|
The Human Crouton posted:I was never one of those people, but I worry about these graphics. I'm hoping they chose them because there is no efficient way to improve on V graphics without current players getting hefty machines: so they went the fanciful route instead. Or, um, perhaps they simply wanted to go for a particular effect and had a hard time getting that effect with realistic graphics. Y'know. Like they outright stated when they were talking about their choices in art direction.
|
#
¿
May 14, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:35 |
|
|
Handsome Ralph posted:What if there was a happy medium between stacks and 1UPT? That's kinda the idea behind the corps and army mechanic, from what they've said thus far. Auxiliary equipment (artillery, etc.) would be available as support units, which can merge with military units for defensive or offensive purposes. e.g., a cannon would stack with a musketman.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
Banana Man posted:I didn't really play the game that much but heard friends gush over it, what were some examples? It's basically Civ2 with some enhancements, so it has all the problems Civ2 does and more.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:loving hexes? Again??? They're here to stay, sorry. I would prefer an arc-based free-form movement mechanism, but that's just not practical.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
The other issue is that tactical combat violates the Covert Action Rule™, so it's not going to happen.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
Red Bones posted:I hope this game takes advantage of the improvements in computers in the last six years and just gives us slightly larger maps, honestly. A game that gave you bigger maps to play around in and was balanced toward slightly bigger maps would be nice. Presumably one of the reasons they're starting over from scratch is so that they can do it right this time, instead of piling poorly-optimized code on top of poorly-optimized code on top of poorly-optimized code. That's really the main reason Civ5 is so sluggish: lovely programming. Lowen posted:Microprose made all sorts of rad games like Pirates!, Sword of the Samurai and stuff like that, following the same formula as Covert Action, and then they stopped. So the "Covert Action Rule" sucks. No, the Covert Action Rule specifically concerns the problem where the main game didn't mesh well with the sub game, both mechanically and, uhh, 'feel'-wise. Intricate mechanics of the sort required for decent tactical combat lack the 'feel' Civilization's aiming for, so it's not going to happen. Aerdan fucked around with this message at 22:03 on May 24, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 24, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:I think you have to pay gold to change cards so you can't just switch back and forth at will. I don't know what the cost is for actually changing government types though. There's definitely some sort of cost associated with switching, since you only get to change freely the turn that you unlock new cards.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:In the context of the screenshot it doesn't look like it's anywhere near the city. And I would have thought it would be part of the military base district, with its signature red colouring - but the only red thing there is a windsock. Looks like airbases are in! Add to that the fact that it's sitting outside the border of its presumed civ of origin (which only makes sense), so it looks like aircraft outside the city is finally a thing again.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:I actually learned a bit from the quotes. Something about the heads of industry don't ever come together-even for merriment and diversion-without the conversation turning to conspiracy against the public. "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public..." —Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:Builders seem a bit pointless to me. You build them, with say, 75 hammers, and then they get 3 improvements before they're gone forever. Why not have the city throw 25 hammers at an improvement directly? Why have this intermediary? Builders don't seem to add anything except the faff of having to move them to the desired locations. I could be persuaded I think, but I'm unconvinced at the moment. After you built up your cities in Civ5 your workers sat around costing you GPT until you either disbanded them or found them something to do. Builders with charges eliminates this problem because you'll have expended your builders by the time you run out of tiles to improve.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
I really, really hope someone writes a UI mod that puts all the information relevant to the player in one place instead of scattering it to the four corners of the screen. I have a big monitor so I can see better, not so that I can crane my neck every which way to keep an eye on numbers'n'poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2016 11:00
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:It's not that you can't do anything creative like multiple leaders, they just made the conscious choice to not do that, because players would feel like they got ripped off if they just got a "rehash" of an older civ. I certainly wouldn't mind, but a large chunk of the player base would. I'm of the opinion that they decided against multiple leaders because the UA system really doesn't allow for it. Washington and Teddy Roosevelt, while they lived in very different times, were both kinda isolationist, for instance. Then, too, many civilizations just don't have a second iconic leader that would be distinct enough to qualify for their own UAs. So, rather than waste time trying to figure out how to make it work, they decided to pick just one. (More than that, their preference for iconic female leaders generally means they skipped over an iconic male leader or two, so having multiple leaders would just skew the leader pool further into the masculine.)
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2016 11:42
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:To the contrary, I think the UA system would have aided multiple leaders well. You keep the UB and UUs (as those define the country), but give them a new UA(which usually defines the leader). ...Come up with 43 alternate leaders, one per Civ5 civilization, then, and UAs for each. You can't use fictional leaders, you can't pull leaders from other civilizations unless they're part of the conglomerate (so no non-British Celtic leaders, for instance), and you certainly can't use prominent people who weren't widely-recognized champions of a national identity for the civilization. (...am I missing anything that would bar an existing leader, aside from e.g. Dido?)
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2016 13:29
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:Civ 4 literally did this though, just with traits. Some civs had 3! Not really. Most (all?) UAs are tied to the civilization rather than any personality the leaders might've had. Also, Civ4's traits were boring and there are obvious 'best' combinations depending on your goals. I'd accept UAs tied to the leader's hidden agenda, though. Prism posted:They have to be not alive. ...Or Mao or Stalin...
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2016 14:10
|
|
|
Clarste posted:Conversely, secularism can also be anti-science. If you want some examples of that, look at the antivaxxers, anti-GMO whingers, animal rights activists (these guys actually do have a point, but I digress), etc., most of which are dominated by secularists. The idea that science and religion are mutually exclusive stems largely from the Protestant cults that are trying to appeal to ignorance, particularly creationists and their ilk, from my understanding.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2016 10:06
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:Why do you feel the need to especially punish the stupid with game mechanics? Isn't the fact that they fail to capitalize and good mechanics punishment enough? What did stupid people ever do to you? Exist? 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
GuyUpNorth posted:Was Greece ever unified enough for a leader besides the Macedonian Alexander? I doubt Firaxis would split it up to separate city-states like Athens and Sparta, which could have their own separate ones. Pericles showed up at least once in the franchise...
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
Gabriel Pope posted:By "overhead" I'm referring to mechanical in-game costs of owning/developing/maintaining territory, not the time spent as a player doing micro. That is, de-facto, punishing the player for expanding. Good job.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:I thought so too, but look at this. You can tell that this unit has 4MP because it can get onto the hill marked X, and can also circle around the zone of control to get to Y. Tile Z is the issue. Unless it costs 2MP to enter tundra then this MP estimate is wrong. Costs 2MP to cross the river, it looks like, from that screenshot in isolation. Which is an improvement over Civ5's 'costs all remaining MP' thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:And if it costs 2MP to cross a river then that unit should be able to reach tile Z. I am a dingus and can't count, clearly. I can't imagine why tundra would be impassable, though, unless there's supposed to be a district there or something.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
berenzen posted:If the tundra was classified as a hill, wouldn't that prevent movement to it? Nope. If you have at least 1MP remaining and the tile is not impassable (mountain, occupied by an unstackable unit, etc.), you can move into a tile with any terrain feature.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:I can't imagine they wouldn't allow any full action with 1 point left. Otherwise you potentially end up in the situation of having a unit that literally can't do anything due to circumstances. Plus the current approach is pretty standard for "action point"-based games in general. More than that, they scrapped the 'must have this many MP to move into a tile' rule after SMAC, since boy howdy was that obnoxious given the MP penalties you could rack up due to xenofungi. (Civ3's manual (pp59-60) says you can move into a tile as long as you have non-zero MP, so this not a new-as-of-5 thing.)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Chronojam posted:Didn't civ 2 feature units with fractional (by thirds) movement? They still moved or attacked into adjacent tiles but had a combat penalty if an enemy was there. Yes, but you had to have Enough™ movement in order to actually move. Combat you could do at x/3 strength based on the fractional move you had left, as Cythereal said.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:Also, isn't it the only thing in the game that is formally obsoleted? In Civ 4 many (if not all) wonders got obsoleted at some stage, their bonuses no longer applying. The Great Wall, I think, is the only thing that kept this. A better way to handle it would've been to grant all units a free promotion upon researching Dynamite that lets them ignore the Wall's effects.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
Gort posted:They really need to bring this back. I've seen enough of the AI completely forgetting to build workers or wandering them constantly into the same barbarian camp, thanks. "They", and Call to Power, were not in any way affiliated with the Sid Meier's Civilization franchise at all; CTP only has 'Civlization' in its title because it was also based on the Avalon Hill board game Civilization. Sorry to disappoint.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
Tarquinn posted:Now I want DOTA style announcer packs for Civ VI. Oh, are we naming people we want to voice the quotes now? Morgan Freeman. You may close the thread now.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2016 08:25
|
|
|
Be aware that, because CBP includes DLLs, it is unfortunately Windows-only.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2016 02:46
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:People bitching about a woman leading France, I assume? People bitching about that woman leading France and not one of the numerous male personalities that have been involved with French history. One did actually suggest Jeanne d'Arc, though.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
 having the highest population doesn't necessarily mean you are winning
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2016 08:21
|
|
|
Honestly, a lot of it is that the AI is poo poo at prioritizing unit movements. You see this with their inability to lay down improvements, both as enemy civs and as the 'automated worker' feature. You also see this with their scouting; it's not methodical in the least; units just randomly change direction every few turns. That incapacity also leads to their incompetent shuffling about while invading. (Sidenote: unit-swapping is actually doable, just order a unit to move into the same tile as another unit, provided both have moves remaining.)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
Orcs and Ostriches posted:history creating empires like Rome, China, Persia, England, etc. ...You mean like the Celts, Denmark, Korea, e: vvv I'll give you that one. vvv Aerdan fucked around with this message at 23:17 on Aug 15, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
Civilization VI 25th Anniversary Edition announced, which includes a few physical bonuses in addition to the stuff available in the digital deluxe edition.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
majormonotone posted:Beyond Earth isn't necessarily bad, at least, not in the same way vanilla CiV was. It's just really loving boring, and miasma is dumb, and I have ADHD and literally can't read the tech web Except it tries to be a spiritual successor to SMAC while also providing a more generic environment. That's part of why it's boring: the factions have no flavour except in the civilopedia, so it's hard to care. The VAs reading the tech quotes sound fairly bored, too, and then there's the lack of dialogue for buildings... It's a bland puréed mess.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
OfChristandMen posted:So Ghandi's ability mostly affects the Civ6 equivalent of "Panetheons" and not the 2nd or 3rd belief you'd get upon following a religion? That's worse than I expected, but watching some streams of people getting multiple Workboat/Culture pantheons, I can see how it would be busted to go further than that. It's basically one of the Piety policies for free, right? No? India's Dharma ability allows them to use the follower beliefs of all religions present in a given city. That's not the pantheon belief.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
ChrisXP posted:Am I totally missing the point here? I can see that Gorgo is on the leader list there, but when I saw the video I thought they were trying to avoid revealing the concept of Suzerain which is in the text that he is actually reading aloud..... City-state diplomacy had already been discussed prior to that stream.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:No, it just requires them to build in a scripting engine so that mods don't require compiled code (which is de facto platform-specific) to work. Really, it just means they'd have to make it unnecessary to have to (re)build the core DLL like it is for Civ4 & Civ5 mods that need to do so in order to make the changes they want.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
AlphaKretin posted:Civ V mods are technically cross platform if they don't touch DLLs, but the Aspyr ports don't have Workshop support so it's a pain in the rear end a relative fraction of the players bother with, afaik. They...do have Workshop support. I'm staring at it on my Mac. e: 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2016 13:25
|
|
|
Reagan — Reaganomics: Extra unhappiness from city size, but 25% more gold from buildings.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2016 11:33
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:Honestly the unironic roo rah about Teddy in this thread is a little off putting So post unironic roo rah about Lincoln or Washington, then. Or another President.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:35 |
|
|
The White Dragon posted:I don't get these OSX woes at all, Macs have been able to boot Windows OSes for a decade. An entire generation of computer users have only ever seen Macs with Intel CPUs at this point. It's great that you have $200 to just throw away on an OS solely for gaming purposes and have the technical knowledge required to utilize Boot Camp.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2016 04:30
|
|