religion is immensely powerful, if you use it right. i tested myself once, and managed to win a culture victory without a single world wonder.
What difficulty? What was the map layout like (continents, islands, etc)?
continents, prince
it is difficult, but only in that you have to have access to almost all religions and spread them widely to be able to build heaps of the musical buildings
edit: unless you want to risk it and wait for a very late win on the back of broadcast towers and free speech alone
My favorite way to win in Civ4 was the culture takeover.
There's just something appealing about the borders of your empire creeping over the planet like a giant amoeba. Armies can't stop it, science can't stop it, religion can't stop it. You win by giving a 4 year scholarship to every kid whoever picked up a paint brush or guitar, and unleashing their creations on an unsuspecting populace.
Liberal arts majors everywhere suddenly feel vindicated.
Armies can too stop it. I raze those cities semi-frequently.
Oh, yes. This!
Once I've beaten my own continent into submission and start to prepare for the space race and what not, there's always a joker on the other continent who'll flip the culture switch. So what I do is, I always fill up a bunch of transports with marines and modern armors, and keep a couple of nukes handy as well. Then I keep them lurking along his sea borders. If he's getting close to a cultural victory, I can have his three most cultural cities burned to the ground within two turns. (Also works if someone tries to launch a spaceship.) After that, my troops usually get dogpiled and fucked, of course, but who cares when you're about to leave the planet anyway?
I'd be all for religion if I could force the world to worship me as their immortal god-king.
I still don't see why that isn't an option. What am I, the stone age Illuminati?
I've just sort of ignored it, otherwise. I prefer my cleansings to be based on which color of civ makes my minimap look ugly rather than whatever flavor of priest they keep sending over my border.
I've never understood why I couldn't use the Ancient Greek/Roman Religion.
Rise of Humanity gives this religion and also the Egyptians and ???(Shinto maybe?)
Oh, nifty. I downloaded that, but haven't played more than a couple of turns.
I suspect people are missing the point of religion in Civ 4. It is first a culture tool. I think people know that. Expanding your borders can go a long way to helping in your security. Second is the happiness bonuses since a temple can mean a whole nother tile can be worked. Third, diplomacy. Religion can be a major tool to get people to be your friend. Spamming your religion or adopting a neighbor's religion is a major step toward making them your closest of allies. Finally, the holy site can transform a civilization from struggling financially with lagging research to a beast with science at 100%m tearing through the tech chart.
They are dangerous bastards. Religion alone (even without the extra wonders) can make or break a game.
religion is immensely powerful, if you use it right. i tested myself once, and managed to win a culture victory without a single world wonder.
I don't think that would be terribly difficult. Wonders are overrated.
And for cultural victory only a handful are ridiculously useful.
Except those few (Parthenon, Sistine Chapel, and religion foundation buildings), the main benefit for wonders is just the GP/culture points that they add, and I'd imagine that you could make those up pretty quickly if you can get your cities big enough to support specialists.
But man, I'd hate to try cultural victory without the Sistine chapel.
chrono_traveller on
The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it. ~ Terry Pratchett
I should add that I'm horrible at winning culturally. I've done it once on prince, but I was so bored, I don't think I'm gonna try it again. Science/domination ftw!
chrono_traveller on
The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it. ~ Terry Pratchett
0
Options
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
I'd be all for religion if I could force the world to worship me as their immortal god-king.
I still don't see why that isn't an option. What am I, the stone age Illuminati?
I've just sort of ignored it, otherwise. I prefer my cleansings to be based on which color of civ makes my minimap look ugly rather than whatever flavor of priest they keep sending over my border.
I've never understood why I couldn't use the Ancient Greek/Roman Religion.
Rise of Humanity gives this religion and also the Egyptians and ???(Shinto maybe?)
Oh, nifty. I downloaded that, but haven't played more than a couple of turns.
I suspect people are missing the point of religion in Civ 4. It is first a culture tool. I think people know that. Expanding your borders can go a long way to helping in your security. Second is the happiness bonuses since a temple can mean a whole nother tile can be worked. Third, diplomacy. Religion can be a major tool to get people to be your friend. Spamming your religion or adopting a neighbor's religion is a major step toward making them your closest of allies. Finally, the holy site can transform a civilization from struggling financially with lagging research to a beast with science at 100%m tearing through the tech chart.
They are dangerous bastards. Religion alone (even without the extra wonders) can make or break a game.
religion is immensely powerful, if you use it right. i tested myself once, and managed to win a culture victory without a single world wonder.
I don't think that would be terribly difficult. Wonders are overrated.
And for cultural victory only a handful are ridiculously useful.
Except those few (Parthenon, Sistine Chapel, and religion foundation buildings), the main benefit for wonders is just the GP/culture points that they add, and I'd imagine that you could make those up pretty quickly if you can get your cities big enough to support specialists.
But man, I'd hate to try cultural victory without the Sistine chapel.
It's terrible but I always forget about that Wonder when going cultural.
...am I the only one who squinted and reread the thread title over and over, hardly daring to click on it and be disappointed because I just misread that tricksy Roman numeral?
And I seem to not care whether I ever play anything genuinely new anymore. I'm way too excited by the idea of getting a decent new computer sometime soon, and blowing what free time I have for the next two years on Civ 5, Starcraft 2, and Diablo 3.
}
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
I'm not disputing, just wondering what else I need to be looking forward to!
Command and Conquer 4, Supreme Commander 2, and E:TW and DoWII expansions.
Jephery on
}
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
But man, I'd hate to try cultural victory without the Sistine chapel.
It's terrible but I always forget about that Wonder when going cultural.
Yeah, Sistine chapel is the sexiest (well, I haven't crunched the numbers since Parthenon is pretty sexy too) since it gives you extra culture for religion buildings (which you're gonna build the hell out of anyway) as well as yummy artist GP points. And I think its something like +10 culture itself.
Edit: Aaaaaand, +culture for specialists, which you'll also be using a lot of as well. So, its really a win, win, win, win situation there.
chrono_traveller on
The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it. ~ Terry Pratchett
I just looked over the list and...removing resources as a strategic interest? Seriously? No more upgrading mines or farm or plantations, building roads to them, and trying to defend them? Or do you still have to do all that, but all the work is wasted once you build your first unit? I'm guessing tile upgrades from such resources would be gone as well, limiting the ability to specialize cities.
I'm hoping I'm missing something, because this sounds really, really bad.
Where did you get the idea that they were removing resources as a strategic interest? If nothing else, making them finite will increase the importance of resources. Whether they "run out" or are able to support a set number of units, it will increase the demand/importance of resources.
Because they'll be gone from the map almost immediately. If each one let you do 20 or 30 units, that'd be one thing, but 1? I don't even get how that works, you can build maybe one or two swordsmen and then you're stuck with cavemen til you can kill someone and steal their swords?
I just looked over the list and...removing resources as a strategic interest? Seriously? No more upgrading mines or farm or plantations, building roads to them, and trying to defend them? Or do you still have to do all that, but all the work is wasted once you build your first unit? I'm guessing tile upgrades from such resources would be gone as well, limiting the ability to specialize cities.
I'm hoping I'm missing something, because this sounds really, really bad.
Where did you get the idea that they were removing resources as a strategic interest? If nothing else, making them finite will increase the importance of resources. Whether they "run out" or are able to support a set number of units, it will increase the demand/importance of resources.
Because they'll be gone from the map almost immediately. If each one let you do 20 or 30 units, that'd be one thing, but 1? I don't even get how that works, you can build maybe one or two swordsmen and then you're stuck with cavemen til you can kill someone and steal their swords?
I believe the current reading is, "One at a time." As in, if you have 5 sources of horses, you can have 5 horse-requiring units at any given time. If you want a knight and you have 5 horsemen, you need to disband an existing horseman or find more horses.
Then, if one of your horseman units dies, you get its horses back and can make another horse-using unit - a knight, in this case.
My favorite way to win in Civ4 was the culture takeover.
There's just something appealing about the borders of your empire creeping over the planet like a giant amoeba. Armies can't stop it, science can't stop it, religion can't stop it. You win by giving a 4 year scholarship to every kid whoever picked up a paint brush or guitar, and unleashing their creations on an unsuspecting populace.
Liberal arts majors everywhere suddenly feel vindicated.
Armies can too stop it. I raze those cities semi-frequently.
Oh, yes. This!
Once I've beaten my own continent into submission and start to prepare for the space race and what not, there's always a joker on the other continent who'll flip the culture switch. So what I do is, I always fill up a bunch of transports with marines and modern armors, and keep a couple of nukes handy as well. Then I keep them lurking along his sea borders. If he's getting close to a cultural victory, I can have his three most cultural cities burned to the ground within two turns. (Also works if someone tries to launch a spaceship.) After that, my troops usually get dogpiled and fucked, of course, but who cares when you're about to leave the planet anyway?
I'm a total bastard, I know...
Heh. I was playing last night and Charlemagne had all the iron and copper. We were also best friends, so I asked for it. I then proceeded to try to build a swordsman force to kill him, but he cancelled the deal before that could happen.
I'd be all for religion if I could force the world to worship me as their immortal god-king.
I still don't see why that isn't an option. What am I, the stone age Illuminati?
I've just sort of ignored it, otherwise. I prefer my cleansings to be based on which color of civ makes my minimap look ugly rather than whatever flavor of priest they keep sending over my border.
I've never understood why I couldn't use the Ancient Greek/Roman Religion.
Rise of Humanity gives this religion and also the Egyptians and ???(Shinto maybe?)
Oh, nifty. I downloaded that, but haven't played more than a couple of turns.
I suspect people are missing the point of religion in Civ 4. It is first a culture tool. I think people know that. Expanding your borders can go a long way to helping in your security. Second is the happiness bonuses since a temple can mean a whole nother tile can be worked. Third, diplomacy. Religion can be a major tool to get people to be your friend. Spamming your religion or adopting a neighbor's religion is a major step toward making them your closest of allies. Finally, the holy site can transform a civilization from struggling financially with lagging research to a beast with science at 100%m tearing through the tech chart.
They are dangerous bastards. Religion alone (even without the extra wonders) can make or break a game.
religion is immensely powerful, if you use it right. i tested myself once, and managed to win a culture victory without a single world wonder.
I don't think that would be terribly difficult. Wonders are overrated.
And for cultural victory only a handful are ridiculously useful.
Except those few (Parthenon, Sistine Chapel, and religion foundation buildings), the main benefit for wonders is just the GP/culture points that they add, and I'd imagine that you could make those up pretty quickly if you can get your cities big enough to support specialists.
But man, I'd hate to try cultural victory without the Sistine chapel.
It's terrible but I always forget about that Wonder when going cultural.
I'd love to see wonders be a bit more powerful and focused in Civ5 but maybe get obsolete faster or something.
Just thinking something like "Oh shit, the romans have built the pyramids - now they can whip slaves 4x more efficiently and churn out swordsmen".
Can we get confirmation on if it's one unit per hex? I hope not, because the first thing I want to do is make a Steve Jackson Ogre mod for this. The scale is near perfect.
edit: Confirmed no more stacks. Well crap.
Sonar on
I'm building a real pirate ship. Really. Wanna help? Click here!
caffron said: "and cat pee is not a laughing matter"
Personally, I've got absolutely no problem with the change to hexes in Civ V (at least, as much as we know about them). I do have a problem with silly geese that are too busy masturbating with their hex mats to admit that hexes aren't perfect, rather just one of multiple movement and distance abstracting devices that can be employed.
Well as soon as somebody does that, you jump on em, chief.
Can we get confirmation on if it's one unit per hex? I hope not, because the first thing I want to do is make a Steve Jackson Ogre mod for this. The scale is near perfect.
edit: Confirmed no more stacks. Well crap.
I like the idea someone posted earlier about having it so that tile improvements such as forts would allow you to stack additional units on a given hex.
Can we get confirmation on if it's one unit per hex? I hope not, because the first thing I want to do is make a Steve Jackson Ogre mod for this. The scale is near perfect.
edit: Confirmed no more stacks. Well crap.
I would be very VERY surprised if this was not easily turned off, either via a mod or even an in game option.
We are talking a binary switch here, they would be dumb to not allow it.
The one thing about one unit per tile is that it would make moving your shit around REALLY obnoxious.
I'm wondering if they'll instead just go back to how it was in Civilization 2: if the defender is killed, the whole stack dies, unless they're in a city or fortress. And I guess also making it so only one unit per stack can attack at a time, too.
Can we get confirmation on if it's one unit per hex? I hope not, because the first thing I want to do is make a Steve Jackson Ogre mod for this. The scale is near perfect.
edit: Confirmed no more stacks. Well crap.
I would be very VERY surprised if this was not easily turned off, either via a mod or even an in game option.
We are talking a binary switch here, they would be dumb to not allow it.
I really doubt it would be that simple - seems like the game would balanced supposing one unit per tile.
Can we get confirmation on if it's one unit per hex? I hope not, because the first thing I want to do is make a Steve Jackson Ogre mod for this. The scale is near perfect.
edit: Confirmed no more stacks. Well crap.
I would be very VERY surprised if this was not easily turned off, either via a mod or even an in game option.
We are talking a binary switch here, they would be dumb to not allow it.
I really doubt it would be that simple - seems like the game would balanced supposing one unit per tile.
Can we get confirmation on if it's one unit per hex? I hope not, because the first thing I want to do is make a Steve Jackson Ogre mod for this. The scale is near perfect.
edit: Confirmed no more stacks. Well crap.
I would be very VERY surprised if this was not easily turned off, either via a mod or even an in game option.
We are talking a binary switch here, they would be dumb to not allow it.
I really doubt it would be that simple - seems like the game would balanced supposing one unit per tile.
It'd be neat if they could take the system from Revolutions for creating armies and extend it. So I could create a army from various units, like adding some axemen and spearmen to some catapults so they are less vulnerable to flanking maneuvers, or just go all out seige if I want concentrated firepower and I am not worried about them getting attacked. Basically a more organized form of unit stacks.
I don't enjoy the thought of managing dozens of individual units all across the map.
Can we get confirmation on if it's one unit per hex? I hope not, because the first thing I want to do is make a Steve Jackson Ogre mod for this. The scale is near perfect.
edit: Confirmed no more stacks. Well crap.
I would be very VERY surprised if this was not easily turned off, either via a mod or even an in game option.
We are talking a binary switch here, they would be dumb to not allow it.
I really doubt it would be that simple - seems like the game would balanced supposing one unit per tile.
It will be moddable.
But if the game is built around one unit per tile, it'll be integrated fairly deep into the engine. Think of all the things multiple units per tile needs - a permissive unit-position-tracking mechanism, unit grouping, logic for deciding who gets to attack and defend first, etc.
Civ 4 is pretty moddable, but it still runs into "this isn't exposed in the API, we can't do it" issues, even when they start hacking away at the .dll files. Multiple units per tile sounds like one of those features that needs to be included at an engine level, even if it is disabled by default.
It'd be neat if they could take the system from Revolutions for creating armies and extend it. So I could create a army from various units, like adding some axemen and spearmen to some catapults so they are less vulnerable to flanking maneuvers, or just go all out seige if I want concentrated firepower and I am not worried about them getting attacked. Basically a more organized form of unit stacks.
I don't enjoy the thought of managing dozens of individual units all across the map.
The one thing about one unit per tile is that it would make moving your shit around REALLY obnoxious.
I'm wondering if they'll instead just go back to how it was in Civilization 2: if the defender is killed, the whole stack dies, unless they're in a city or fortress. And I guess also making it so only one unit per stack can attack at a time, too.
I dunno. If the game is built around a smaller number of units that represent larger forces, we might not be working with that many of them at any one time, so one-hex-per unit makes sense.
If it helps, the screenshots heavily imply (to me) that they're doing some sort of army combining like they did in Revolution. You can see a large number of units standing on the same hex, of varying quantity. I could be extrapolating too much from it, but from that it looks to me like they're going to have the sort of thing Yoshua is describing.
Ick, I hadn't thought of that either... I wonder if the new Civ will be much more resource intensive than the last one? My computer is... lacking... in power, and I think it'll be some time before I can afford a new one. =( Got to start saving my pennies, I've been putting it off for far too long anyways.
If it helps, the screenshots heavily imply (to me) that they're doing some sort of army combining like they did in Revolution. You can see a large number of units standing on the same hex, of varying quantity. I could be extrapolating too much from it, but from that it looks to me like they're going to have the sort of thing Yoshua is describing.
I agree that Yoshua's point sounds good. The only issue I see is that, by screens we've got now, all the hexes seem to be populated with the same unit. Of course, that could just be because we're in the early, pre-alpha stages of the game.
The one thing about one unit per tile is that it would make moving your shit around REALLY obnoxious.
I'm wondering if they'll instead just go back to how it was in Civilization 2: if the defender is killed, the whole stack dies, unless they're in a city or fortress. And I guess also making it so only one unit per stack can attack at a time, too.
I dunno. If the game is built around a smaller number of units that represent larger forces, we might not be working with that many of them at any one time, so one-hex-per unit makes sense.
My question is, does this apply to workers too? Will a marching army have to curve around someone building a road between two cities?
The one thing about one unit per tile is that it would make moving your shit around REALLY obnoxious.
I'm wondering if they'll instead just go back to how it was in Civilization 2: if the defender is killed, the whole stack dies, unless they're in a city or fortress. And I guess also making it so only one unit per stack can attack at a time, too.
I dunno. If the game is built around a smaller number of units that represent larger forces, we might not be working with that many of them at any one time, so one-hex-per unit makes sense.
My question is, does this apply to workers too? Will a marching army have to curve around someone building a road between two cities?
Yeah, I realize now that what I wrote could be misinterpreted. This is what I'm talking about: having to dance your units around in order to rearrange them (want to move your new horsemen ahead of your main force to scout ahead? Too bad!), not about having more things to click around with because I no longer can stackodoom.
I'm not sure how I feel about these hexes. I fully admit, the only reason I don't like them is because they're different(and yes, I've played hex-based games before). Still... its different
Posts
continents, prince
it is difficult, but only in that you have to have access to almost all religions and spread them widely to be able to build heaps of the musical buildings
edit: unless you want to risk it and wait for a very late win on the back of broadcast towers and free speech alone
Oh, yes. This!
Once I've beaten my own continent into submission and start to prepare for the space race and what not, there's always a joker on the other continent who'll flip the culture switch. So what I do is, I always fill up a bunch of transports with marines and modern armors, and keep a couple of nukes handy as well. Then I keep them lurking along his sea borders. If he's getting close to a cultural victory, I can have his three most cultural cities burned to the ground within two turns. (Also works if someone tries to launch a spaceship.) After that, my troops usually get dogpiled and fucked, of course, but who cares when you're about to leave the planet anyway?
I'm a total bastard, I know...
Except those few (Parthenon, Sistine Chapel, and religion foundation buildings), the main benefit for wonders is just the GP/culture points that they add, and I'd imagine that you could make those up pretty quickly if you can get your cities big enough to support specialists.
But man, I'd hate to try cultural victory without the Sistine chapel.
It's terrible but I always forget about that Wonder when going cultural.
HOLY SHIT
...am I the only one who squinted and reread the thread title over and over, hardly daring to click on it and be disappointed because I just misread that tricksy Roman numeral?
And I seem to not care whether I ever play anything genuinely new anymore. I'm way too excited by the idea of getting a decent new computer sometime soon, and blowing what free time I have for the next two years on Civ 5, Starcraft 2, and Diablo 3.
Steam: badger2d
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
Civ V, Elemental, Starcraft II, and ... ?
I'm not disputing, just wondering what else I need to be looking forward to!
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
Command and Conquer 4, Supreme Commander 2, and E:TW and DoWII expansions.
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
Yeah, Sistine chapel is the sexiest (well, I haven't crunched the numbers since Parthenon is pretty sexy too) since it gives you extra culture for religion buildings (which you're gonna build the hell out of anyway) as well as yummy artist GP points. And I think its something like +10 culture itself.
Edit: Aaaaaand, +culture for specialists, which you'll also be using a lot of as well. So, its really a win, win, win, win situation there.
Because they'll be gone from the map almost immediately. If each one let you do 20 or 30 units, that'd be one thing, but 1? I don't even get how that works, you can build maybe one or two swordsmen and then you're stuck with cavemen til you can kill someone and steal their swords?
I believe the current reading is, "One at a time." As in, if you have 5 sources of horses, you can have 5 horse-requiring units at any given time. If you want a knight and you have 5 horsemen, you need to disband an existing horseman or find more horses.
Then, if one of your horseman units dies, you get its horses back and can make another horse-using unit - a knight, in this case.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
I agree that fighting over a source of iron to get one swordsman (say attack 4 vs attack 2 for your other soldiers) would be totally pointless.
Heh. I was playing last night and Charlemagne had all the iron and copper. We were also best friends, so I asked for it. I then proceeded to try to build a swordsman force to kill him, but he cancelled the deal before that could happen.
I'd love to see wonders be a bit more powerful and focused in Civ5 but maybe get obsolete faster or something.
Just thinking something like "Oh shit, the romans have built the pyramids - now they can whip slaves 4x more efficiently and churn out swordsmen".
edit: Confirmed no more stacks. Well crap.
caffron said: "and cat pee is not a laughing matter"
Well as soon as somebody does that, you jump on em, chief.
I like the idea someone posted earlier about having it so that tile improvements such as forts would allow you to stack additional units on a given hex.
I would be very VERY surprised if this was not easily turned off, either via a mod or even an in game option.
We are talking a binary switch here, they would be dumb to not allow it.
Is it September yet?
I'm wondering if they'll instead just go back to how it was in Civilization 2: if the defender is killed, the whole stack dies, unless they're in a city or fortress. And I guess also making it so only one unit per stack can attack at a time, too.
I really doubt it would be that simple - seems like the game would balanced supposing one unit per tile.
I imagine its balanced out by having vastly smaller unit counts.
game balance != technical limitation
It will be moddable.
I don't enjoy the thought of managing dozens of individual units all across the map.
But if the game is built around one unit per tile, it'll be integrated fairly deep into the engine. Think of all the things multiple units per tile needs - a permissive unit-position-tracking mechanism, unit grouping, logic for deciding who gets to attack and defend first, etc.
Civ 4 is pretty moddable, but it still runs into "this isn't exposed in the API, we can't do it" issues, even when they start hacking away at the .dll files. Multiple units per tile sounds like one of those features that needs to be included at an engine level, even if it is disabled by default.
I dunno. If the game is built around a smaller number of units that represent larger forces, we might not be working with that many of them at any one time, so one-hex-per unit makes sense.
I agree that Yoshua's point sounds good. The only issue I see is that, by screens we've got now, all the hexes seem to be populated with the same unit. Of course, that could just be because we're in the early, pre-alpha stages of the game.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
My question is, does this apply to workers too? Will a marching army have to curve around someone building a road between two cities?
Yeah, I realize now that what I wrote could be misinterpreted. This is what I'm talking about: having to dance your units around in order to rearrange them (want to move your new horsemen ahead of your main force to scout ahead? Too bad!), not about having more things to click around with because I no longer can stackodoom.
3ds friend code: 2981-6032-4118