|
Gustavus Adolphus reigned from 1611 onwards though, I wouldn't count him a 16th century leader just because he was born in 1594.
|
#
¿
May 26, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 04:44 |
|
|
Phobophilia posted:The game had better give a drat good reason for me to waste a tile on a fort or a wall instead of something productive Maybe you have more tiles than pops to work them with? Seems like a pretty common scenario to me based on past games. If forts/walls are actually useful I can see them being used.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2016 12:01
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:This is how I play too lol. Mega optimized is 1300. That's with map settings designed for finishing as fast as possible, and rerolling for a good start, which you might consider cheating as well. Oh and exploiting the fact that building settlers sets your food production to 0 even if it would normally be negative.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
You can also just kill foreign religions before they get off the ground, though that requires you to make a concerted effort to do so and to have planned for it, preferably with a Great Prophet in position. Actually I the Prophet's probably necessary to completely remove the religion from the holy city.
Staltran fucked around with this message at 16:33 on Jun 5, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
Rexides posted:The best you can do with 4X is try to deprecate the pressure levers the players build up as the game progresses, and Civ is really bad at that. If I build a strong army in ancient times, it carries over forever. The upgrade costs should be expensive enough so that at some point a weaker player would be able to compensate with new and more powerful units, or maybe it should be impossible to upgrade some units after a certain point. Ancient armies carrying on for the rest of the game is really only a problem in Civ5, in 4 upgrades were indeed expensive enough that you generally only did it in emergencies. Being unable to upgrade units further at some point seems unnecessary. also I wouldn't call Catan good (but it's still a good example since a lot of people have played it)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2016 13:54
|
|
|
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..... No, they were almost certainly reacting to the fact that they had just leaked every single leader that will be in the game at launch.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2016 15:22
|
|
|
Brawnfire posted:I remember when iv came out there was some horrible internet post about how "civilization" isn't represented by (I can't remember the actual phrasing, but it boiled down to) ooga-booga music. Baba Yetu is also literally the Lord's Prayer in Swahili. I'd guess that most of the people complaining wouldn't have called it ooga-booga music or tribalistic chanting or whatever else they called it if they'd known that. Although I'm sure there were some fedora-wearing morons who'd have doubled down on it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
quadrophrenic posted:is there ever a circumstance in which you would think "man i'm gonna lose this war unless i start lumping my men together", i would submit that there is not Corps is +10 str (army +7 more for a total of +17). That's a significant bonus. Having 30 str more than the enemy is the point where you oneshot them, for reference. (Also I tried to search Civilopedia for corps, zero hits. I had to check the manual instead. Why is the civilopedia even in the game, it's useless, they should have just replaced it with a link to the manual.) e: In my current Scythia game, I have 19 horsemen on turn 110 (150 BCE). I'd definitely like to turn a bunch of them into corps, but I'm not anywhere close to unlocking that. Of course, that's Scythia, but if you're military focused you can definitely poo poo out a ton of units. If you had a close war (and had a significant amount of units), I'd be surprised if getting better force concentration through corps wouldn't be huge. You could focus down their frontline better with ranged units, forcing them to waste time shuffling units forward (and possibly denying them an attack if you're in 2 movement cost terrain), and it would be harder for them to do the same. Staltran fucked around with this message at 15:30 on Oct 23, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
Tbh corps are probably more of a "do this if you already have enough units for the front and have a bunch of units twiddling thumbs in the backline" thing, which translates to "build more units to make corps if you can't beat the enemy (fast enough/effectively enough) with a full front+at least one line of range units behind that". Since the AI can't really challenge you late game, that means you never end up bothering since you can just beat them with a smaller investment in military. Also I've only completed one game, in which I made 3 corps for a eureka -one of which was 2 spearmen that I only built for that eureka- and never fought with them, so this is all complete theorycrafting. I was just kneejerking because I remember release Beyond Earth where I had a frontline a dozen hexes wide and three deep when I stopped building units, and corps/armies would have been real nice to avoid that mat of doom. e: Okay maybe only the Civilopedia search function sucks. Also the whole "clicking on Getting Started because it looks more like a searchbox than the actual searchbox" thing e2: Reading through the formations entry, you could merge new 0-exp units into a few of your high-promoted units and keep the rest of your army as... non-corps units . Is there an actual term for that? If you managed to get the multiple attacks per turn promo on someone you'd probably want to buff them up as much as possible. Or the +1 range for siege weapons maybe. Staltran fucked around with this message at 15:54 on Oct 23, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
quadrophrenic posted:OH you know one thing i just remembered because i never actually did it in my game, but actually this changes my mind about the whole thing: Oh yeah the later encampment buildings give +25% to "corps training" or something? I actually weren't sure what that did and never bothered to find out e: Armory says "faster corps and army training", doesn't mention how much faster
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Is the adjacency bonus of a district set permanently when you build it? Or can you increase it later if you e.g. build a mine next to your industrial district? e: nvm it can increase, for some reason I forgot the tooltips often don't update before the next turn.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:This is the opposite of what I've seen reported everywhere else. If you have 8 cities, two copies of Jade should supply Jade to all 8. That is a common misconception, and would certainly be more intuitive, but they're trading fodder. From the manual: Page 50 posted:LUXURY RESOURCES
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
I was really confused at the Ruhr Valley quote too. That was seriously the best they could do? Also, I apparently broke my promise to move my troops away from the Greek border and now Pericles is mad at me. Apparently, he doesn't consider the fact that he declared war on me relevant. Also, I think he might have declared on me because I had a wall of horsemen about fifteen hexes wide over the entire continent, and it was blocking his settler. So he declared war with no units in place... except for his unescorted settler, right next to three of my horsemen. Is healing religious units at holy sites documented anywhere? I didn't find anything in the manual.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:1) Every district you build of a type increases the next district of that type by X production. It's like builders, or holy units. You do, however, get a 25% discount if you have less districts of that kind than the average civ, apparently. Alkydere posted:2) If someone wiped out your religion you're SOL. Once a religion no longer has a majority in a city it can't exert pressure and you can't make holy units for it anymore. No more "permanent holy city pressure" like in V. Well, maybe as a technicality you might be able to exert pressure with Jerusalem's Suzerain ability depending on how it works but that's an edge case at best and requires Jerusalem to be near your cities. You could actually wipe out a holy city in V as well, you just had to use an inquisitor to do it so you had to conquer it first. At which point the pressure probably would be a nuisance at worst, but you could do it. e: Also you seem to get one more district at 4, 7, and 9 pop? not sure how it goes after that. Also that's a really odd progression so I have no idea how it's supposed to work. Staltran fucked around with this message at 22:10 on Oct 24, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Huh, even more involved than I thought. Shame this is mentioned basically no where, or no where easily found. As far as I can tell, it's only mentioned in a xml file, where it's defined for each district what CostProgressionModel they follow. A CostProgressionParam1 is also defined. That one's an integer, but CostProgressionModels are apparently hardcoded, and how they work is educated guesswork at this point. I was basing what I said on a reddit post that I can't seem to find now. Specialty districts have CostProgressionModel="COST_PROGRESSION_NUM_UNDER_AVG_PLUS_TECH" CostProgressionParam1="25", non-specialty CostProgressionModel="COST_PROGRESSION_GAME_PROGRESS" CostProgressionParam1="1000". Civ uniques have half base cost. District projects have CostProgressionModel="COST_PROGRESSION_GAME_PROGRESS" CostProgressionParam1="1500". Now you know everything I know. I have no idea why none of this is documented. Where did the whole idea that districts increased the cost of later districts come from, anyway? I remember hearing it before the game was released, and I'm pretty sure everyone thought that was how it worked.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:Huh. drat this game is obscure at times. I'm liking it as i get used to it more, but the UI guys really need to get their poo poo together. Yeah I just realized the tooltip tells you when the next one unlocks. I'm definitely getting 4 district slots in all of my 9 pop cities though. I think I used a great person that gave me one extra in the capital, but I still have 3 other 9 pop cities with 4 district slots. They're all conquered though, maybe that's somehow related? Kinda doubt the AI got a +1 district bonus in all of them though... Dunno what's going on there. Maybe it doesn't count districts that were there when you got the city? That would definitely be a bug though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
No Safe Word posted:They definitely do hate you for occupying the cities you get in a peace deal though. I was pulled into war by Gilgamesh and the only city I took by force was one he took off of Sparta, and then he traded me one for peace once I did. He then denounced me later on because I "occupy one of his cities". You gave it to me bro! But third parties don't, apparently. It makes sense that someone would keep a grudge over you conquering their cities, even if they ceded them in the peace deal.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Has anyone confirmed that the "only the first luxury you get applies period, later copies don't apply to your next four cities" thing is true? Given that later Great Merchants provide two copies of their luxury, for four amenities each, according to their in-game descriptions, it seems like it's meant for more copies to apply rather than be nothing but trading fodder even if you need more. There was a reddit post with screenshots confirming that, yes. And why would the manual lie about that? MMM Whatchya Say posted:It happens, everybody ITT complaining about getting stomped by barbs doesn't try to chase down the scouts. Later on, the barb scouts are so hopelessly outclassed by up to date units that they can't really do the thing anymore. Actually catching a scout is almost impossible though. You basically need to intercept them before they ever see your city. I haven't had much barb trouble personally, but I knew going in that you should to open with a military unit or two.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:Do we know if the district cost thing is based on number of techs/civics known, or how many layers in the highest one you know is? That actually will end up making a big difference for whether you want to go wide or deep on the trees. I think the way it works is that every tech or civic increases it, with later techs/civics increasing it by more. So the game calculates a cost increase based on total cost of techs or something, then does the same for civics and picks the higher one. Also holy poo poo guys selling corps gives you quadruple gold what the gently caress 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 08:59
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:So it's likely that it's based on the sum of the costs of your techs/civics? Not really any way to game that, except that researching an expensive tech first gives you a bit more time at the lower cost. Apparently so, there seems to be conflicting information going around though. Without decompiling and somehow finding the right part of the code all we can do is experiment though, so at this point all I can say for sure is that it increases with tech. That's at least in the variable name, and supported y observation.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 09:13
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:That reminds me that I hope someone runs the numbers on both production and science overflow, like people did for 4 and 5. It really makes a difference for getting the most out of chopping trees and using Great Scientist abilities. Ahahaha that reminds me, I think overflow is both uncapped and preserves percentage boosts like V did, instead of dividing by the multiplier like IV. So if you have 80 production through trade route stacking or whatever and the +100% cav policy I think you can just build a horseman (which cost 80) every turn for free since you can overflow 80 into whatever. And since it's uncapped you can keep building horsemen, build up a thousand overflow and then dump it all into a wonder. I haven't actually tried this but in my Scythia game i had high-production cities 1 turn universities and districts after building horsemen for a while so I'm pretty sure there is no overflow cap, and I remember thinking that it doesn't seem to get the +100% boost removed.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 09:22
|
|
|
Failboattootoot posted:Is selling deleting? Did I miss some way to sell units? Deleting a unit gives you twice the production cost of the unit in gold. Deleting a corp seems to give you 4x that, or twice as much as you would expect. Haven't tried with an army yet. As for the game being good, honestly I think the district cost mechanic is just stupid, tourism is still meh at best, the inclusion religious victory probably makes the game worse, and the subsystems feel like there's a lot of bloat and I they don't actually interact that well. I feel like everything but units are too expensive as well. Worst of all the tech/civic trees are really barren and I don't give a poo poo about most techs/civics. Plus 1UPT is still horrible for qol things, even if it's probably better than stacks for actual warfare, and obviously the UI is just horrid. It's still a decent game even now but I don't think I'd go so far as actually calling it good yet. And that's ignoring all the exploits.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 09:34
|
|
|
Selling a cavalry army gave me almost 5k. About 9 times what selling a single cavalry would give me (I think the merchant republic gold buy discount also reduces the money you get for deleting units, so it's probably not exact due to rounding somewhere in the calculations). I think there's a bug and selling corps/army is supposed to give you 2x or 3x gold, respectively, but the multiplication is accidentally done twice so you get 4x/9x. So if you want to get ridiculously rich, you can use that. Probably a bridge too far even if you're willing to exploit deleting units for gold, though. It's hilarious how badly you can break the game with Scythia. Build 6 light cavalry (only paying for 1.5 times the base production cost of one) , merge into 2 armies, sell armies, 36x production cost of the unit in gold. If you still have horsemen, you spend 120 base cogs to get 2880 gold.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 12:32
|
|
|
I think VI currently has more exploits than launch BE had, and they're more gamebreaking. Disregarding those however the balance isn't nearly as out of whack as release BE trade routes were. The UI is an abomination though and worse than launch BE's already bad UI.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
Axe Master posted:Someone needs to make a FFH2-like mod for V, that was so much dumb fun, especially the weird terraforming civs, and the one that let you literally summon god if you brought on the ice-pocalypse. So goofy. Impossible. Civ V engine can't handle terraforming, I think Firaxis actually originally wanted to have the Dutch UA be to turn coast into land but they couldn't do it. And V is much harder to mod in general. I don't think the FFH2 spell system could be replicated in V at all, though I'm not sure. Does V allow you to add your own python (or another language, but python is what FFH2/Civ IV used) functions?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
Endless Legend AI provides roughly zero challenge late game though? Maybe mid game too, there's a lot of synergistic stuff you can do in EL to hyperscale and the AI seems to have no idea that's possible. It's not "cant deal with 2 archers and a warrior" bad, that's true.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
e:nvm beaten badly I guess I hadn't refreshed in a few while
Staltran fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Oct 25, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
Aerdan posted:I think maybe you missed that you can view your relationship modifiers in the diplomacy screen, because that is more or else how Civ6's diplomacy works. Hogama posted:This is not definitive, but it looks like the AI's relationship status with you is actually based on an invisible number. The modifiers you see when you check your relationship are actually the per turn adjustments to this invisible number, not your current standing with them. e: quote is not edit
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
LordSloth posted:I started up a new game as Gorgo. On turn six, I meet... Gorgo. I think that's a bug specific to Greece (since they have two leaders). e; Or not a bug at all I guess!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
Are you seriously defending the AI denouncing you for doing what they asked you to do?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
Also, the Civ boardgame does have diplomacy. You can trade trade points/resources/I think culture cards and great persons as well. I don't remember if the rules explicitly mention non-binding promises, but a lot of similar boardgames do.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
e:^^^If you know anything about programming in general you it's immediately obvious that these things should not be difficult to fix for someone familiar with the existing code.Normal Adult Human posted:here's the thing: you are constantly equating "the computer player in civ 6" and "literal loving artificial intelligence" as the same thing. and saying that since the latter doesnt exist, the former being absolutely worthless and stupid is forgivable. This is presumably because you live in a chasm between civ 6 shills and /r/futurism just noting that AI!=GAI a loving spam filter is AI this is bothering me way more than it should Anyway yes making a good AI for Civ is obviously hard. Making one that doesn't hate you for declaring a joint war with it against a third civ really shouldn't be. The only reason for that being hard I can think of is if the existing diplo code is absolute unreadable, unmaintainable dogshit. Staltran fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Oct 26, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
Ice Fist posted:No. No it's not. I know that sometimes problems, even on a system I've written a large portion of, are exactly easy to fix as I think. Sometimes they are sound easy and end up being a giant pain in the rear end. Sometimes they sound hard and end up being easy. And sometimes they sound hard and end up being a cinch. Okay yes it might not be as easy as one might think, but it still should be quite doable. It's so obviously dumb that it's bad pr, Firaxis can have someone take a hour or two to fix it. If it somehow takes longer than that (or even as long as that really) I'd argue the system is badly written. And it's probably an easy fix, the problem is most likely just that no-one thought to check for joint wars when assigning warmonger penalties. e: I'm defining good AI as something that won't make the average player go "wtf why the hell would they ever do that", the AI not knowing how to attack a city well or something like that is understandable, but all the diplo stuff is just obviously broken. An AI that is willing to give you every city it has for 1 gpt if you haggle just right is blatantly bugged, so is one that denounces you for doing what it asked you to do or gets mad that you didn't spread your religion to him the turn you founded it. The AI can derp out once in a while as long as it doesn't do anything completely idiotic. Staltran fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Oct 26, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Efexeye I really think you're talking about something no-one else is talking about. The complaints about AI have been about very specific obvious bugs, no that it's not good enough at the game in general.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:Anway, I feel like the protectorate Casus Belli's war monger penalties are wrong Protectorate, liberation and reconquest wars all have WarmongerPercent="0" turboraton posted:It's really fun watching the CIv 4 squad claiming their game at release was perfect when they had to patch a lot of major features later on. Specially the AI where I could literally nuke one or two civs to death and get denounced at max because "We Are Bros" is Good AI© Who's even been talking about Civ 4? Also, I'm honestly fine with not everyone declaring war on you if you nuke civs to death. In fact attacking a civ that just wiped out one or two other civs with nukes seems pretty suicidal? Also Civ 4 didn't have denouncing people so I don't know what you're talking about. Honestly this seems super defensive to me with very little provocation
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
turboraton posted:Bullshit, you got a diplo message warning you about nuclear business and poo poo. We have become pretty much old people in here remembering things that were in fact different. Maybe there's some nuke-specific stuff. I've never actually used nukes in any Civ game.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
Ahahaha I noticed that overflow seemed to keep the percentage boosts but I didn't realize it was actually bugged. Sounds like they wanted to divide the overflow with the multiplier like in IV but accidentally multiplied instead. e: Oh wow the science overflow bug from V is back too?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
Sanctum posted:Warmongering penalties make no sense to me in this game, help me get this straight:
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 13:45
|
|
As long as they declared the war.
|
You could try to trade some of your old books to make space but the AI being what it is I wouldn't count on them giving you a good offer.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 04:44 |
|
|
Cobbsprite posted:"Wweh wweh, things have changed and I don't like change." Have you considered that maybe he really thinks 1UPT sucks??? And that cities/production/research/trade were better in Civ4? Hardly unheard of opinions, though tbh the commerce slider was kinda weird and I don't think a lot of people preferred it to the current science implementation. Anyway there's a bunch of times the xml files mention the production queue and I think I remember seeing some //TODO for the queue, it looks like they at least intended to have it at launch but didn't have enough time. So the UI is probably lovely because it just wasn't ready when the game was released.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 22:09
|
|