|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:Day one mod all trump quotes "Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything." - the new and improved tutorial, upon entering the diplomacy screen
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 09:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 16:52 |
|
|
Man, I'm wondering what any new civs they add will be like, mechanically. A lot of the current ones are really interesting and have so much more going on than most past civs, and it makes it hard to guess beyond generalities. Like, if (or rather when) they add Persia or Babylon or the Dutch, what will they be like? They're clearly willing to do some pretty crazy stuff this time around, and I'm liking it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 10:00
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:People derive their enjoyment from games in different ways, and none is less valid than any other. A lot of people derive their enjoyment from games by knowing and understanding the mechanics as fully as possible and using their hard-won knowledge and experience to defeat the game on the hardest difficulties. If that's the way someone finds games enjoyable, and they've found that there are a very small number of valid strategies to win on the hardest difficulty and mastered them all, it's reasonable for them to lose interest in the game, and it's also reasonable for them to be disappointed the game wasn't robustly designed to not have a definite best strategy that is the same every game. If that person doesn't find deliberately handicapping themself fun, why bother? Of course people can play however they want, but if your specific issue is that the game is too samey when you deliberately avoid a swathe of suboptimal gameplay elements, I'm just saying a simple solution exists. If I were to complain that Civ was turn based and did a poor job representing geographic relations and power imbalances, you'd probably suggest that I play Paradox games instead.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 10:09
|
|
|
I know the minimum specs were releases a long time ago but I'm super bummed out I won't be able to play Civ VI on my lovely laptop with integrated graphics. I guess I'm going to have to stick with V.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 10:19
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Man, I'm wondering what any new civs they add will be like, mechanically. A lot of the current ones are really interesting and have so much more going on than most past civs, and it makes it hard to guess beyond generalities. Like, if (or rather when) they add Persia or Babylon or the Dutch, what will they be like? They're clearly willing to do some pretty crazy stuff this time around, and I'm liking it. Are they really that crazy? I haven't done a big comparison but some of them are plain underwhelming. All the American uniques for example just change the value of a non-zero number (more tourism, more range, less maintenance, etc), the only exception being culture for kills which is something the Aztecs got in Civ 5 so it's hardly a ground-breaker. Instead of tiny boosts like these I would rather see a lot more truly unique abilities, like that of the Great Wall, Conquistador, Legion, The Last Prophet and Adventures with Enkidu. The Civ abilities seem a lot more creative, but there are some big contrasts. Like the German UA is "+1 to a thing you can do anyways" and India's is "a thing nobody gets even close to doing". It's going to be hard to top Venice though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 10:22
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:Are they really that crazy? I haven't done a big comparison but some of them are plain underwhelming. All the American uniques for example just change the value of a non-zero number (more tourism, more range, less maintenance, etc), the only exception being culture for kills which is something the Aztecs got in Civ 5 so it's hardly a ground-breaker. I'm mostly thinking of things like the Great Wall, The Last Prophet, Religious Convert, and so on, admittedly; I actually didn't even think about America when making that post. Still, as you say, the abilities are getting pretty creative, and everyone gets two, between civ and leader bonuses. Latter generally aren't as wild (though some, like Mvemba's, shake things up quite a bit), but it adds even more still. Two abilities that are generally willing to be pretty out-there at times makes things a lot more interesting (and harder to predict, again, especially since the leader abilities are based on, well, the leader, and each potential Civ generally has options there). Really, the only thing I can say for sure at this point is that, when Persia is added, its unique unit will probably be the Immortal again. I wouldn't be surprised if Venice returned, or at least its only-one-city thing did, sooner or later, too. Maybe after the first big expansion/the return of the world council, to make it a bit more viable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 10:36
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:Of course people can play however they want, but if your specific issue is that the game is too samey when you deliberately avoid a swathe of suboptimal gameplay elements, I'm just saying a simple solution exists. If I were to complain that Civ was turn based and did a poor job representing geographic relations and power imbalances, you'd probably suggest that I play Paradox games instead. It's not a solution, though. For the people who have that issue , your simple solution is "play the game in a way that's not fun".
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 11:34
|
|
|
Jeez. Watching Quill's Norway game, Germany just keeps spamming him with friendship offers. gently caress off already. I'd commit to an early way just to stop them bugging me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 11:55
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:Are they really that crazy? I haven't done a big comparison but some of them are plain underwhelming. All the American uniques for example just change the value of a non-zero number (more tourism, more range, less maintenance, etc), the only exception being culture for kills which is something the Aztecs got in Civ 5 so it's hardly a ground-breaker. The ones that stick out as most crazy to me are Mvemba and his "One of the victory conditions is simply unavailable to you" and Scythia's buy-one-get-one-free military. Reveilled posted:It's not a solution, though. For the people who have that issue , your simple solution is "play the game in a way that's not fun". Yeah, I'm with you. "Well, you can just pick the bad options instead" is not a valid solution to "We didn't bother balancing our game".
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 11:57
|
|
|
Gort posted:The ones that stick out as most crazy to me are Mvemba and his "One of the victory conditions is simply unavailable to you" and Scythia's buy-one-get-one-free military. Mvemba is going to be an utter terror to deal with on high difficulties. His bonuses are excruciatingly powerful once they get going. An fully themed museum of sculptures/artifacts as Kongo is +12 Food, +12 Hammers, +36 Gold.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
There are some really disappointing things in the streams I have to say. Just watched one of Marbozir's recent videos where he "tested" the diplomacy system a bit. He made friends with Greece, had only positive modifiers and close to maxed out relationship with the them. But Germany still pulled Greece into a joint war against Marbozir. I mean, I don't think that you should be able to "play" all the AI civs it'd be nice if the diplomacy system actually meant something real and not just "well, I can squeeze a few more pieces of gold out of this trade". Well, I hope there was something drastic going on behind the scenes that actually made Greece join the war like that, but eh...
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
I don't think America is ever going to get non-boring modifiers in the sense that Gort is talking about, because it'll be the first civ played by a substantial number of players and thus a) needs to be easy to comprehend, and b) needs to be uninteresting enough to get those players to venture outside their comfort zone. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
Oh man, Marbozir bought a great work off of Scythia for 1 gold. As Kongo. Firaxis please
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:You can just... not do that, you know. Please read this: https://www.designer-notes.com/?p=369
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
TASTE THE PAIN!! posted:Oh man, Marbozir bought a great work off of Scythia for 1 gold. As Kongo. The AI's valuations for stuff in trades really is all over the place, but that seems to be a fairly obvious bug/oversight. In another LP Barbarossa actually came to the player with the offer to trade one of the player's luxuries for another luxury, a bunch of money, and a great work on top of that. But at least fixing that is likely just a matter of adjusting up some values and maybe tightening the constraints of what they consider an acceptable trade.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
mitochondritom posted:I watched a few at work this week as my bosses were away so why not and this guy was just the worst. I totally understand people getting frustrated with people non-optimally playing (though with a brand new game where they are literally playing it as they re learning it I can certainly understand why mistakes are made) but this guy just straight up blames the game for being "loving stupid" as he makes boneheaded thoughtless choices over and over again. All the other ones I saw, Quill, Marbozir and Filthyrobot acknowledged their unfamiliarity with the new mechanics, but Arumba was the only one to come across as arrogant. To each his own I guess, but I found him insufferable. I would recommend Marbozir's videos over all of them I think. It surprised me how much I enjoyed watching a youtube series of some other bloke playing Civ games, reminded me of when my brother and I took turns as kids and we would watch each other play games. Yeah, this is what turned me off to Arumba's EU4 playthroughs - he would routinely blame the AI, the game, etc. when he was doing poorly, rather than his own foolish decisions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:It's not a solution, though. For the people who have that issue , your simple solution is "play the game in a way that's not fun". But the way they're playing the game also isn't fun. That's the whole rub. Brannock posted:Please read this: https://www.designer-notes.com/?p=369 I'm not sure what you're expecting me to take away from that. It just seems to reinforce the point that gamers are incapable of having fun if they have the option to grind or micromanage. It would be a lot easier for an individual to unlearn that behavior than it would be for every game to be rebalanced and implement anti-exploit measures every time an optimal gameplay style emerges.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:But the way they're playing the game also isn't fun. That's the whole rub. That still doesn't make "play the game in a way that's not fun" a solution to "the game has stopped being fun".
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
It would be a lot easier for a game to be well-designed and balanced than it would be for every person to pretend that it's fun to play poorly designed, poorly balanced games.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
Let's not forget this tangent about the game no longer being fun was in reference to MadDjinn who has over 3000 hours of playtime in CivV. It's no shame on either the game or the player that someone stops having fun at that point because they've found an optimal way to play the game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
The anticipation over this game has me thinking about buying BE: Rising Tide. If I got a few hours of enjoyment from the original but slowly soured on it (mainly from reading the thread here) would I get some value ($12 to be exact) out of the expansion
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
He doesn't do the optimal build every time though. MadDjinn also does off the cuff strategies that works because he knows Civ V that well. Hell, he once won a Domination victory on Deity as Venice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:The anticipation over this game has me thinking about buying BE: Rising Tide. Depends on what you think BE lacked. Did you think it needed more character, personality, and stuff to do in general? Rising Tide may appeal to you - leaders are much more chatty and have a lot more personality now along with a revamped diplomacy system, hybrid affinities, sea cities, new sea resources, and being able to build tile improvements in general in the water. If you thought the nuts and bolts of the gameplay like how unbalanced it could be and how poor the AI tended to be, Rising Tide has nothing for you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:That still doesn't make "play the game in a way that's not fun" a solution to "the game has stopped being fun". Well, no, but what is the alternative? Continuously implementing anti-exploit measures that make the game less fun for everyone else? Rebalancing the game every time someone decides on the optimal setup? IAmUnaware posted:It would be a lot easier for a game to be well-designed and balanced than it would be for every person to pretend that it's fun to play poorly designed, poorly balanced games. Actually it's really easy to have fun playing a poorly balanced game when it is a single player game with adjustable difficulty, assuming it is otherwise well-designed. A lot easier than making a game that every person would enjoy in a vacuum, for sure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:Well, no, but what is the alternative? Continuously implementing anti-exploit measures that make the game less fun for everyone else? Rebalancing the game every time someone decides on the optimal setup? The problem isn't that one setup is optimal, it's that only one setup is even fully functional. Everything in Civ V is stacked towards building tall, and there's exactly one path for building tall successfully, especially in the early game. Tradition is so much better than the other options that 'which policy should I open first?' isn't a strategy question at all, it's purely a question of if you want to play a gimmick challenge game or not. Even if Tradition was only the best opener 75%, it would still be 'optimal', but you would still have the interesting question of 'is this particular setup the 1 in 4 time that liberty is better? Should I risk it?' But no, Tradition and Rationalism are so overwhelmingly The One Best Choice that you generally have to manufacture a situation to justify passing up on them. The solution is to make interesting choices. Civ 6 seems to be trying to do that by rolling back a lot of the restrictions on going wide, and by having your decisions affected a lot more by specific situations.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:The anticipation over this game has me thinking about buying BE: Rising Tide. Play the demo and get bored of it before it ends like I did
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
Tendales posted:The solution is to make interesting choices. Civ 6 seems to be trying to do that by rolling back a lot of the restrictions on going wide, and by having your decisions affected a lot more by specific situations. And also downplaying to some extent the primacy of science (and thus everything that produces science) as the most important "resource". In an ideal world, science, production, culture, and faith would all be equally valuable resources, and the player would need to carefully consider the tradeoffs of emphasizing any of them at the cost of the others.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
I am watching the Marbozir Greece stream, and why did Britain declare war on him the turn after agreeing to pay him money for a joint war with Spain
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
Perfidious ALbion.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 03:42
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:You can just... not do that, you know. It's very difficult for some people to intentionally be stupid when they know there is a better strategy. Playing the way you suggest feels less like playing a game or doing something interesting, and more like intentionally playing in a way you know is deficient so that you can pretend the game is remotely competitive. Except that you know it really is not competitive, because by definition, you did not actually try to win. Because if you were trying to win, you would not intentionally play suboptimally. In essence, playing that way just makes the whole thing a farce. Kind of like playing chess with a four year old. Except the computer is not a four year old, and I'm not trying to teach it to grow and learn (which is the reason you might play chess against a four year old and pull your punches).
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
You guys have seriously never heard about the concept of self-imposed challenges? Do a minimum-level run of Chrono Trigger, or play Symphony of the Night without wearing any equipment, or beat Super Metroid with only 15% of the items, or beat X-COM without ever reloading a save, or etc. etc. etc. There are tons of well-designed but easy games out there (especially if you allow for "it's easy because I've played it a thousand times") that give you the freedom to make your own challenges within their framework. I mean, yes of course games, especially sandbox games like Civ, should have multiple equally-valid strategies for victory, but the existence of suboptimal options does not a bad game make unless those options are blatantly, massively suboptimal -- in which case they're newbie traps. But Civ5 doesn't have options like that; it just has options that are simply not as good as others, which becomes more and more evident as you aim for the higher difficulty levels and have to exploit systems more thoroughly and blatantly to keep up. But taking Honor instead of Tradition in your Prince-difficulty game because you're a scrub that just wants to play an alt-history game where Hawaii conquers the world in the ancient era? Is totally fine. Keep in mind y'all're castigating Civ5 after five years' experience with the game. It's not a great game, maybe, but how many hours have you logged in it? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
smh if you think of how much time in hours instead of days
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
So now that we pretty much know all the traits for all the civilizations at launch, who wants to guess which ones will be overpowered? Obviously it's not something we can know now, but it's interesting to speculate. Especially since so many Civs have such ridiculous boosts. China comes to mind. They basically get +20% science and culture tech, assuming everyone always gets every eureka and inspiration... which is obviously not going to happen but even if it's just "most" techs, that's a massive boost. Their other boost to early wonders and workers is great, as that's the only era where production, rather than science, will determine who gets a wonder first. So theoretically they should have their pick of wonders all game. Though that may be less useful now that so many wonders are less competitive. I mentioned my appreciation of Germany earlier too, but the more I think about it the more ridiculous their unique district and ability seem. So, all unique districts are half price and don't count against your city district limit, nor do they increase the cost of the next district. That's fantastic. It means unique districts are always spammable. For some districts this isn't a huge advantage. The Aqueduct and Neighborhood were already fairly spammable, so the Bath and M'banza aren't all that special (for that reason at least, the M'banza is pretty incredible for other reasons). The Royal Navy Dockyard and Carnival District seem like they're more situationally useful districts, and so you wouldn't feel a huge bonus from spamming them. The Acropolis is incredibly useful (now that culture is basically another kind of science), and so naturally its spammability is limited by the fact that you can only place it on hills. Russia's Lavra is probably the 2nd best district because it not only allows for a quick first holy site, the ubiquitous spam of them should result in ridiculous yields of faith. This seems to be balanced by an absurdly underwhelming bonus- it gets all its utility just from being a unique district at all. Which leaves the Hansa. Unlike the Lavra, the bonus is really good and always very useful. Unlike the Acropolis you can spam it in every city without limitation. The fact that it's cheaper is doubly good because it boosts production primarily, allowing you to throw one down in every lovely city to give it a solid production base to do whatever you want with it. Basically, with the Hansa, there are no garbage cities. Any worthless little tundra city that would need an industrial zone to be remotely useful... gets that zone for cheap, at no cost to your wider empire. And in case you thought you didn't have need for massive boosts to production literally everywhere, Germany also gets an extra district per city beyond what the population would usually allow! Germany essentially gets two more districts per city than anyone else, and one of those will boost production, in case you were worried you wouldn't be able to build all your bonus districts. I might be missing other points that balance a civ overall (like Germany's useless submarine UU), but the Hansa seems to have way more utility than basically any other unique infrastructure, and it's almost certainly the best unique district. More production means more of everything else you might need.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 06:41
|
|
|
Yeah, China seems like they'll be strong. On a tangent, though, you mention wonders not looking like they're as big a deal (though obviously they're still nice for most people) this time around. Are there any that do stand out as really good? Or conversely seem to be not at all worth it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 06:45
|
|
|
China being overpowered is on par for course. They were absolute monsters in Civ V and had several patches nerfing the UA and Uu.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:Well, no, but what is the alternative? Continuously implementing anti-exploit measures that make the game less fun for everyone else? Rebalancing the game every time someone decides on the optimal setup? That's the thing; the various changes in Brave New World were specifically made after massively wide was 'The Ultimate Strategy' and people complained. Rationalism was still as powerful, I think, but it used to be you did have choice. And the limits on culture, both in terms of the scaling costs based on cities and the scaling costs basd on what you have(except Poland, who gets the equivalent of an entire tree+change for free) and the power of filling out the trees means a wide spread, or even experimenting, isn't that much of a thing as one might like.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
Eiba posted:So now that we pretty much know all the traits for all the civilizations at launch, who wants to guess which ones will be overpowered? I do agree with your ordering. Hansa is most powerful, and Lavra is second most powerful. I'm more excited for the Lavra though because of how sneakily powerful it is. With the Lavra being the earliest unique district along with the fact that unique districts are half price, don't count against your limit, and don't increase the cost of the next district; Russia will be the only civ that can have both a holy site and a campus in cities with 6 or less population. Most civs have to make a choice between the two, but Russia can choose both faith and science sooner than anybody else can.(Germany can do this to, but they'll be a few turns behind.) Add that Russia gets extra land when settling cities, and you're more likely to have good locations to place both districts. The Human Crouton fucked around with this message at 06:56 on Oct 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 06:54
|
|
|
poly and open-minded posted:smh if you think of how much time in hours instead of days look man if steam told me my playtime in days i would but i have to use a calculator to know that my civ 5 clock is 2mos
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Yeah, China seems like they'll be strong. Did you ever have a game of Civ V where no one had a capital near a desert, and so it took ages for Petra to be built and you managed to get it in your third city without even trying? Most wonders are like that now. You need a hill next to a mountain, or a tile next to both an industrial zone and a river, and so on. Stonehenge needs to be built next to stone, so you're only competing with like one out of every three civilizations maybe. If you're lucky enough to have stone. Otherwise it's just not an option. And even for wonders that have easy requirements there's only so many wonders your rivals high production city can crap out without using up all their expendable tiles. They'll be full eventually and you'll have a fair shot at one. The Ruhr Valley looks good. +30% production, and +1 for every mine and quarry. Needs to be next to an industrial zone and a river though. Venetian Arsenal is kind of insane if a navy is important to you. It gives you a free naval unit every time you build a naval unit. Double your navy. But it needs to be built on a sea tile next to an industrial zone. The Forbidden City gives you a free wildcard slot this time, which has a ton of potential. All it needs is flat land next to a city center. The Human Crouton posted:I do agree with your ordering. Hansa is most powerful, and Lavra is second most powerful. I'm more excited for the Lavra though because of how sneakily powerful it is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 07:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 16:52 |
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:The anticipation over this game has me thinking about buying BE: Rising Tide. If playing as the commander of a colonial naval pirate whose flagship is his loving capital city, and in which he majestically cruises across the map, making GBS threads tiny cities into the path of partially-developed tiles in order to grow rapidly sounds like twelve bucks of fun to you, then you might consider it. I have 400 hours in Beyond Earth, about 100 of those were from before Rising Tide, and after Rising Tide came out I probably played 3-4 games as anyone but the North Sea Alliance. I mean, seriously, imagine smug rear end in a top hat Hutama making GBS threads his pants when Deepcastle and another city are spotted chugging up through his borders to act as fleet staging areas/superheavy aircraft carriers for the invasion? Also, you can garrison a land unit in the ocean cities, so 3-range artillery of various types could actually bombard enemy cities while still in garrison (closest approach between cities is two tiles, and also as a gently caress you ocean cities claim a 1-tile radius when they move). Of course the AI does need serious help (there were a couple of mods I used when last I played to make the enemies serious threats) in order to compete with a human player intellectually sophisticated enough to have object permanence, and it's proportionally shittier at warfare on the water vs on land to Civ V so naval-only warmonger colonies have even more of an advantage, so for sure it might not be to your taste.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 07:05
|
|
