Sid Meier's Civilization

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Ughubughughughughughghlug said:
So cav being represented as dealing double damage but only when you can position them to lay a killing blow is an elegant way of conveying their function of being a decisive but fragile force, especially with being expensive and eaten alive by anti-cav. It wins battles because of the work put in by infantry to set it up at its moment of glory.
Click to expand...
I thought I could just have an army of cavalry, but that is just not economically feasible even with more horde-like states. They are also just really fragile.
Its definitely balanced extremely well.

Cavalry being insanely powerful is historically accurate though.
Rome's rightful successor said:
Nope
Click to expand...
I get these videos like every two weeks about Civ 7. Its just utterly bizarre.
 
I Know 孤独のせい said:
So until Civ 8 drops in the future we will get a constant barrage of faggy YouTubers releasing the same fucking video over and over again. Good Now ? or Good Now ! Repeat until Firaxis starts flying out people for a sneek peek at Civ 8.
Click to expand...
Still ain't clicking on them. They're all insufferable. I had the poor judgement to click on that faggy Emotional Dog guy. Never again.
 
Slap47 said:
I thought I could just have an army of cavalry, but that is just not economically feasible even with more horde-like states. They are also just really fragile.
Its definitely balanced extremely well.
Click to expand...
Tried it and it went badly?
I'm not good at warfare in this game, among other things no matter how much I prepare I always find they swarm on me with way more troops than I have.
 
Ughubughughughughughghlug said:
Tried it and it went badly?
I'm not good at warfare in this game, among other things no matter how much I prepare I always find they swarm on me with way more troops than I have.
Click to expand...
Spears wipe a cavalry unit for half of its HP so it really is not feasible. Cavalry also perform badly in forests compared to heavy infantry.

One strategy I have been considering is specially preparing land for the invasion by just clear cutting all of the forests with workers.

Ughubughughughughughghlug said:
I always find they swarm on me with way more troops than I have.
Click to expand...
A country being invaded is able to churn out an army really quickly in desperation by wasting all of its politics and military points. They also switch to full military production. At this point it seems better to just end the war before your other neighbors get ideas. Which is kinda a nice change from Civ where every war is just a death battle.
 
I Know 孤独のせい said:
So until Civ 8 drops in the future we will get a constant barrage of faggy YouTubers releasing the same fucking video over and over again. Good Now ? or Good Now ! Repeat until Firaxis starts flying out people for a sneek peek at Civ 8.
Click to expand...
They built their entire youtube identities around strategy games and Civ in particular. It being bad or good is what their lives revolve around.
 
Slap47 said:
At this point it seems better to just end the war before your other neighbors get ideas. Which is kinda a nice change from Civ where every war is just a death battle.
Click to expand...
One of the things I like about the game is that the diplomacy system has momentum in it. You're trapped for at least two years, I think, before even suing for peace and then another two years assuming the diplomacy works and it is politically costly. Casually starting a war isn't viable, you're going to have to hold out for five years, all told.

Slap47 said:
One strategy I have been considering is specially preparing land for the invasion by just clear cutting all of the forests with workers.
Click to expand...
I've done this before. I don't know if it was worth the opportunity cost, but I've sent workers to the frontier of enemy cities and prepared killing fields for archers/resource denial by deforesting their future land. Hittites are supposed to deliberately play that way.
 
The main problem with civ like in general is the problem with all knock off products, they are intimidations that lacked a soul. Had they came out after civ 7 ironically I think they could have sold better.
Slap47 said:
I get these videos like every two weeks about Civ 7. Its just utterly bizarre.
Click to expand...
It's a train wreck that you can't leave.
 
Something I like about Old World that I wish more games, like Rome 2 Total War, would use is the idea that religion/culture doesn't have to be rivalrous. Often, and understandably, you'll see this, if a game doesn't have it be categorical, as percentages, but Old World breaks with this in that there is no choice of religion for a city nor is it a fixed pie. What religion is Alexandria? It's Egyptian Pagan AND Greek Pagan AND Jewish AND Christian. Religion there just means "has a community," so indeed it can be all of these things. Doesn't matter if there's a bunch of Jews or a few as long as there's enough for there to be Jewish Dissent.

I've thought about that a lot with the shitty way Rome 2 does culture (pretends its not religion by calling it culture, in practice it is religion as its propagated by religion, is rivalrous). The interesting "story" of the world, where culture is concerned, in classical antiquity is syncretism and propagation, both Hellenistic and Roman. We're Egyptian AND Roman. We're Persians AND Greeks.
 
Computer God Autism said:
Another problem I think that the general land-grab early game design of Civ presents for making the civs more unique is in that mandates a stripping out a lot of possible potential asymmetry. Civs have to behave like one another; your nomadic Turks or Mongols or Hungarians aren't really different from sedentary Egypt or China or Babylon, and any civilizations in another continent are going to be around the same tech level you are when you discover them (or vice-versa) with there being no meaningful disparities to exploit or explore.
Click to expand...

As for the second point, at least when playing Earth maps with tech trading, the New World tends to be well behind the player/old world.

And for the first, it's something I wish RI made more effort into being viable. Pastoral Nomads should have awful starts but be able to bounce back by playing incredibly wide, only settling down after conquest and vast amounts of technological improvement allows for great city building. Think of how the Golden Horde went from Mongols on migration to a series of well established cities fed by agriculture near the rivers.

1776921058300.png

I get what they were going for, but it just needs a little extra.

1776921313279.png

Now that rewards lots of crappy cities over large distances without being able to truly develop them like an urban civilization.
 
Rome's rightful successor said:
The main problem with civ like in general is the problem with all knock off products, they are intimidations that lacked a soul. Had they came out after civ 7 ironically I think they could have sold better.
Click to expand...

Civilization has been a AAA series since at least Alpha Centauri, you can't directly compete with it mano-a-mano, you either need something that heavily differentiates you from any other game in Civ or else people will just say: "Why am I playing this instead of Civ X?". Even Firaxis themselves ran into this problem with Beyond Earth, which was basically a reskin of Civ 5 in space. Everyone just kept playing Civ 5 or played Alpha Centauri instead. Endless Legend is the most recent example of a Civ-like that succeeded by its own merits, but they embraced a heavy fantasy angle that Civ officially never went for. Old World did so by creating a hybrid between Civ and Crusader Kings, which I'm personally not much of a fan of but other people here are. Humankind and Mellenium were just worse versions of games that already existed.

If anything, I'd love to see someone try and properly remake the concept behind Colonization, there's mods for the Civ 4 remake, sure, but even We The People can only go so far. There's little difference between Amerindian factions aside from the civilized ones having walls, and no mechanics for the demography of a colony, which largely shaped loyalist and separatist sentiment, especially in Spanish America. Colonization 2071 has a system where you can play as the natives (aliens in the mod's case), and that could be implemented with trade, Christian Missionaries, and conversion alongside settlement, which is how the Guarani survived as a coherent culture with their language being the only Amerindian tongue that is an official language of their state, Paraguay.


It's just ramblings, I've done some modding but I'd really have to learn to code properly to make this into reality.
 

1776990111932.png

1776990201134.png

Potato gets mad about capes.

Ughubughughughughughghlug said:
Something I like about Old World that I wish more games, like Rome 2 Total War, would use is the idea that religion/culture doesn't have to be rivalrous. Often, and understandably, you'll see this, if a game doesn't have it be categorical, as percentages, but Old World breaks with this in that there is no choice of religion for a city nor is it a fixed pie. What religion is Alexandria? It's Egyptian Pagan AND Greek Pagan AND Jewish AND Christian. Religion there just means "has a community," so indeed it can be all of these things. Doesn't matter if there's a bunch of Jews or a few as long as there's enough for there to be Jewish Dissent.

I've thought about that a lot with the shitty way Rome 2 does culture (pretends its not religion by calling it culture, in practice it is religion as its propagated by religion, is rivalrous). The interesting "story" of the world, where culture is concerned, in classical antiquity is syncretism and propagation, both Hellenistic and Roman. We're Egyptian AND Roman. We're Persians AND Greeks.
Click to expand...
Its funny because I play Old World in a very intolerant way. There is a state religion and you will follow it and you will be happy.
Choosing between tolerance and orthodoxy is fun because its a meaningful choice. You can dot the world with shrines/diverse temples and develop all of your cities faster/get lots of bonuses or use that stone to build monuments and have a centralized religion that gives alot of political power and legitimacy from beating up heretics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom