|
Darkrenown posted:Nah, Dreadnought had some wing turrets which could only fire to one side: Why did they ever put turrets on the side though.
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 04:19
|
|
_profile_drawing.png)
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 16:40 |
|
|
StashAugustine posted:smac was a pretty dreadful game tho It was Civ 2 in space with some new mechanics sprinkled in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:It was Civ 2 in space with some new mechanics sprinkled in. Yes, exactly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
Decrepus posted:Why did they ever put turrets on the side though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
Decrepus posted:Why did they ever put turrets on the side though.  The late Victorian/Edwardian period was a strange time for ship design. There was even a point where naval designers experimented with ships built around ramming (because steam makes you independent of the wind so you're basically a super-galley, right, and you can do so much damage if you manage to hit a ship below the waterline, so...)
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
Decrepus posted:Why did they ever put turrets on the side though. Dreadnought can fire 6 guns fore and aft and has an 8 gun broadside. Without superfiring turrets you need wing turrets to bring your broadside up to weight and superfiring turrets were a non-starter until the USA proved the turrets wouldn't destroy each other. With no wing turrets/superfiring you would only be able to bring 2 guns to bear during pursuit which isn't acceptable. Your other option besides the dreadnought arrangement would be cross deck fire like indefatigable where all your guns are engaged in a broadside but that has it's own set of problems.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 05:31
|
|
|
Tomn posted:The late Victorian/Edwardian period was a strange time for ship design. There was even a point where naval designers experimented with ships built around ramming (because steam makes you independent of the wind so you're basically a super-galley, right, and you can do so much damage if you manage to hit a ship below the waterline, so...) Odd, but effective against Martians.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 05:54
|
|
|
ThisIsNoZaku posted:Yes, exactly. This is hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 06:25
|
|
|
Tomn posted:
hgggnnnnnnn..... now I feel like we should add ramming attacks to HOI4 ships
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 12:08
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:It was Civ 2 in space with some new mechanics sprinkled in. And compared to Civ 2 with expansions it was about as bad as the new Space Civ5. I am not sure why people bring it up so much as one of the better strategy games.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 12:38
|
|
|
podcat posted:hgggnnnnnnn..... now I feel like we should add ramming attacks to HOI4 ships Wasn't using destroyers to ram surfaced submarines a tactic used by the Allies during most of the war?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 12:50
|
|
|
It works against docks too! 
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 12:53
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:And compared to Civ 2 with expansions it was about as bad as the new Space Civ5. I am not sure why people bring it up so much as one of the better strategy games. The concept was more of a novelty at the time probably. I'm sure nostalgia plays a role. I wouldn't go as far as what you're saying though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 13:02
|
|
|
Ramming worked pretty well against the Admiral Hipper and the Surcouf too
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 13:10
|
|
|
I can't find it right now but there's a video of someone playing Silent Hunter and jumping their sub out of the water at the right angle to land on a Japanese ship. I demand that be a valid if suicidal tactic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 13:12
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:The concept was more of a novelty at the time probably. I'm sure nostalgia plays a role. I wouldn't go as far as what you're saying though. Yeah, I never played it back then and when I decided to try, a couple of years ago, it just felt terribly outdated and unfun. Did not care about the supposedly superb writing neither (who gives a poo poo about writing on a strategy game). At the same time, Master of Magic is even older and still a great game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 13:17
|
|
|
Master of Magic is beautiful but the ancient braindead AI ruins it. Not that some modern strategy games are much better. Honestly I'd imagine anyone playing Civ 2 at this point for the first time would probably also find it dated and crappy. Civ 4 was the best Civ, i think.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 13:40
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:Master of Magic is beautiful but the ancient braindead AI ruins it. Not that some modern strategy games are much better. Civ 3 was the biggest leap-forward as far as converting unit support to an empire-wide calculation, fleshing out the concept of national borders (that SMAC kinda toyed with), introducing culture, strategic resources, and even the domination victory. Civ 4 polished those ideas like a mofo, but I still go back to 3 over 4.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
Test of Time, its soundtrack, and its scenarios will always hold a special place in my heart, mostly because it was my first strategy game. The only thing Civ 4 had missing was Civ 3's palace screen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Civ 3 was the biggest leap-forward as far as converting unit support to an empire-wide calculation, fleshing out the concept of national borders (that SMAC kinda toyed with), introducing culture, strategic resources, and even the domination victory. But Civ 4 had Rhye's and Fall of Civilization easily securing it 'best nostalgia civ game' by a mile.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
Kavak posted:I can't find it right now but there's a video of someone playing Silent Hunter and jumping their sub out of the water at the right angle to land on a Japanese ship. I demand that be a valid if suicidal tactic. It's this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFN9nvFYHmk
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
420 Gank Mid posted:But Civ 4 had Rhye's and Fall of Civilization easily securing it 'best nostalgia civ game' by a mile. And Fall From Heaven, which makes it one of the best fantasy 4xs as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Civ 3 was the biggest leap-forward as far as converting unit support to an empire-wide calculation, fleshing out the concept of national borders (that SMAC kinda toyed with), introducing culture, strategic resources, and even the domination victory. But Civ3 removed the ability to secure your island's borders/coasts with units. No more super turtle strategy. I think I actually like the current Civ5 over Civ4, at least I am happy enough with Civ5 that I don't need Civ4 anymore. In the end none of those games is as fun as M.A.X
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:And Fall From Heaven, which makes it one of the best fantasy 4xs as well. I'm still amazed a modder made something nearly on par with Master of Magic and Age of Wonders.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 16:28
|
|
|
Grizzwold posted:It's this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFN9nvFYHmk
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:Master of Magic is beautiful but the ancient braindead AI ruins it. Not that some modern strategy games are much better. I guess its really a challenge to make a strategy game with such complex mechanics and have an AI that knows how to play it. Endless Legend is my favorite "fantasy-civ" game since MoM but the AI also really sucks at it, and that makes the game a lot less interesting and replayable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
oops EDIT != QUOTE
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
On the other hand Civ 3's colony mechanic for getting distance resources was something I missed in 4.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 16:40
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:I guess its really a challenge to make a strategy game with such complex mechanics and have an AI that knows how to play it. Yeah there's just too many options and combos for MoM for an AI to be good at it. Dominions has the same problem.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
I absolutely love MoM, and Age of Wonders (1 more than Shadow Magic, I've not played the others) but I've not been able to get into Civ4, even trying Fall from Heaven. I think it's because Paradox games just feel better to me, and I didn't grow up with it like I did MoM and AoW. I would love a Paradox fantasy game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
The AI doesn't get smarter or more capable in harder settings with Civ and others. They just literally cheat. That is the most annoying side of 4X games.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
YouTuber posted:The AI doesn't get smarter or more capable in harder settings with Civ and others. They just literally cheat. That is the most annoying side of 4X games. Well let me know if you come up with a process that lets the developer understand the best strats before the game even comes out so that that's even possible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:Well let me know if you come up with a process that lets the developer understand the best strats before the game even comes out so that that's even possible. Make the game phone home with every move every player makes, do some machine learning on the collected information, release AI patches monthly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
There are some 4x games out there where the AI does actually get smarter on harder difficulties. AoW3 and HoMM series come to mind, but they also cheat on top of making better decisions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
In AI War the AI getting smarter/gaining new abilities is one of the primary things that happens when the difficulty goes up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:Make the game phone home with every move every player makes, do some machine learning on the collected information, release AI patches monthly. That's also a pretty insane task right there. Gwyrgyn Blood posted:There are some 4x games out there where the AI does actually get smarter on harder difficulties. AoW3 and HoMM series come to mind, but they also cheat on top of making better decisions. Typically difficulty increases AI aggression which is sometimes good, sometimes bad. It's really hard to justify hiding your best AI behaviors behind a difficulty curve, though- if you have a good AI you want to show it off. uPen posted:In AI War the AI getting smarter/gaining new abilities is one of the primary things that happens when the difficulty goes up. The AI doesn't even really play the same game as you, though, so you can kinda brute force some things- nothing the AI does in that game could be called 'cheating' because it isn't really playing by your rules.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:That's also a pretty insane task right there. Yeah, it's a terrible idea in practice, but if you really want an AI that stays competitive no matter what tactics players develop, it's either that or manually coding new behaviors to deal with strategies that become popular. I guess you could pay a full-time employee to watch twitch 8 hours a day and take notes on any interesting tactics streamers talk about?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:Yeah, it's a terrible idea in practice, but if you really want an AI that stays competitive no matter what tactics players develop, it's either that or manually coding new behaviors to deal with strategies that become popular. I guess you could pay a full-time employee to watch twitch 8 hours a day and take notes on any interesting tactics streamers talk about?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:Well let me know if you come up with a process that lets the developer understand the best strats before the game even comes out so that that's even possible. It'd help a lot of Firaxis actually had a post-release attitude towards expansions and patches that wasn't straight out of 2005. I don't think it's like they need to be watching streams all day long, but especially with Beyond Earth they just seemed so completely out of touch. Tbf personally I don't think AI cheating is a bad thing at all as long as it isn't super obvious, but actually balancing your game around strategies that happen after launch shouldn't be some unattainable thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 16:40 |
|
|
When I was a kid playing the first Age of Empires, I thought that the "computer" enemies were actually all human players in the employ of Ensemble Studios, and that setting different difficulty levels connected me with players of varying levels of skill. I'd trash talk them with in the in-game chat and call them poopy-head if they were on the opposing side, and thank them if they were fighting alongside me. What I'm saying is that Paradox needs to hire a literal army of gamers to play as every "AI" faction, to create a truly dynamic playing experience.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 00:12
|
|
