|
A Canadian Civ is totally workable and there's a really good one for Civ V. The UA is unique (+1 delegate per declaration of friendship) and really carves out a niche for carebear diplomacy and expansionism.
|
#
¿
May 15, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 09:48 |
|
|
I know the graphical style may be leaning a little heavy on saturation, but I kind of get the feeling that a decade+ of grimdark brown realism games have made normal colour schemes positively blinding by comparison. Good news is there's plenty of examples showing this slightly stylized, cartoony look ages far better than contemporaries. Windwaker and TF2 still look fantastic for instance, and I quite imagine Overwatch will experience a similar longevity. Perhaps Civ VI will be the same. As it is, between my partner and we've sunk 3000 hours into CiV, and I love the new art direction, and I find claims that it looks like 'Clash of Clans' or freemium games to be just a little shy of complete bullshit. My partner is somewhat worried the system requirements will be significantly higher than CiV and Beyond Earth however. This will be a total bummer, as Civ night is kind of our board game night and hangover activity. Sure we can play hotseat, but it's just not as good as crashing on a couch with two laptops, throwing a movie on the TV, and sparking a few joints while wonder sniping and backstabbing each other. PoizenJam fucked around with this message at 17:31 on May 16, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 16, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
Any word on city-states? I assume they won't be making a comeback, but perhaps some version of them such as minor civs? That would be cool. As would an independence mechanic, though I'm unsure how that would work. As far as a Canadian civ, I think they could have filled a useful modern diplomacy-focused civ in CiV. I mentioned the Colonialist Legacy mod previously, but 'Declarations of friendship provide +1 delegate for both Canada and the other party' in Civ V is a kind of neat mechanic that creates its own meta game. That being said, the Inuit civ would have even been cooler- tundra is hardly exploited by any civs, and snow is exploited by none.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
Fuligin posted:Managing 1upt carpets of doom was always a much more enormous pain in the dick than just shift clicking stacks of units around, plus the different unit qualities in IV made stack management more tactical anyway. I feel like a lot of people came in when Civ V launched cause Steam sales and whatnot and just heard tales of the horrible micromanagement hell of doom stacks, which has never really been the case. The AI could even actually fight you! And yes, I do have Soren's dick lodged squarely in mouth. I'll take 'pain in the dick' over 'completely unengaging warfare' any day. I'd rather an intuitive solution to 1UPT than a return to garbage stacks.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
Borsche69 posted:Stacks are in no way disengaging unless you're playing against a complete moron, Since this is a matter of taste you can't just tell me 'you're wrong stacks are fine'. I've played north of 2000 hours in Civ IV and V combined and a few dozen hours in the prior iterations, and I vastly prefer V's poor-man's-Advance-Wars to every iteration of the stack mechanic. I'd sooner they implement stricter limits on army size to tone down carpets of doom, than re implementing any contemporary form of stacking. From what I can tell they're doing something similar to Civ Revolutions- limited stacking of same unit types to form 'armies'? Correct me if I'm wrong of course. It seems for Civ V the main issue causing a carpet slog is the very liberal unit cap + limited window of engagement for units (ie. Units can only hit each other 2 tiles away usually). To that end, I'd rather they take even more cues from Advance wars. distances and range in war are already abstracted; it's kind of silly that archers can fire across something like the English Channel in world maps of Civ V, and it's kind of silly conflicts often last multiple centuries or millennia. I say accept these abstractions, embrace them in the name of better mechanics. Specifically, I think this could be resolved with four simple changes to the Civ V system: 1.) stricter unit caps, 2.) extend unit movement range significantly for most land units, 3.) extend the range of ranged units, and 4,) implementing a minimum range mechanic so melee units can get up in their face without fear of reprisal. All of these work against the carpet of doom by directly reducing the amount of units and speeding up the resolution of military engagements. In cases where two large armies DO clash, increased maneuverability and range means units other than your immediate frontline (and 1 tile behind it) are involved. The result is large conflicts get resolved quicker and units get chewed up, indirectly reducing military size. Better still, it could resolve the issues of Civ V without needing to shake up the mechanics too much- these are all rather simply tweaks.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
German Joey posted:You've probably only played vs. AI You could make that assumption, but you'd be incorrect. Do you have some pathological need to prove me wrong on something that's ultimately a subjective preference? Civ IV may have done stacks a little better, but I still don't like the mechanic. I also like the visual aspect of 1UPT because I can see at a glance how powerful my opponent is, rather than checking through drop down lists of stacked units. PoizenJam fucked around with this message at 00:57 on May 18, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
I think If they gave ranged units minimum range and made them more vulnerable to melee, they'd be a lot more squishy and balanced. I like that ranged units can shoot multiple tiles, but I don't think the Advance Wars or Tactics style range mechanics work well when you only move or shoot two tiles a turn. I would be fine if maneuverability and range are scaled up.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
Oh great! Now I can convert valuable farmland to copy pasted suburbs! Just like real life!
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
What's the chances this game will run more efficiently than Civ V? My girlfriend plays a lot of Civ V and is rather concerned the system requirements for Civ VI will be too high for her laptop. She plays Civ V and BE on medium or lower settings just fine but she's using a lower mid-tier laptop from ~2 years ago.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
Gort posted:I'd be very surprised if it ran better than Civ 5. They'll have thrown in a ton of bells and whistles since graphics - as this thread has shown - matter a ton to players when they decide whether or not to buy. Personally I'm more concerned with CPU load/processing time for turns, but it would be quite unfortunate if the game had a high barrier of entry (graphically speaking).
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
Nope, great scientists are definitely the last 10 turns, rather than the 10 turns leading up to the great scientist spawning.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:Huh, the more you know! Confusingly, Great Writers use 'current culture per turn' to determine how much culture to grant, while great musician tourism bombs do use the turns leading up to their spawn. I kind of wish there was consistency. Frankly the whole stockpiling scientists thing is boring and dumb.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:I like Liberty because of the free worker and settler, it really helps early game expansion. And Order always seemed to have slightly better bonuses for me, but Freedom is great too. Autocracy is plain worst really. Even if you don't go for a tradition build, it is almost always best to pick the tradition opener. The +3 Culture/turn pays for itself very quickly. And most of the successful Liberty builds I've ever seen are hybrids with other trees. There is almost never a situation where not picking the Traditione opener is beneficial. And that feels wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2016 04:05
|
|
|
I'd like a mechanic that makes reviving Civs an actually attractive option. Yes, you can do it for a permanent World Leader vote in Civ V, but the Civ is usually so completely behind on tech and utterly crushed they'll never have more than 2 diplomatic votes again. Vassal states could work; but If the rubber banding on tech costs was exaggerated (ie. Decreases greatly for each person who knows the tech), are there any issues that would cause?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Gort posted:Thing is, you can do "many units per tile" on a hex map. That was my idea for a solution- scale everything up, and make tiles represent smaller individual areas. Give all units increased movement points, and give ranged units a greater range but implement an Advance Wars style firing shadow. Suddenly we have a tactical combat system where melee front line units are necessary to protect range and siege units, and flanking mounted units could get up in the face of ranged units with no fear or retaliation (balancing the fact ranged units can attack without retaliation). The 'tiles represent less area' would also work well with the unstacked cities and district system now.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
I'd much prefer additional Civs to additional leaders for existing Civs, so I'm hoping Captain Fargle is right on this one.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
Serious answer for Inuit leader- Colonialist Legacies modders used Ekeuhnick, which is at least as valid a pick as Dido or Hiawatha. That is, a somewhat mythical figure whose existence is debated but evidence leans toward 'yes'. Alternatively, for an ice based civilization, you could use the Sami. PoizenJam fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Aug 17, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
I really like that they honoured the request not to include the language- it sucks that no alternative solution was possible though. It would be pretty jarring in the context of a game where all the leaders speak their native language.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
Flagrant Abuse posted:All but three. Ramesses in Civ speaks Arabic, when they could've at least used Coptic; Attila speaks Chuvash, when he actually would've spoken either Hunnic or possibly Gothic (the latter of which we at least know what it sounds like and have a few decent speakers); and Gandhi should more accurately be speaking Gujarati, though he at least did know Hindi so it's not as inaccurate as it could be. Interesting- the more you know eh? I wonder if it was laziness, expense, or availability of those language's speakers that caused the disinclusion.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Trivia posted:What game was it that gave early era ships a weak melee unit that acts as a scout? I loved that, took a lot of the tedium out of having to send a specific scout unit to claim a goody hut. CIV Revolutions. And yes, I'd love to have a weak landing party unit for that purpose- clearing vacant barbarian encampments and claiming goodies. You could even delay embarkation research to force people to use boats for transportation across water early on. E;f,b
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
I haven't been following the updates about this game beyond this thread to be honest, and I have to say- the art direction for this game is truly fantastic. I was a little offput by Teddy Taft when I first saw it, but everything I've seen since just screams visual polish. The only thing I might have done differently, which modders will likely do, is scale down the tile improvements and units. It's very big and easily readable which is great for gameplay, but a wonder the size of a capital city is a little goofy looking. That is a very superficial aesthetic preference though.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
John F Bennett posted:Why is Venice banned from multiplayer? Embargo Venice -> Embargo City States Always the first two congress votes passed if a Venice player is doing well, and utterly cripples them.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2016 13:19
|
|
|
PirateBob posted:Can't get over how lovely the art design is, both 2D and 3D wise... I know taste in aesthetics is the realm of subjectivity, but how could you be so wrong about this? It looks beautiful- Colourful but not oversaturated, easily readable, great leader models, and the fog of war being a map is just the greatest little touch of polish. The only thing it lacks is fully rendered leader scenes, which I could give a poo poo about if it means more actual content. I will miss Monty's crazy fire though.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
Groke posted:gently caress, gonna need a new computer. If you're in the market for a laptop specifically, I highly recommend the Dell Inspiron 7559. It's easily the best bang-for-buck option I've seen in a long time, sporting a i7 6700 and a GeForce 960M for ~$850USD, or $1200CAD. Thing runs GTAV smooth as silk maxed out (exempting AA and High Res Shadows of course)- something unheard of in that price range. Only real issue is build quality is a bit meh compared to, say, a Macbook, and the touch pad isn't the greatest I've seen. Nonetheless, I bought two of them, one for my girlfriend and one for myself. We're going to have fun come October 21st.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
I'm told the XPS 13 is pretty good this generation, though it's the same price (Maybe a little more?) despite the smaller screen.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2016 02:35
|
|
|
Considering all the community effort it took to make the JDH mods and then roll it all into CBP, it would be foolish not to feature active AI in multiplayer. The simple solution, of course, is to have leader's addressing you show up as clickable icons that you can address at your leisure. The complicated problem occurs when AI's attempt to make deals with multiple players a turn without having the resources to support all trades- which still occurred with JDH but ought to be easy to fix on the dev end.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
Yeah, Global happiness was a much bigger problem than the science/culture increase, unless you planned on making GBS threads out a bunch of cities that never grow past a population of 3.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
Yeah, more than a little tempted to preorder (using the cheap link posted earlier that included Monty) at this point, just to play with my girlfriend on release day. But SimCity is a thing that happened, and it poisoned me against preorders.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
I'm not hard up about Sean Bean as the narrator, but I think I like Morgan Sheppard better. The intros to Civ V and its expansions are some of my favourites of all time- I have some misgivings that BNW didn't continue the trend of the vanilla and G&K intros, ie. Wisdom being passed down through the ages to 'Morgan Sheppard's' descendants. But the BNW intro was still beautiful enough to not matter. That being said, with each iteration of Civ I think to myself 'David Attenborough will be dead before the next one!' and get a little sad. Maybe we'll get NDT sometime though?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
After watching the IGN preview video on nuclear bombs in Civ VI, I'm so stoked for some cold war scenarios. Mutually assured destruction will make for some pretty neat dark horse victories when the big players nuke themselves into oblivion. I wonder how it'll work in a game with win conditions though? Surely there's no reason not to nuke the poo poo out of someone approaching a victory condition. I know in single player you'll suffer diplomatic fallout with the AI which could potentially make for a lose-lose scenario, but who's going to care for multiplayer?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2016 04:15
|
|
|
Sometimes the scenarios were really great at teaching strategies about game mechanics. The Mongol scenario, for instance, improved my war game significantly.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2016 04:40
|
|
|
Is Greenman Gaming still the best available deal for this game? steep entry price, considering both my girlfriend and I want a copy. Justifying a 2x $80 CAD purchase is really hard, even in spite of our ridiculous hours/investment in Civ V (>3000 between the two of us).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Does this game have LAN capability? To save money a few years back, my girlfriend and I used to use 1 copy of Civ to play over LAN- She'd log into my account, then switch to offline mode, and we were both able to play together with AI. Would that be possible with Civ VI? PoizenJam fucked around with this message at 20:08 on Oct 22, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
I really miss the replay map from Civ V. It was very satisfying to watch, especially following a domination win or some alt history scenarios.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
Also, the game itself is not nearly as readable as I got the impression from he screenshots. I do like the bright and colourful approach, and I shun grim-dark brown realism these days... but right now we have colourful unit/city/resource icons overlaid on a colourful in game world. In Civ V the icons and borders stood out way better- you had colourful icons overlaid on more subdued, realistic terrain. In Civ Vi, everything kind of blends together. This is only exacerbated by the fact units with pre-existing orders (that I might change my mind about) start the turn faded out.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2016 14:39
|
|
|
I got an ironclad from a great admiral really early in my current game, and have been rampaging around the world single handedly capturing multiple cities with it... Until I now realized it can't heal. It has like 10% health left. What might be preventing me from healing? Not having researched the tech to build an ironclad yet?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
The increased variety and involvement in the spy game is great, but it really needs to be more passively implemented. I like the choices, but I'd prefer if the missions were higher impact but took longer to complete. Also seriously missing the build queue and alert modes for the units. Playing LAN with my girlfriend just takes forever and leaves her waiting for much longer periods of time than Civ V. I tend to go large and wide (Because I did the Tradition/4 city build too many times), which doesn't increase the time per turn all that much when I can queue up half my tech tree and 6 buildings at a time in every city. But when I have to make production selections literally every turn, as well as dealing with spies every turn and an uncapped trade route limit... This game is a slog and a half.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:Man, reading this thread and you'd think that Civ VI is the worst Civ ever. I have my problems and frustrations with it but it's miles and miles ahead of V at launch, I like a lot of the new systems and I can see that once they fix stuff like the spastic AI it will be one of the best Civ games ever. There are a lot of extremely great design decisions, and lots of neat areas of polish that are welcome changes from Civ V... And yet, there are a lot of critically missing features (queues), janky UI decisions, and bullshit insane AI... I have every confidence this will be the superior game, but it still needs some work. Tom Tucker posted:Offensive spying is awesome and good because they get fun promotions that make them better at certain things. Defensive spy game is a complete slog. Strange, I've noticed no issues with defensive spying other than having to reset their drat assignment what feels like every 2/3 turns. I've received notifications for successfully thwarting tech espionage and heists, as well as notifications when my enemy's spies succeed. PoizenJam fucked around with this message at 16:32 on Oct 31, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
The diplomacy screens really exemplify how puzzling my reaction to this game is. The preset animations I have to click through and watch for each notification, only for it to then load a second screen for meaningful interactions, is just mindbogglingly dumb and annoying to behold. But it exists along some really great decisions- the side bar that lets you flick between the diplomacy screens without returning to the map, as well as all of the available detail that exists on the diplomacy screen. I'd still like an infoaddict style 'global political allignment' web, but it's miles ahead of Civ V.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 09:48 |
|
|
Chalks posted:What an odd system - so you could have one guy who dominates 80% of the world but doesn't own their own capital losing a domination victory to a guy who owns a single city that happens to be their capital? This was also how Civ V worked until BNW… I kind of liked it, because it discouraged just sweeping up the little guys before confronting the biggest powers. It's actually more to your benefit to take out your top competitors first, as those are the ones capable of a surprise surgical strike on your capital when you're about to win. It's very rare that a person who otherwise would win a domination victory is not in control of their original capital anyways, so generally upsets came in the form of the aforementioned surgical strike, usually by whoever was in 2nd place after 1st place mopped up most of the world. PoizenJam fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Nov 3, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2016 17:12
|
|