|
IcePhoenix posted:She can carry my big stick any day Rough Rider? I hardly know 'er!
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 15:15 |
|
|
IcePhoenix posted:She can carry my big stick any day I'd ride her rough. e: ^ bah  (but yours was way better)
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
In this stream they are explaining amenities and luxuries. Oh my god am I glad global happiness is gone. That was the absolute worst part of Civ V for me. In Civ VI each luxury gives 4 amenities (which I wish they'd just call happiness), that get distributed around your cities. So if you have four or less cities you get one happiness for each luxury like before, but if you have more than that they'll start dividing up your luxuries. It seems like a kind of natural penalty for going wide where you need more luxuries to reach the same happiness. That feels so much better than global happiness. They also mentioned that happiness is important as a growth limiter as you need three population for every district, so you can really build up a large city more than a small one. Though they mentioned you can't manually distribute luxury amenities, so you can't like neglect the provinces to make a massive core.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
It's over now! Legions have 1 charge for building, but of course do not vanish once they've expended that charge. Mvemba a Nzinga cannot win a Religious Victory; you have to found your own religion, just controlling the holy city isn't enough. Cultural victories are based on total tourists visiting your nation, so you don't necessarily have to win over each individual civ as long as you can make up the difference with others. Neighborhoods give more Housing on high Appeal tiles. Having Amenities over the required number boosts a city's Growth and Yields. Trading Posts extend trading range (so Rome can make longer Trade Routes from the get-go). The Heavy Cavalry line (which includes Tanks) ignores Zone of Control as a unit feature, Ranged units like Archers exert no Zone of Control. Unique Units generally do not require Strategic Resources. A Corps is roughly equivalent to an Era advance; 70 combat strength Infantry can combine into an 80 combat strength Corps. (Presumably an Army is an additional step.) A Great General attached to a unit gives an extra movement point in addition to the combat bonus it radiates. Populations are tracked and non-native citizens suffer higher War Weariness penalties. Also, Twitch is saved if you want to catch up before Youtube processing. Hogama fucked around with this message at 20:19 on Sep 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
These both look like big changes that will make 1UPT battles potentially more interesting.Hogama posted:The Heavy Cavalry line (which includes Tanks) ignores Zone of Control as a unit feature, Ranged units like Archers exert no Zone of Control.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:23
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:Yeah, one at a time. They have build charges just like builders, but we don't know how many they start with. That sounds pretty awesome. I like playing Rome in these games but it felt kinda lackluster in 5. Sol Invictus Mr Ghandi!
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
Hogama posted:Populations are tracked and non-native citizens suffer higher War Weariness penalties. I really like this because it leaves the door open to things like revolutions, city flipping and other things that can be fleshed out in an expansion to make the late game less static.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
War weariness is dumb unless it works like in Charlemange for Atilla:TW.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:War weariness is dumb unless it works like in Charlemange for Atilla:TW. Without it you get 4000 year stalemate wars.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:Without it you get 4000 year stalemate wars. You get 4000 year stalemate wars because of the obstinate AI never accepting peace.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:You get 4000 year stalemate wars because of the obstinate AI never accepting peace. Which in turn is because they don't have sufficient problems with being at war to make them accept peace. Which brings us right back to war weariness.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Gort posted:Which in turn is because they don't have sufficient problems with being at war to make them accept peace. Which brings us right back to war weariness. The AI is almost certainly going to get massive difficulty happiness bonuses so it will only hurt Humans, just like the cultural pressure mechanic in BNW. If not, the A.I will be unable to recognize that happiness is killing them because this is just one of those mechanics that A.I. does not know how to balance.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
Nevermind, was wrong because I wasn't quite paying attention. Stream was good, Rome looks fun.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:I really like this because it leaves the door open to things like revolutions, city flipping and other things that can be fleshed out in an expansion to make the late game less static. Not to mention it makes for some nice storytelling, I want my empire to be a melting pot  I hope there's some migration simulated behind the numbers. Would be fun to brain-drain other peoples' empires
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
OfChristandMen posted:Nevermind, was wrong because I wasn't quite paying attention. Stream was good, Rome looks fun. I caught what you said and it made me think that it would be pretty cool if different great generals imparted different bonuses and abilities on their nearby troops, rather than just a flat combat bonus
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:I caught what you said and it made me think that it would be pretty cool if different great generals imparted different bonuses and abilities on their nearby troops, rather than just a flat combat bonus Agreed, but the movement bonus seems significantly more powerful now that you can't just move any terrain with your last point of movement. Extra movement seems great for outflanking opponents, and manuevering around combat terrain. What struck me most is that you don't need a unit to occupy every tile around the city only exert zone of control around every immediate city tile to prevent a city from healing. Ranged units don't exert ZoC, and Heavy Mounted units (Hvy Chariot, Knight, Tank) ignore it. The devs were also much more excited about taking a city without walls, and it seems like they're much more important because of that ranged strike.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
Tanks ignoring ZoC was the funnest feature in picking Autocracy in Civ V and I'm glad they made it a thing again. Well, Gunboat Diplomacy was pretty great also.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Kajeesus posted:Tanks ignoring ZoC was the funnest feature in picking Autocracy in Civ V and I'm glad they made it a thing again. Well, Gunboat Diplomacy was pretty great also. Parking your intimidating military forces next to city-states so they'd give you all their stuff was pretty great.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Youtube's up if you needed that, I suppose. Curious if they removed the adjacency prohibition on the Kurgans or not. Kongo's Mbanza apparently have a lower theoretical max Housing bonus , but coming earlier in the game and always being +5 Housing regardless of Appeal, they'll still be pretty good at growth.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:Not to mention it makes for some nice storytelling, I want my empire to be a melting pot Though, thinking about it some more, even that doesn't offer up much in terms of regional distinction when you consider how luxuries are automatically distributed. In their example Kongo setup there was one Norse city that had a pretty big warmonger penalty (for a war with Japan), and so it was getting a ton of luxuries. In other words if you have a big enough empire with enough luxuries, a single really sad city won't actually be individually sad, but luxury amenities will be drawn from everywhere else, lowering happiness in all of your cities to maintain it in the trouble making city. In other words universal happiness is back!  But honestly, even if it has the same effect in large empires, at least there's a sensible mechanic behind it so it doesn't feel as bad. Also in civilizations going tall (4 cities or less) there won't be any distribution of luxuries and happiness will be totally local. But for large empires, a newly conquered city will still make your capital miserable as all your tea and jade gets shipped out to placate the newly conquered whiners. I guess there are some interesting implications still- like if you only have six different luxuries the maximum a whiny city can be boosted is just six total, and those six will be evenly taken from your empire's happiest cities rather than dragging your whole empire down if there's a net negative, and you'll never lose the effect of building happiness in cities that have happiness buildings. Well, however it works out I'm glad they're tracking things in a more interesting way than Civ V.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
So I haven't really been watching the streams or anything, is the combat gonna be Civ 5 style or Endless Legend style? Because I'm really excited for this poo poo but I will stop being excited if it's that AI-commanding wargame clusterfuck like the latter was.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:So I haven't really been watching the streams or anything, is the combat gonna be Civ 5 style or Endless Legend style? Because I'm really excited for this poo poo but I will stop being excited if it's that AI-commanding wargame clusterfuck like the latter was. Civ V.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:So I haven't really been watching the streams or anything, is the combat gonna be Civ 5 style or Endless Legend style? Because I'm really excited for this poo poo but I will stop being excited if it's that AI-commanding wargame clusterfuck like the latter was. Like Civ 5, but with significant changes. Tile movement costs are now to enter, not to leave, you can combine units to make a slightly more powerful version, ranged units do not project zone of control, tanks and heavy cav ignore it, and things like AT guns aren't individual units, they attach to line units to give them extra abilities. Essentially less spread out, slower to move, and stackable in specific ways, no off-map battles though, combat takes place on the map as civ 5.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
Hogama posted:
I'm gonna lose games over this poo poo right here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
JVNO posted: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. Aside from Fat Teddy, the only thing I don't like about the game's look thus far is 3D modeled Wonders instead of painting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 06:45
|
|
|
Hogama posted:Mvemba a Nzinga cannot win a Religious Victory; you have to found your own religion, just controlling the holy city isn't enough. this is pretty lame, actually. i hope they do something about this since it kind of sucks that you literally are just blocked from a certain victory type as this civ...whose leader UA is rather powerful for spreading religion since you basically get a free religion-spreader whenever you make your unique district. i think there should be a way to become the functional founder of a religion you've adopted. like, if you conquer a holy city and make peace, and if the religion in question is a majority (if not more) of your citizens, and perhaps additional requirements like generating more faith per turn than the original founder or being in a golden age or something, then there should be a big project you can build in that holy city that turns you into the founder (but if the actual founder reconquers the city they should probably automatically regain that status). it seems simple and sensible to me, and it'd be much more interesting for Kongo to be such fervent and devout converts that they end up being the real authority of that religion and launching it to greater heights than its founders, instead of Kongo being such fervent and devout converts that they literally cannot become the world's religious authority no matter what
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 08:52
|
|
|
Get over it people geez. They released a civ who couldn't settle nor annex cities and it turned out to be just fine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 09:58
|
|
|
Serephina posted:Get over it people geez. They released a civ who couldn't settle nor annex cities and it turned out to be just fine. Well seeing as Venice is banned in multiplayer (literally removed from the no quitters MP balance mod) and significantly changed in CBP I am not sure that is true
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 10:31
|
|
|
I'm fairly confident that religious victory will be like culture victory where it's just a gimmick win anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 10:51
|
|
|
What's gimmick about a culture victory? (Not that I expect religious victory to be any good, mind... )
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 11:10
|
|
|
Why is Venice banned from multiplayer?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 11:14
|
|
|
Probably because it's terribly weak if it has a bad start, and overwhelmingly powerful if it doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 11:26
|
|
|
I am a bit confused. Does possessing copies of the same luxury provide additional amenities, or does it work like previous games?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 11:40
|
|
|
John F Bennett posted:Why is Venice banned from multiplayer? Because your immediate neighbours get more space than other players
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 11:45
|
|
|
Brannock posted:Aside from Fat Teddy, the only thing I don't like about the game's look thus far is 3D modeled Wonders instead of painting. You know they changed that model right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 12:44
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:Probably because it's terribly weak if it has a bad start, and overwhelmingly powerful if it doesn't. venice is never powerful
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 12:44
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Oh, I see. I don't play multiplayer but this is a big reason why I always play without the World Congress. Stuff like the AI banning luxuries . World Congress is not in CIV VI, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 13:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 15:15 |
|
|
Can't get over how lovely the art design is, both 2D and 3D wise... 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 13:32
|
|
