|
Speaking of MP, only 3 goons filled the spreadsheet. Come on guys, stop complaining about AI and get rekt by humans instead.
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2018 20:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:28 |
|
|
Beamed posted:In Stellaris, the AI exists. So, is this just asking me to just start posting screenshots of the AI's worlds from any of my various endgames where I have the Sensory Array built and vision on every single one of them or what, with their starving pops, pops not working buildings, critically unhappy pops, systems with no mining stations despite there being no reason to not build mining stations there, their pathetic power ratings to me in the midgame despite being an "advanced start" AI? If you want I'll post a big ole dump of them in the Stellaris thread, because I'm happy to show how sad it is anytime. Just because you're too bad at the game to realize that the Stellaris AI is a loving joke doesn't mean that it isn't. It just means the system is more opaque so it's better at fooling you. Magil Zeal fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Mar 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
boys please. they're both very bad games
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
Prav posted:boys please. they're both very bad games Both of them have pretty bad AI, at least.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:So, is this just asking me to just start posting screenshots of the AI's worlds from any of my various endgames where I have the Sensory Array built and vision on every single one of them or what, with their starving pops, pops not working buildings, critically unhappy pops, systems with no mining stations despite there being no reason to not build mining stations there, their pathetic power ratings to me in the midgame despite being an "advanced start" AI? If you want I'll post a big ole dump of them in the Stellaris thread, because I'm happy to show how sad it is anytime.  Yes, it's because I'm bad at Stellaris that makes Civ6 a good game. I didn't say the Stellaris AI is good, I said it exists, there's a bare minimum game to be played there at least. Maybe stop choking on rage for a second because someone is questioning your beloved Sid Meier Civilization 6 to realize Firaxis really dropped the ball and refuses to pick it up. I guess you don't really know how to play videogames, though, if you think your inability to understand Stellaris means everyone else is bad at it. EDIT: I realized I should put something better on topic here, so let me juts note that if Firaxis at least engaged the community regarding Civ6's inability to function, it would go a long way for a lot of people. Instead, silence, because they know they already got the money. Beamed fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Mar 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
Friends, please limit your slapfights to games in the Sid Meyer's Civilization franchise. For example, IV is a bad game with bad mechanics, and V is the series pinnacle.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
Beamed posted:
I've criticized Civ 6's AI and UI design plenty. But to hold up Stellaris as a better counter-example? Nah, it just pulls the wool over your eyes so you don't realize it. But hey, keep trying to suggest I don't "understand" Stellaris. Whatever, I'm not even going to get into that, because I can't imagine what exactly you're trying to say. Stellaris's AI, much in the same way as Civ VI's, is a dumpster fire. But please, do explain to me what I'm not understanding about Stellaris and its sectors building more Farms to feed my robots. I criticize things I like. I want Stellaris to be good, but it isn't. Civilization 6 is good, and I want it to be better. I criticize the hell out of both of them because there's a lot to complain about in both cases. To hold up an example of why I think Civ VI is a good game: last time I built Petra, I did it in one turn. Start to finish, early Medieval era. I did it through allocating and expending resources and planning ahead. It felt drat good. I set something up and it paid off. That's what I like out of my strategy games, making a plan and seeing it pay off. I don't get that feeling in other games like I do in the Civ series. Magil Zeal fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Mar 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2018 21:38
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:Friends, please limit your slapfights to games in the Sid Meyer's Civilization franchise. For example, IV is a bad game with bad mechanics, and V is the series pinnacle. Sid Meier's Colonization is literally the best Sid Meier game ever made, and I will shank you. Magil Zeal posted:I've criticized Civ 6's AI and UI design plenty. But to hold up Stellaris as a better counter-example? Nah, it just pulls the wool over your eyes so you don't realize it. But hey, keep trying to suggest I don't "understand" Stellaris. Whatever, I'm not even going to get into that, because I can't imagine what exactly you're trying to say. Stellaris's AI, much in the same way as Civ VI's, is a dumpster fire. But please, do explain to me what I'm not understanding about Stellaris and its sectors building more Farms to feed my robots. You're the one who implied that the only reason I thought Stellaris AI existed was because I was bad?? Christ, dude, go walk outside or something. It's okay to acknowledge Civilization 6 needs work before it can be considered good, because you're still allowed to have fun with it. Magil Zeal posted:To hold up an example of why I think Civ VI is a good game: last time I built Petra, I did it in one turn. Start to finish, early Medieval era. I did it through allocating and expending resources and planning ahead. It felt drat good. I set something up and it paid off. That's what I like out of my strategy games, making a plan and seeing it pay off. I don't get that feeling in other games like I do in the Civ series. Yes, this is a perfect example - Civ 6 is a satisfying puzzle game. Not a strategy game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
Beamed posted:Yes, this is a perfect example - Civ 6 is a satisfying puzzle game. Not a strategy game. Dude. A strategy is literally "a plan to achieve a desired result". A puzzle game is about problem-solving, not picking your own goals and then planning to achieve them. Civ is the latter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2018 21:48
|
|
|
Beamed posted:Sid Meier's Colonization is literally the best Sid Meier game ever made, and I will shank you. You're either horribly misguided, or you misspelled Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2018 21:56
|
|
|
turboraton posted:Speaking of MP, only 3 goons filled the spreadsheet. Come on guys, stop complaining about AI and get rekt by humans instead. Is this a PYDT sheet I didn't know about?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2018 23:03
|
|
|
They should make civ VI except the whole map is just space for you to develop your nation and other nations are off-map entities that you interact with via a diplomacy screen. Make it so the main aim of the game is resource chains, chains of production and infrastructure. Call it a "civilization builder" or something instead of a city builder and it honestly plays to the civ vi dev team's strengths.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:They should make civ VI except the whole map is just space for you to develop your nation and other nations are off-map entities that you interact with via a diplomacy screen. Make it so the main aim of the game is resource chains, chains of production and infrastructure. Call it a "civilization builder" or something instead of a city builder and it honestly plays to the civ vi dev team's strengths.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 00:04
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:They should make civ VI except the whole map is just space for you to develop your nation and other nations are off-map entities that you interact with via a diplomacy screen. Make it so the main aim of the game is resource chains, chains of production and infrastructure. Call it a "civilization builder" or something instead of a city builder and it honestly plays to the civ vi dev team's strengths. eh, I wouldn't go quite that far. But as I posted I'd definitely be down if they just started abstracting AI civs instead of bothering to teach it to play a game that goes over its head. "ok, it's the industrial age, let's give Germany some tanks" etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 00:10
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:They should make civ VI except the whole map is just space for you to develop your nation and other nations are off-map entities that you interact with via a diplomacy screen. Make it so the main aim of the game is resource chains, chains of production and infrastructure. Call it a "civilization builder" or something instead of a city builder and it honestly plays to the civ vi dev team's strengths. This would be rad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 01:41
|
|
|
Excuse me goon sirs, I think you'll find that Pirates! is the best Sid Meier game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 03:18
|
|
|
turboraton posted:Controversial opinion, Civ6 is NOT a trash fire. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 03:22
|
|
|
I did enjoy the Civ IV: Colonization remake for a few dozen hours. With the mod that apparently patched some of the bugs and oddities anyways. Though I don't think I was very good at it. The whole economic chain of raw goods -> processed goods -> load them up and sell them was pretty nice to set up using Civ gameplay, I kinda wish they'd take a lighter version of that and stick it into the Civ series proper.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 04:27
|
|
|
Bread Pudding posted:I would play the poo poo out of Caesar 3 : Civilization Edition. CivCity: Rome is actually a reasonably good game and it's very sad they never bothered to make sequels because a few improvements to the core gameplay would have made it top tier. I still like it better than the randomly-pathed walker versions of the city building games though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 04:36
|
|
|
Civ VI is bad because the AI hates you arbitrarily and it can't fight to save it's life. Stellaris is pretty much the same. Except maybe the endgame crises which only work because they just throw big stacks of units instantly into the game. It's probably a smart idea to make the Civ AI be playing a different, simpler game altogether than the player with lines that intersect.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 06:08
|
|
|
The thing is, Civ managed this in the past (some standouts from the Civ I-II era aside). It's just the AI programming still hasn't really been properly brought up to speed since, say, Civ V and the introduction of one-unit-per-tile. It's not totally impossible. It can be done without gutting the way the AI plays the game, I mean, for as much as I don't care for Civ V its Vox Populi mod makes the AI reasonably intelligent about handling the game. I'm pretty confident we'll see similar strides made in Civ VI once modders are given full .dll access. It just doesn't seem to be a high-priority item for the Civ VI dev team (like it didn't seem to be in V). There are always small adjustments here and there and the AI is certainly in better shape now than it was at release, but there are always really confusing "why did they do that" moments for the player that can probably be ironed out with some elbow grease.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 06:23
|
|
|
Not a single mention of Sim Golf? Shaking my drat head.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 06:38
|
|
|
I think 6 is the best civ and one of the best games ever, but since this is SA I'll just agree that its literal unplayable dogshit. The next expac should probably focus on AI — both combat and diplomacy, and add some lategame systems that interact with diplo (world congress and corporations, as suggested)
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 09:44
|
|
|
blackmongoose posted:CivCity: Rome is actually a reasonably good game and it's very sad they never bothered to make sequels because a few improvements to the core gameplay would have made it top tier. I still like it better than the randomly-pathed walker versions of the city building games though.  That sure was an insta-buy. Thank you! How have I never heard of this game before? Did people hate it or something, it's never talked about online despite being (technically) a Civ game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 10:09
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:They should make civ VI except the whole map is just space for you to develop your nation and other nations are off-map entities that you interact with via a diplomacy screen. Make it so the main aim of the game is resource chains, chains of production and infrastructure. Call it a "civilization builder" or something instead of a city builder and it honestly plays to the civ vi dev team's strengths. I would play the poo poo out of this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 12:10
|
|
|
Glass of Milk posted:Civ VI is bad because the AI hates you arbitrarily and it can't fight to save it's life. The AI at least likes or hates you for specific reasons, you can make proper alliances with them and "get to know them" and they know when to attack and when to run away. None of that's true in Civ6. Just think how long it's taken before the AI can even take a walled city.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 12:22
|
|
|
Taear posted:The AI at least likes or hates you for specific reasons, you can make proper alliances with them and "get to know them" and they know when to attack and when to run away. That's simply not true or it's even a deliberate lie you've been repeating forever. It's getting old. The AI is (got?) actually quite predictable and it's quite easy to be on friendly terms with most countries, as long as you're peaceful. The "AI hates you no matter what" myth has been repeatedly debunked here as the case of people not understanding warmongering. People who make this complain are surprised that the AI hates them (as it should) after they've conquered one of the other nations. But peaceful and friendly games are not only viable but also quite easy, and I'm currently playing one such game. 1 opponent allied, 5 friendly and only 1 has the yellow unhappy face... and that after I've taken their capital in a defensive war. Even then they haven't actually denounced me. As long as you're actually, you know... friendly, the AI is friendly back.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 13:27
|
|
|
Bread Pudding posted:I would play the poo poo out of Caesar 3 : Civilization Edition. Beamed posted:This would be rad. Shooting Blanks posted:I would play the poo poo out of this. It's like nobody ever saw city builders and thought "maybe I can do this but at a country-wide scale" and it hurts my soul.  If I had the time and discipline to see it through I might have tried my hand at learning to make it out of sheer desperation. But alas, I can merely wait for the right kickstarter to come along.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 13:40
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:It's like nobody ever saw city builders and thought "maybe I can do this but at a country-wide scale" and it hurts my soul. Or even a space-wide scale. My wet dream is a city builder applied to the scale of planets, asteroids, star systems. Not a 4X game, not a wargame, but a builder sim. Where you build systems and networks and then it all collapses in a spectacular fashion, probably due to some otherworldly horror. So far all space games have the 4X competitive, multiplayer "all factions are equal" mentality. People have been making Masters of Orion over and over. A man can dream. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 14:10
|
|
|
markus_cz posted:My wet dream is a city builder applied to the scale of planets, asteroids, star systems. Oh man I played exactly that a few years ago. It's a very old game, DOS-era but with gfx (so like, the first X-com). You're setting up civilization for mankind in a new solar system, so you explore planets, find good spots for a city, build the city up vertically, have the cities (one per planet/moon) specialize a bit and send their surpluses to each other, either via manual shuttling early game, or a huge fuckoff mass-driver lategame. Eventually the precurser race that was dormant wakes up and you suddenly have to deal with Crisis' everywhere such as the local flora eating the cities alive, of a doomsday device aimed at the sun. I really wish I could remember the name of it, it was very dated but had held up well for being 20 years old.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 14:30
|
|
|
markus_cz posted:That's simply not true or it's even a deliberate lie you've been repeating forever. It's getting old. He's exaggerating, but for all its bells and whistles, Civ VI's diplomacy is spectacularly meaningless. AI empires basically have a binary set of behaviors: either they hate you enough to denounce you, or they like you enough to befriend you. There's a narrow spectrum of opinions in-between, in which they might turn down an envoy or give you a couple more gold pieces in a trade deal, but for all effects and purposes, only those two states exist. An AI that's denounced you once will hate you for attracting great people and being slow to clear out barbarians exactly as much as it will hate a genocidal, city-state-nuking warmonger. You will never have a fair trade deal, and it will declare war on you every 20 turns like clockwork as soon as its war algorithm says it can afford that. It's possible to drag an AI opinion above the denunciation threshold if you're really dedicated, but it takes hundreds if not thousands of buddy points to do so. An AI that's your friend is also in a binary state. If it's decided it wants one of your cities and doesn't have any other neighbors it can declare war on, it will end your friendship and attack you. Or rather, it'll let the friendship/alliance run out and refuse to renew it, because for some reason alliances automatically expire every 30 turns. Trade deals and alliances are also unaffected by your degree of friendship, and the AI has to be bribed into alliances if it thinks it's the bigger dog.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 14:43
|
|
|
markus_cz posted:Or even a space-wide scale. Dwarf Trek
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 14:51
|
|
|
Serephina posted:Oh man I played exactly that a few years ago. It's a very old game, DOS-era but with gfx (so like, the first X-com). You're setting up civilization for mankind in a new solar system, so you explore planets, find good spots for a city, build the city up vertically, have the cities (one per planet/moon) specialize a bit and send their surpluses to each other, either via manual shuttling early game, or a huge fuckoff mass-driver lategame. Eventually the precurser race that was dormant wakes up and you suddenly have to deal with Crisis' everywhere such as the local flora eating the cities alive, of a doomsday device aimed at the sun. Sounds a bit like Master Of Orion, except for that last part.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 15:00
|
|
|
Oh yea, it was also realtime (?) and the planet exploration/scavenging segments where very reminiscent of Star Control 2's lander gameplay. Its one of those beautiful old games that didn't have a genre to fit into, so it just did whatever seemed cool. It's gonna annoy me for ages now, what on earth WAS it called?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 15:03
|
|
|
algebra testes posted:Not a single mention of Sim Golf? Shaking my drat head. I don't know if you're being ironic or not but this is my actual answer for best Sid Meier game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 15:13
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:He's exaggerating, but for all its bells and whistles, Civ VI's diplomacy is spectacularly meaningless. AI empires basically have a binary set of behaviors: either they hate you enough to denounce you, or they like you enough to befriend you. There's a narrow spectrum of opinions in-between, in which they might turn down an envoy or give you a couple more gold pieces in a trade deal, but for all effects and purposes, only those two states exist. yeah, no. I think every game of Civ6 I've played has seen at least one AI civ flip from chain-denunciation to alliance, usually with zero effort on my part. And while attitudes between denunciation/friendship do tend to run together they're actually very common and stable. The core dilemma of Civ diplomacy is that most people take wars very personally, so any state in which the AI can even possibly declare war is unacceptable: not only do you consider neutral states meaningless because the AI can still attack you, you consider friendly states meaningless because the AI might attack you in the future. Your demands for "meaningful" diplomacy boil down to "I want to be sure the AI can never ever attack me." Since Firaxis isn't too keen to deliberately handicap the already-weak AI that way, a lot of players react to attacks by trying to remove the AI's ability to attack them the only way the game allows, by wiping any attacker off the face of the map. Then they get upset that the other civs punish them diplomatically for enforcing what they regard as their reasonable demand that the AI can never attack them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 15:41
|
|
|
PaybackJack posted:1UpT is my favorite change because it makes terrain much more important and allows for natural map defenses in the early and mid game. People keep saying this without really thinking what this means. Terrain was already important in 4. Making sure to place cities on hills and to chop outlying forests that surrounded the city so enemy armies wouldn't have a 'safe path' to the city because of the defensive terrain was a big part of strategy. All 1UPT really does is increase the number of chokepoints, which does less to increase the value of terrain and does more to just set up a killing floor that no one can go through since all the units create a traffic jam.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:Stack attack was an option in civ4 though. Using stack attack was a terrible idea since it forced all the units in the stack to attack at once. If you got some bad rolls and wanted to back out of an attack, you no longer could. Also, based on what promotions and mix of units you had, you would want certain units to attack first.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
Anyone who likes unit stacks must have forgotten the single tactical strategy of suiciding splash damage units and then mopping up the rest. Offense was monumentally overpowered because of the ability to splash attack AND the concentration of power it allowed you. Any choke point could be overwhelmed. In 5/6 a well fortified same-tech unit can hold a mountain pass very effectively. I liked civ 4 a lot, too. Combat has gotten much more interesting in 5 and 6 with 1UPT. Yeah we got the new normal of unit carpets, but that’s preferable imo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 17:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:28 |
|
|
Deltasquid posted:It's like nobody ever saw city builders and thought "maybe I can do this but at a country-wide scale" and it hurts my soul. Wanst Caesar 2 exactly that?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 17:09
|
|
