start I could benefit from.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:37
|
|
|
Huh, that's a new situation. Genghis Khan had previously taken Bologna, then declares war on me. I'm the suzerain of Hong Kong, which proceeds to absolutely stomp Bologna into the ground and razes it before I can even make it there. Weird situation, don't think I've ever seen one CS sack another.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 02:55
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:Huh, that's a new situation. Genghis Khan had previously taken Bologna, then declares war on me. I'm the suzerain of Hong Kong, which proceeds to absolutely stomp Bologna into the ground and razes it before I can even make it there. Weird situation, don't think I've ever seen one CS sack another. Yeah, this will happen and it is hilarious every time. If you have an allied CS, they will absolutely curb stomp any city they are within attacking range of, if they are blessed to have troops to do that. Because they aren't an actual major civ AI, they have zero scripting allowing them to have more than one city, deleted it goes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 03:31
|
|
|
You can abuse this very easily too. Have ranged units to weaken the city and let a CS ally raze it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 10:08
|
|
|
There's a fun caveat to that one: City States can't take actual civ capitals, whether original or a moved capital because the first one was lost. They'll just attack it until they're dead with the city remaining at 1 HP. Had Japan try to throw down with me once, sending a huge army to my lands, not realizing I had three city states allied and on his back border. They went apeshit and burned down two cities then assaulted the capital boldly, but futilely. Eventually one of them got low enough with their remaining troops that I levied the couple that were left and took it myself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 12:57
|
|
|
Nucular Carmul posted:There's a fun caveat to that one: City States can't take actual civ capitals, whether original or a moved capital because the first one was lost. They'll just attack it until they're dead with the city remaining at 1 HP. Had Japan try to throw down with me once, sending a huge army to my lands, not realizing I had three city states allied and on his back border. They went apeshit and burned down two cities then assaulted the capital boldly, but futilely. Eventually one of them got low enough with their remaining troops that I levied the couple that were left and took it myself. this was one of the weirder/funnier things about CSes in 5, because they were bad at combat but they could capture the hell out of a weakened capital and were loving vulturey about it. if you could herd or chance one into capturing a well-developed capital and buy an unbreakable alliance with them it was a pretty great deal
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 13:11
|
|
|
Now I'm wondering what makes the city states competent at taking cities when the proper civs are hopeless.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 13:25
|
|
|
Honestly, I kinda feel like civ needs more abstract combat, not less. If military was as detailed as everything else, unit types would just be buildings that generated "military points" which you could pay varying amounts of to take hexes of hostile enemies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 13:36
|
|
|
Kassad posted:Now I'm wondering what makes the city states competent at taking cities when the proper civs are hopeless. they probably have the combat AI of a normal civ but they place the same "value" on unit preservation as barbarians (none)
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 14:21
|
|
|
They're also not wasting time on building wonders, settlers or ineffectual districts, so most of the time they're building units, which tend to be close to each other, creating a relatively effective fighting force. On deity, their units are actually better fighters than yours because the AI wouldn't get +4 strength when fighting them, as well. Plus they keep up with the tech race too, at a time when most human players will be lagging on higher difficulties. Proper AI defences tend to be either full-on or non-existent. So if 5 City state units hit a weak part of the AI then they might not even bother creating any units to defend. It almost makes you understand why the AI invades so many city states!
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 14:42
|
|
|
onesixtwo posted:Yeah, this will happen and it is hilarious every time. If you have an allied CS, they will absolutely curb stomp any city they are within attacking range of, if they are blessed to have troops to do that. Because they aren't an actual major civ AI, they have zero scripting allowing them to have more than one city, deleted it goes. Nucular Carmul posted:There's a fun caveat to that one: City States can't take actual civ capitals, whether original or a moved capital because the first one was lost. They'll just attack it until they're dead with the city remaining at 1 HP. Had Japan try to throw down with me once, sending a huge army to my lands, not realizing I had three city states allied and on his back border. They went apeshit and burned down two cities then assaulted the capital boldly, but futilely. Eventually one of them got low enough with their remaining troops that I levied the couple that were left and took it myself. You know, if Civ had a proper occupied/owned distinction the way Paradox games do these edge cases would evaporate like dew in sunlight. Panzeh posted:Honestly, I kinda feel like civ needs more abstract combat, not less. If military was as detailed as everything else, unit types would just be buildings that generated "military points" which you could pay varying amounts of to take hexes of hostile enemies. Dunno if I want more abstraction in my Civ. It's only a hair away from perfectly frictionless game entities colliding in a void as it is. I am feeling the idea of territory exchange on scales more granular than entire cities, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 15:16
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:You know, if Civ had a proper occupied/owned distinction the way Paradox games do these edge cases would evaporate like dew in sunlight. I guess we all dream of the perfect Civ-Paradox hybrid from time to time... Although there is also a decent chance it would end up being the worst of both worlds 
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 15:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 14:54 |
|
|
What, like AIs that can neither wage war *nor* prop up their economy?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 16:52
|
|