|
I hearby denounce the OP of that other Civ 6 thread. [Note: we are not at war.]
|
#
¿
May 14, 2016 01:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 20:57 |
|
|
Scalding Coffee posted:The Socialist party in China I don't want to get pedantic, but you're referring to the Communist Party of China. There's no such thing as a Socialist party in China - just in Taiwan.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
I'd love the ability to choose between three different leaders, each with their own unique ability. For example, France could be Charlemagne, Napoleon, and De Gaulle. (Isn't that how it went in Civ 4? 1300 hours of Civ 5 have erased 4 from my memory). But I'd also love a game mode where you can assign any leader to any civ regardless of affiliation. Charlemagne leading the Americans to victory!
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
sarmhan posted:It was, but the move to fully animated leader portraits made that not worth doing for 5, and I assume 6. Why go to the trouble of making a new leader when you could do a bit more work and get a whole new nation added? Ha, my computer's so lovely it doesn't animate the portraits anyway, so I kind of forgot that was even a thing. I was thinking separate the leader / civ bonuses: keep the UU and UBs for the civs, give the civ a unique bonus, then give each leader a unique game effect that they could take with them when they lead a new civ.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
I see the problem. The Roman numeral isn't under the game's name anymore. FFFUUUUUUU
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
Mystic_Shadow posted:CI VI LIZATION 
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
Looks like Teddy Roosevelt is the American leader. He looks fat. 
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
FDR would have been a better choice. 
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
So builders function like work boats did in Civ 5? That's interesting.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
Benjamin Arthur posted:He just looks American. Russian and Celtic leaders should be drunk then.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:I expect that all victory conditions will still usually involve playing a "full" game, where you're in the last era at least before you achieve victory. There'll be gimmicks like getting absurd early conquest victories or maybe something like Civ4's Apostolic Palace religious victory, but otherwise, you're in it for the long haul. Victory should prove your civ's dominance, and if there remains the possibility of a later civ outshining you by whatever metric, how have you truly won? One of the things that struck me about the gameplay video, now that I've had time to pay closer attention to it, is that they seem to have captured the feeling of giving the player adaptable strategic options at any point in the game. The way the new policy system works, bumps in research from the eurekas, and the use of workers and building districts all seem to allow for more choice and options based on the situation the player finds himself in, which is great. One of the things I really liked about Civ 5 is that it felt like all victory types were possible for any civ, and you could adapt how you were playing to what the other players were up to. This seems like that feeling taken to a whole new level and I love it. Granted, that's from seeing some really early-game footage, so who knows how an entire game will play out.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
My ideal Civ game: Build every wonder. Cover the entire map like a stain. Turn every scrap of land into an improvement of some sort.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:* Qin Shi Huang will hate you if you've built more Wonders than him. That works nicely with my "build every Wonder" strategy. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Green Man Gaming just sent out a 27% off code for games including Civ VI preorders. Is there any reason I wouldn't want to hop on that?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:All the more reason to scale down the leader screens, but I guess that's off the table. They're dead set on making the prettiest history-based dating sim around. Ugh, Teddy Roosevelt chose the worst possible Tinder pic.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:Venice is a pack of assholes. Best username/post combo ever.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2016 02:06
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:Who could replace Gandhi? Emperor Ashoka, who created an enormous empire and made Buddhism its state religion.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
I play Civ V almost exclusively with modded in Civs now (the JFD packs and a few I've picked up here and there). But my Mac is so lovely none of the leaders animate, note even the vanilla ones. WOULD modded leaders animate if I had a good enough computer or all they all static? I guess I didn't even realize that was a modding limitation. E: I missed the joke. 
Peas and Rice fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Jun 21, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
I'd like to see Inquisitors reduce the population of a city by 1 when you use them. But - you can use them in enemy cities with the same majority religion as the Inquisitor.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
I'd love to see a challenge mode where you play as one of the worst leaders from a civilization. England as Richard II. Rome as Caligula. Spain as Charles II. America as Herbert Hoover. etc.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:How would you make this fun, though? I mean, you can easily make a civ where their "special abilities" are that they're worse at various things than normal, but is that really going to make the game more fun? I suppose it would be fun in the same way intentionally nerfing yourself to provide a greater challenge is fun - something you'd do only when you were bored with the regular game. Kinda like the one-city challenge, but instead it's a bad-leader challenge.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:Sounds like England feels more "British" than "English". Why can't they just call it Britain? They don't want to preempt a Celtic civ? Ask the Scottish what they think of Victoria.  quote:Depends on the kind of penalty, though. Both India and Venice have penalties in Civ V, but they don't become apparent if you stick to Tall. These are the interesting kind of penalties that you have to adjust your strategy to work around them. Penalties like -25% gold because the leader loved extravagant orgies would be terrible. Yeah, this was more like what I was imagining. It is more difficult to design and still make fun, although it definitely helps when you nerf one thing but increase another. It limits play styles but does make things more of an interesting challenge. Peas and Rice fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Jun 28, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
And to have multiple ways to play "optimally" that are equally fun.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
ChristopherRobin posted:I think you mean America as Barack HUSSEIN Obama II. I was intentionally trying to avoid modern politics but gently caress it: Ba-lack HUSSEIN Osama II, leader of the Socialist United States of America Special abilities: +25% income (tax-raising liberal) Defensive buildings 25% less effective (Benghazi-like attacks) Military units stationed in cities reduce population by 1 / turn (they're sent away to FEMA camps) Universal Health Care social policy reduces happiness by 1 per national wonder (Obamacare) Disbanding military units provides 50% more gold (takes away your guns)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
Well that's kinda unfun bullshit.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
I like how it will make terrain more strategic. I think my reaction comes from, a) I like playing on yooge maps and b) I don't like strategy games that restrict movement unnecessarily. Medieval 2: Total War, for example, gave armies ludicrously small ranges on the world map. I'm sure I'll be used to it in a couple of months.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
I've never wished I still lived in London as much as I do right now.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
Gort posted:Which leader of Italy would you want? Pope Urban II
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Kublai Khan as a builder-scholar type leader for the Mongols would have been rad.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
Davincie posted:rome total war should have done that already Ahem.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
Napoleon as leader of Germany. Ulysses S Grant as leader of America. Enrico Dandalo as leader of Byzantium.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:First I'm going to download the mod to remove all the non-white leaders. Better remove all the women too, or replace them with huge-titted schoolgirls.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
Wasn't there some kickstarter that had like World War 2 tanks redesigned as pneumatic schoolgirls? EVERY UNIT. FROM THE WARRIOR TO THE X-COM SQUAD.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:You know how you could load your Civ V saves into a new game of Civ: Beyond Earth? Wait, what?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2016 18:10
|
|
|
Is there a thread (or even a video tutorial) to learn Crusader Kings II? I love the idea of the game, I love Civ 5 and the Total War series, but I tried playing once and had no clue and just quit.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Single player Civ is for narrative carebearing. Multiplayer Civ is for destroying your enemies and hearing the Lamentations of their women. Also, gently caress, CK2 had like 1 DLC when I got it. Do I really need to blow another hundred bucks to have fun with it?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:Also, I'm curious as to who the Modern Era Great Prophets are L Ron Hubbard E: the UK also has Stonehenge which is a legit wonder.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
Comedy option: Osama Bin Laden 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Then play paradox games? The thing I hate about paradox games is that you can't actually "win." The thing I like about Civ is that you can, indeed that is the actual point of the game. I want something in between - Rome and Medieval 2 Total War were great at balancing "spread across the map and recreate the Roman empire" with "build every city to be perfect" while still (generally) keeping the battles challenging. My biggest complaint about Civ 5 is if I want to play a wide, "perfect city" game, I need to set the difficulty to King or Prince to not be completely hamstrung by happiness, because I want to see my color cover the entire gigantic map. But once I get going, I'm usually so far ahead of the AI by technology and economy I can buy any of my advanced units and simply crush them, which isn't nearly as fun. But if I play on higher difficulties, I can't go wide at all. (I haven't tried playing on a higher difficulty and just disabling happiness in the RAS though). Xelkelvos posted:Jim Jones is 100% controversial. Jobs is probably a Great Engineer. I could swear I've had Jobs as both an Engineer and a Merchant.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 20:57 |
|
|
Jay Rust posted:Man, we had this same conversation on page one of this very thread, and nothing got resolved then either Welcome to a video game sequel anticipation thread on SA.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2016 05:13
|
|