|
FZeroRacer posted:I'm...slightly disappointed? I really loved Amplitude's world building and design with the Endless series. Them going the Civ route and essentially sticking to just human history is kind of bland, considering how many games have gone over the broad strokes in various forms. I agree, it seems like they're just forcing themselves to be less creative.
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2019 02:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 08:38 |
|
|
Basically nothing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2020 22:04
|
|
|
It seems to be following the EL thing where regions are pre-defined by the world generator and you can only have one city per region. I'd imagine an outpost is something like a pre-city where the city is in a vulnerable state before it becomes a city proper. Since that's exactly what they were in ES2.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
The world ends before airplanes are invented.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2020 07:15
|
|
|
Jeza posted:In fairness, my memory of it in EL was terrible, but in ES I would autoresolve constantly without feeling cheated, so hopefully that's something they've learned to iron out. The auto-resolve in ES2 is specifically designed to always give you the exact same result as watching the battle, although they did that by removing your ability to control the battle in any way. Personally I liked that since I don't play 4X games for tactical combat, but obviously a lot of other people hated it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2020 01:12
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:Ideally in a 4x game I still think wars should be abstracted in a way that, rather than having individual units, you have a frontline and you can commit resources like manpower or production every turn to make it shift if you commit more of it than your enemy. With shifting the frontline over a river or across an ocean requiring many more resources committed, and the deeper you go into enemy territory the more costly committing becomes whereas you get bonuses the closer the frontline moves to your capital. I like the way you think.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2020 23:39
|
|
|
I mean having dozens of immortal soldier chess pieces on another continent with no supply lines anything is also incredibly abstracted, just in a different way.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2020 07:33
|
|
|
Once again, my reaction is "okay, so what? what do they do?"
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2020 07:25
|
|
|
The way I see it, the thematic point of this is to emphasize that cultures are not static: you don't have one unified American empire that lasts from the neolithic to modern times. So, like, ancient Egypt is not the same culture as modern Egypt, even if the people are their descendants, and choosing a new culture to evolve into (while keeping some of your old bonuses) represents that. Perhaps an even easier example to understand would be all the different dynasties of China. Or the way Rome fell in the West and left behind a bunch of states heavily influenced by Rome. So in that sense I am all in favor of this system. That said, I'm not sure there's going to be a good reason not to just start with the food culture and always pick the new food culture so that you are the best at food and win a food victory.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2020 07:58
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:They are addressing that, though to what effect I'm unsure. Well, I didn't mean food specifically, I just meant pick the bonuses that stacks with your current bonuses in order to snowball harder. Which is more or less how Factions have functioned in their previous games.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2020 10:08
|
|
|
We traditionally call that state "losing."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2020 05:57
|
|
|
I like cosmopolitan.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2020 12:44
|
|
|
The problem with the word "globalism" is that it is being applied to civilizations that are not yet able to circumnavigate the globe, or even know for certain that the world is round (yes I'm aware that it was determined indirectly quite early in history but still). The idea of anything at all being "global" in the early stages of history sounds kind of absurd to me. Presumably it just means "cares about their neighbors" which is almost always going to be much more local than "global".
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2020 14:13
|
|
|
True.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2020 14:51
|
|
|
These temple temples, also commonly known as temples, were temples where they worshipped stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2020 02:33
|
|
|
Yeah, this is directly after the era of local warlords, when someone finally managed to unify the nation. Still pretty feudal though.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2020 06:25
|
|
|
Aerdan posted:...no, the Tokugawa Shogunate was the birth of the samurai class and, more importantly and relevantly, the genesis of the Shinto religion. What it ended was centuries of feuding...and the Meiji restoration in the late 19th century is what ended the samurai. Which still makes it weird that their unique building is a Buddhist temple of the sort that had already existed for hundreds of years.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2020 08:52
|
|
|
Danann posted:Fun fact: it looks like you can scale normally impassible terrain if city districts are connected to each other. What this means is that on one hand you can shift defenders to higher elevations but likewise the attacker can also just ignore all that annoying terrain if they breach the walls and have a foothold. The folly of roads.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2021 00:19
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:does this one have a randomized map or is it like the last one where it was a premade one? I didn't play last time, but this one seems to be premade. In that I started a second game and the map was exactly the same. Anyway, I was wondering if there was any reason not to merge all of your cities into one giant mega-city? Because honestly I really, really want to do that.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2021 10:17
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:I mean, you can, but it wouldn't be in any way efficient, not the least of which because a city can only ever grow by 1 population per turn. Huh, I never noticed the population growth thing. Honestly, given that it takes a tech and a huge pile of Influence to merge cities, not to mention the stability penalties for having so many territories under one city, I would have expected it to be more efficient, as a sort of bonus thing you can do.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2021 18:38
|
|
|
Buller posted:I dont like this build it feels so slow. Everything is just so incredible slow compared to before. Maybe I am playing wrong but I feel like you get way too little Influence early on and you need it for everything, especially expansion, and then by the end you are generating 3000 a turn but you're boxed in with nothing to spend it on.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2021 19:08
|
|
|
The goal of game AI is to make the game fun, not to make it challenging. There's some overlap but it's not at all the same thing.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2021 14:12
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:Wouldn't you be able to train AI by giving it skill based matchmaking of sorts? I think you are probably misunderstanding what "training an AI" means. A "trained" AI (as opposed to one that is programmed manually to follow certain rules) doesn't try to copy players of any skill level, it runs millions of simulations against different iterations of itself to determine optimal strategies. There's no simple way to scale that up and down. And even if it did work the way you imagined, how could they possibly get enough player data to emulate before the game is even released? Clarste fucked around with this message at 15:30 on Aug 13, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2021 15:26
|
|
|
skeleton warrior posted:Advice from the beta, which may have changed: Just have one giant city per continent, imo. Not because this is efficient but because it's funny.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2021 19:56
|
|
|
I was thinking about trying this game but when I tried to buy it I found out that it was already in my Steam library. I don't remember pre-ordering it though. Is there any sort of weird event that would let me play it on Steam?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2021 00:26
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:is there a way to downgrade a city back to an outpost? I got a bunch of bullshit cities from one of the minor AI factions and I'd like to turn them into one megacity I don't believe you can downgrade, but there is a mid-game tech that allows one city to absorb another.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2021 05:19
|
|
|
Creating outposts doesn't cost stability, at least not by any significant amount comparing to attaching them to cities. Anyway, there's no downside and if you're playing a culture civ of any kind you definitely want to claim as much territory as possible as fast as possible. It's better value than creating more, bigger cities you can't afford at least. Spending culture to exploit resources is also often cheaper and simpler than building them manually and I wish you could just down that for territories that are attached to cities. Also I wish building a single giant mega-city was actually good, but it seems like they've stacked a billion penalties on it for launch. Like, only being able to grow 1 pop a turn is already pretty awful, but whenever I merge two big cities I find that they somehow don't have enough food to feed themselves anymore?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2021 09:27
|
|
|
victrix posted:... wait, which game? I just finished a game of OW the other night and didn't see that, just a timeline thing Humankind does a thing where it has some ending narration mix-and-matched from the stuff you did well at in the game. It's pretty vague though, like "you built a wonder... you had a lot of allies..."
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2021 09:40
|
|
|
You can spend huge amounts of it to merge your cities but it just makes them worse so I'm not sure why.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2021 18:18
|
|
|
Your Computer posted:not sure i'm a fan of the new world setting, it feels like whoever gets there first and starts settling has already won the game I think more generally the person who has the most territory will always win, which is a little sad.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2021 08:39
|
|
|
ZypherIM posted:You can edit AI flags/colors/etc. Not sure offhand if that fixes it or not, or if its tied to the AI slot. I changed the color and it still happened so yeah. Your Computer posted:you can even demand other cultures to give you their territories if you're culturally dominant. Is there actually a point to that other than pissing them off and cutting off all trade? I've never seen one actually give in to the demand so I'm not sure why you'd want to. I guess to build up war score before you conquer them? But I don't want to conquer them.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2021 12:10
|
|
|
CuddleCryptid posted:Too easy maybe? You have to actually move the settlers into the new territory and that means they can be killed. Technically speaking you can get more slots by building hamlets, though. You don't have to use settlers to take advantage of the free infrastructure techs. You also get all the free buildings for founding any city normally. Settlers just give them a boosted starting population and saves you the influence cost.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2021 22:03
|
|
|
Yeah, I know, settlers are amazing, I'm just saying that the "risk" of physically moving settlers across the map justifying not giving older cities all the free infrastructure doesn't make any sense because the mechanics aren't even attached to each other.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2021 22:16
|
|
|
I don't even know what their abilities are because I don't know how to check when someone else has already selected them.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2021 22:29
|
|
|
Kazzah posted:A converted outpost also gets the benefits of whatever colony techs you’ve researched. And on the flip side of that, it would be incredibly useful to know how much of a stability buffer you have before you do anything that could lower it. Ihmemies posted:Settlers follow, as said they can turn an outpost to a city with full buildings. For the like the third time, the Settlers don't create the buildings. You get that effect for free just from researching the tech. The Settlers only save you influence cost (which is significant).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2021 01:08
|
|
|
Ihmemies posted:Pangaea feels a lot better. Altough my builder/farmer strat never works, the AI just wants to stomp on me so I always have to go Huns/Mongols because it is the cheapest/easiest way to deal with overaggressive AI. Just let me build and turtle in peace goddamnit! Also these huge plains are sweet in pangaea. I play on peaceful AI when I just want to build. Although it's sort of funny how eventually everyone hates you but just can't declare war no matter how much they want to.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2021 17:27
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:I forgot the exact wording of the tooltip, but from the tooltip and explanation I expected that the secularism option would make my cities and holy sites stop exerting religious pressure (as opposed to, my population? So I expected them to keep their religion if they already had one?) so my religion would start mingling with other religions that exerted pressure on me. Kind of like how France going secular didn't flip them from 100% Catholic to 100% Protestant overnight on 9 December 1905. But instead everybody immediately converted to Harappan polytheism, from halfway across the globe, and all of my neighbors started demanding reparations because I oppressed people from their religion. That kind of catastrophic implosion doesn't seem to be working as intended. Secularism should make you immune to all religious demands, so if that's what happened I think it's a bug. State Atheism definitely does that though, because it effectively makes your state religion one which exactly 0 people in your empire follow. It slowly converts them to Atheism, but in the short-medium term everyone will hate you. Honestly I don't see the point.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2021 21:59
|
|
|
Always be at city cap. More cities is better than bigger cities. You do want to make sure each city has a few territories they can grab though.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2021 22:48
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:Early game it is very useful to attach more territories. The bump in food/production is substantial and you don't have a big city cap anyway. I think the important thing mid-to-late-game is whether your cities have enough space to spam the districts they need. Base tile yields are eventually outclassed by the raw power of urban sprawl. If the city cap is 2, then be at 2 cities. To be fair, the jump to 3 is a little costly, which can happen early if you choose City Councils. In other news, I'm finding it funny how easy it is to bully people into alliances. "Hey, want to be allies?" "Nah." "How dare you!" "Okay, okay, we're allies, calm down!"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2021 02:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 08:38 |
|
|
Borsche69 posted:That's ignoring the fact that there is no getting around the production node concept for 4x games - an empire with 2 cities can potentially build twice as many things per turn when compared to an empire with a single city, which is always going to be capped at 1 thing at a time. Why does it have to be capped at one thing at a time? That's a totally arbitrary limitation that a new game could easily remove if they wanted to.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2021 02:54
|
|