|
Superior thread title, superior thread. I'm probably gonna pre-order the deluxe edition even though all common sense dictates I shouldn't!  Also I hope they've learned their lesson with the DLC stuff, if it's just like four civs and some scenarios that would suck. But since XCOM 2's season pass thing seems to deliver a decent enough value, I'm hoping Firaxis has finally learned a way to package DLC in a way that pleases 2K without ripping off their customers.
|
#
¿
May 14, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 05:26 |
|
|
I really like the diplomacy screens but I can totally get how they can be annoying if several pop up in quick succession when you just want to get a new building going in a city. It'd be nice if you could set an importance threshold for them to pop up fullscreen, so lesser things would just be alerts.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2016 14:28
|
|
|
I think I've said it before but they already tried a facebook Civ spinoff and it was a huge flop. Why would they risk trying it again with a main series title? Plus Civ Rev has a mobile port and it's a hot buggy mess because they gave it to 2K China or something. It's also a 2D game, because I'm pretty sure running a game like Civ at the graphical fidelity of V OR VI is beyond any phone currently on the market. As someone that actually enjoyed Civ Rev, it's a real letdown that the mobile port is so dang buggy. Ranging from instability, AI being unable to play the game properly, to stuff like multiplayer being separate DLC... it's just not pretty.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
Yeah I feel like 1UPT didn't get a fair shake because the AI sucks at using it and multiplayer wasn't so hot until many patches in. Firaxis should see if the google dude who made that GO-playing AI is interested in doing some contract work. Apparently before he was picked up by google he did do AI for video games, so it's not a totally far-fetched idea!
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:Getting AI to do a Good Job at civ would be very very difficult. If they start now they could have something ready by the time Civ VII is ready to release!
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Speaking of CivRev, is the second one worth the $10 asking price? Probably not. Civ Rev 2 is basically the second attempt at a mobile port for Civ Rev, as opposed to a real sequel. It's a better attempt, because it has actual 3D graphics and a couple new leaders, but many of the same issues from the first port persist in this one - AI and barbarian units don't interact, for example. This might not sound like a big deal but it actually gives you, the player, a huge advantage for snapping up all the untouched barb villages, along with impeding the AI's expansion because they have to just try to move around the barb units in their way. Civ Rev for 360 (or PS3, I think?) is a super-fun game that was designed (actually by Sid Meier!) to deliver the essential civ experience in a single sitting, and I think it does a good job at that even if it's obviously simpler than IV, V, or presumably VI. The mobile ports, however, should only be considered if you absolutely positively need to play an incomplete version of that game.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
I thought Civ Rev was a ton of fun and a great way to introduce people to the Civ series and get them interested in strategy games in general, I wish it had gotten a real sequel that addressed some of its design issues instead of being relegated to the realm of lazy mobile ports.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Should Civ AI play like a vague approximation of their real-world counterpart with some variance, or play like a player trying to win the game with some variable traits? Or some other way?
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
Privateers were the coolest in Civ IV.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
I mean, 150 civs/leader of the quality that Civ 4, 5, or (hopefully) 6 would actually be a monumental undertaking, but it's a fun pipe dream!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
The America intro video was cool but it really put into perspective how bizarrely inflated they made Teddy's face by showing his in-game model next to real-life pictures of the guy. It's like he got stung by a bunch of bees!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
Why is Teddy Roosevelt fat, and why is Cleopatra straight-up white?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
sarmhan posted:She isn't when you aren't looking at a photograph of a magazine. Yeah, that looks more reasonable. To clarify, I wasn't trying to argue that Cleo couldn't be like, white-skinned, but in the magazine scan she just looked pale white which I feel would've been a little silly for anyone in Egypt to -that- white. They'd get a sunburn!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
Cleopatra was also the Egyptian leader in Civ Rev
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2016 03:11
|
|
|
Rolled America for my maiden Civ VI voyage and I'm having a hard time making friends, but I'm finding that the tried and true strategy of "use my smaller amount of units smarter than the AI uses their hordes" to be keeping me afloat. At first I thought that the AI was just pointlessly milling its soldiers about my city and to an extent they definitely were, but what they did accomplish was pillaging my districts, which loving sucks. It takes forever to fix those, and in the same game I had a barbarian boat swoop in to my coastal city and pillage my Harbor the very turn I finished building the drat thing! I don't know if pillaging districts will slow the AI down, but it's vital for the human player to not let it happen to them.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
Cities don't have a ranged attack until you build walls, but even after that sometimes I had a really hard time clicking the red circle to activate it, especially if I had a unit stationed on the city.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
"Finished" my first game in that I'm pretty sure I've lost and I'm not sure I want to keep playing. I made the mistake of checking the actual victory metrics and found out that Japan's 53 techs researched was slightly higher than my 35. Their military seemed weak until I realized that I was just fighting all the dreg units they hadn't bothered to upgrade, and their cities were all 90+ HP Helms Deep-esque fortresses that could shred my musketmen and field cannons before I could whittle them down. I need to take a more expansionistic approach, or at least figure out how to properly speculate on new city locations - The Civ V approach of "less is more" doesn't seem quite as true here!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
PirateBob posted:How long does it take for a city to stop being Occupied and all pissy about amenities? Is there something you have to build? The original owner needs to cede the city to you in peace talks, or you need to eradicate the original owner completely. I actually don't like that mechanic, or rather I don't like that ceding cities isn't automatically included in the default peace agreement. It's not like there's any reason I would -not- want them to cede cities I decided to keep, right?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
Overall, I'm pretty okay with how the release turned out. "The UI is bad" is a definite problem with launch VI, but it's a lot better than launch V's "I cannot play this game". And Beyond Earth's uh, everything.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2016 06:48
|
|
|
Brannock posted:Also, this is the third game I've seen Gandhi get Nuke Happy in and I'm wondering if he's guaranteed to get that as his secret agenda. At the very least I would expect some kind of increased odds for him to get it, because Tradition(TM)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
Okay so I don't wanna sound like a dick by asking this but: How do you pronounce the leader of Kongo's name?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Yo, this game has more than one quote for a given piece of research. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Here's question: If I want to place a district over a forest, does clearing the forest have the same effect as chopping it, and if not, what would be a good way to ensure that the chop actually gets used somehow?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:
I feel like an idiot for saying this, but I mean, three times zero is still zero, yeah? Ratios and Tendency posted:I don't understand why everyone is freaking out about autocycling through units. When I'm binge-playing this game late at night sometimes it facilitates me moving the wrong guy into the wrong place, especially since it sometimes will jump to another unit while I'm clicking the next unit I want to move.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:But I thought it was supposed to only count that way for cities you're liberating and not ones you're burning down. I see what you're saying. Maybe they could add some more differentiating between the types of just wars by having those three listed not let you raze stuff for free, but have more bloodthirsty ones like colonial or territorial wars let you reduce/remove the penalty for razing.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 01:34
|
|
|
Would the game be better or worse if you were not in a semi-permanent state of religious war at all times? I think it's kinda cool, but I also haven't been playing as much as some of my other pals, who seem a bit burnt out by it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 02:27
|
|
|
bump_fn posted:Is this true? Can you turn it off? Time victories are a thing, I want to say it's the year 2050. You can't turn it off, as far as I know.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
Zomborgon posted:You actually can turn it off; when creating a game, you can disable any victory type, including score (which is tallied at 2050, which is turn 700 on Standard). Turn/score limits been in the series at least as early as civ 3, and I turn them off every time. steinrokkan posted:There is an advanced setup option called something like "Turn limit" that can be toggled, I assume it does what you want. By default if you run out of time, the winner is chosen based on "score", but I don't think there is any score screen in the game. Sick. Also, Turn 700? I would kind of appreciate the game mercy-killing my run at that point.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
I could be talking out my rear end, but I vaguely remember reading that in Civ V, the city recommending icon would have access to information you didn't - namely, the availability of resources that you haven't revealed via research yet. Is it possible that something similar exists in VI, or am I just wrong in both games?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:even giving you a score and comparing you to a historical leader aren't present for some reason. This is from a few pages back but this feature is still totally in, second tab on the victory screen. I had a game where I annihilated everyone in tech, culture, relgion, everything, but I only had three cities so I had a terrible score. Warren G Harding wouldn't have kicked France's rear end and liberated Toronto, video game! <  >
Geight fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Oct 27, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
snoremac posted:I don't like how they changed movement so that you need two movement points to go uphill/forest/etc., rather than being able to spend the second point to do it. Yeah I also really do not like this, it makes exploring early a real pain and it's just kind of not fun to move around with those rules
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
I've yet to establish a trade route that didn't have a blank box for what the other party would be getting out the route.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
I think if you totally annihilate a civ then their cities are effectively ceded to you.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
Am I missing something with Inquisitors? They only work in your territory and the one I built seemed weaker than the invading Apostle.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:Where is the "Discuss" option on the diplomacy screen? I can't find it anywhere and it's infuriating to not be able to tell the other Civs to stop settling cities right on my boarder. I tried googling this and I can't find anything. I think it only shows up if the civ in question is diplomatically amicable to you. Or that's my best guess, anyways. Sometimes it's there on the diplo screen, sometimes it's not.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2016 07:32
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Weirdly I had a game with Gorgo and Qin on the same continent as me. See, that's the good kind of whacky diplomacy. I'm totally down with stuff like that, and agendas can enable that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
Olive Branch posted:The UI REALLY doesn't like you in this game. Check for the little wrench icon on top of the lower right window, near the move to, sleep, etc. actions when you send a worker into a pillaged area. I wonder if there's a bug with the worker UI that only happens sometimes, because whenever I put a worker on a damaged tile it automagically puts "repair this" on the top of the menu in plain sight. Also that video rules and I had forgotten that earlier civs used actual labels for barbarians instead of just the generic title.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
I'm glad that My2K stuff fizzled out quick.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:So there is no multiplayer at the moment? Or is there? Or does it need a patch? Multiplayer seems surprisingly playable for a civ game at launch.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 05:26 |
|
|
Can we get that district cheatsheet thing in the OP? That's really handy. Also agreeing with the sentiment from the last page that Civ VI's civlopedia is kind of a letdown. It's not good as a game mechanics reference because it lacks a lot of keywords, and it's even worse as light historical reading. Civ V's tone was lighthearted, Civ VI's tone is snarky.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2016 18:09
|
|