I'm playing India, going for a Science victory, just me on a very large island with one city state. Every one seems crowded, but I'm mostly staying out of their affairs.
Bwahaha, stole 3 of washington's cities and razed one, then used my great general to throw down a citadel on the 1 tile choke that was separating his nation right before he counter attacks.
Kinda bored of this game. It's way, way too easy on Prince, and I don't really like the idea of letting the AI cheat as a means of increasing the difficulty. It's also starting to become clear that ICS is the dominant strategy by a huge margin for any victory condition other than cultural, so that's kinda lame.
Hopefully it'll get patched and expanded and modded into a truly good game someday, but I don't think I'll be playing it very frequently in the near future.
Also if your ever going to play any strategy game against a CPU and want a challenge you just need to get use to them cheating. It's there in every game.
Taking Liberty/Order and just placing cities everywhere. Since population = science and gold (through trading posts) you can become unstoppable if done right.
Ferrus on
I would like to pause for a moment, to talk about my penis.
My penis is like a toddler. A toddler—who is a perfectly normal size for his age—on a long road trip to what he thinks is Disney World. My penis is excited because he hasn’t been to Disney World in a long, long time, but remembers a time when he used to go every day. So now the penis toddler is constantly fidgeting, whining “Are we there yet? Are we there yet? How about now? Now? How about... now?”
And Disney World is nowhere in sight.
Also if your ever going to play any strategy game against a CPU and want a challenge you just need to get use to them cheating. It's there in every game.
Yeah, as Ferrus said, ICS = Infinite City Sprawl. Basically Maritime food, various policies/wonders, and the economic mechanics of Civ V conspire to make near-constant city spamming (without any regards as to placement/terrain, no less) the hands-down best strategy in most cases. This game report by Sulla is a great example. Also check out the next one he's got posted, which he does as France.
I know strategy-game AI usually is somewhat lackluster, but it's downright stupid in this game. Particularly when it comes to combat. It's not exactly terrible at diplomacy, just kind of sociopathic and weird.
I have to say, though, I played Civ IV on Noble and found that to be a pretty decent challenge for me. Easy enough that I could win a comfortable majority of my games, but hard enough to be interesting. I haven't lost a game of Civ V on Prince yet, though to be fair I abandoned one that was going poorly. My very first game I won a science victory as India, without knowing jack about what I was doing.
Supraluminal on
0
Options
MrMonroepassed outon the floor nowRegistered Userregular
edited October 2010
basically you're spamming cities or you're going for a cultural conquest
of course, this does mark the first civ game during which there is a way to win with a limited number of cities
basically you're spamming cities or you're going for a cultural conquest
of course, this does mark the first civ game during which there is a way to win with a limited number of cities
Eh, you can do well with a small empire in Civ IV, at least on Prince. Combat is harder, so it's more difficult to defend against a large, aggressive civ, but victory is certainly feasible. The last Civ IV game I played to completion was a cultural victory in which I only had 4 cities for nearly the entire game, with 2 more founded about 50 turns from the end. This was on a small fractal map, not duel-sized or anything - I was working with perhaps half as many cities as the AI civs.
It's true though that the per-city social policy cost increase represents the most direct mechanical means of discouraging expansion in regards to a specific victory type that we've seen so far. The problem is that it's almost the only reason not to expand indefinitely; if you aren't going for a cultural win, it's simply outweighed by the benefits of city spam.
Persia declared war on me, so I bribed rome into going to war with them. Well a few turns after that rome decided that they didn't like me very much and declared war on me. So now we're stuck in a 3 way slug fest, But at least I have 4 city-states on my side.
Well, the question is then, how do you fix it? Do you increase the cost of city maintenance, or do you change happiness bonuses/penalties? Or both?
Nerfing maritime city states would be the best bet I think. They're overpowered no matter how you play.
There was a post on Civ Fanatics by someone who just tried to get the biggest city possible with granaries, MCS, hospitals etc. and he ended up with something like 45 pop.
I would like to pause for a moment, to talk about my penis.
My penis is like a toddler. A toddler—who is a perfectly normal size for his age—on a long road trip to what he thinks is Disney World. My penis is excited because he hasn’t been to Disney World in a long, long time, but remembers a time when he used to go every day. So now the penis toddler is constantly fidgeting, whining “Are we there yet? Are we there yet? How about now? Now? How about... now?”
And Disney World is nowhere in sight.
I don't know if city-state bonuses really need to be nerfed. I think it would be OK if they just changed the AI so that the other civs made more of an effort to get them on their side. I also wish they would tinker with the city-state requests; it feels like 90% of the requests are to destroy other city-states, even when it doesn't match the requester's personality.
Cantide on
0
Options
MrMonroepassed outon the floor nowRegistered Userregular
I don't know if city-state bonuses really need to be nerfed. I think it would be OK if they just changed the AI so that the other civs made more of an effort to get them on their side. I also wish they would tinker with the city-state requests; it feels like 90% of the requests are to destroy other city-states, even when it doesn't match the requester's personality.
also, how the fuck do you develop a vendetta against another city-state that exists thousands of miles away in an era when "the world is round" is considered a dangerous concept?
Well what else is there to do for a city state that has a road and no barbarians around except kill each other and request the odd great person?
Ferrus on
I would like to pause for a moment, to talk about my penis.
My penis is like a toddler. A toddler—who is a perfectly normal size for his age—on a long road trip to what he thinks is Disney World. My penis is excited because he hasn’t been to Disney World in a long, long time, but remembers a time when he used to go every day. So now the penis toddler is constantly fidgeting, whining “Are we there yet? Are we there yet? How about now? Now? How about... now?”
And Disney World is nowhere in sight.
0
Options
BaidolI will hold him offEscape while you canRegistered Userregular
I don't know if city-state bonuses really need to be nerfed. I think it would be OK if they just changed the AI so that the other civs made more of an effort to get them on their side. I also wish they would tinker with the city-state requests; it feels like 90% of the requests are to destroy other city-states, even when it doesn't match the requester's personality.
Seriously, at some point I have to be bribing them with gold because the alternative is to eliminate half of all the city-states
They need a wider base of city-state requests at the very least
Favlaudjust straight up awfulRegistered Userregular
edited October 2010
My biggest problem is that when the games are as long as they are, I can lose track of what I wanted to do from the beginning and make poor decisions that bite me later in the game
This game I was playing as Germany and I wanted to get my last complete policy track, Autocracy, on a large continent map
Only to figure out later that Autocracy is really best for smaller empires, and smaller empires don't do well on large maps, especially naval-oriented ones
so I tried to get a cultural victory about mid-late game, when I wasn't set up for it at all, and by the end of the game (2035 or so is when I quit) I had 3/5 complete tracks, a shitty economy, unhappy citizens, no army, and France closing in on my borders
so ehhhh next time I can be a bit more expansionist
It seems that unless you're going for a cultural victory, you'll do pretty well in any other victories if you just start the game by murdering everyone
Ivar on
0
Options
Favlaudjust straight up awfulRegistered Userregular
edited October 2010
Basically freedom and order are two of the best policies out there with a few exceptions
Favlaud on
0
Options
FandyienBut Otto, what about us? Registered Userregular
edited October 2010
Anyone else buy the DLC pack that just came out?
gonna play me some BABYLON
Fandyien on
0
Options
MrMonroepassed outon the floor nowRegistered Userregular
edited October 2010
Did it just update? I got a "Steam has finished downloading" message.
Posts
saw this and thought
"+1 to happiness!"
Time to settle in a science victory on my island with 3 maritime city-states.
Hopefully it'll get patched and expanded and modded into a truly good game someday, but I don't think I'll be playing it very frequently in the near future.
Also if your ever going to play any strategy game against a CPU and want a challenge you just need to get use to them cheating. It's there in every game.
Taking Liberty/Order and just placing cities everywhere. Since population = science and gold (through trading posts) you can become unstoppable if done right.
And Disney World is nowhere in sight.
Looks like doing the exact opposite of ICS was not that great.
Yeah, as Ferrus said, ICS = Infinite City Sprawl. Basically Maritime food, various policies/wonders, and the economic mechanics of Civ V conspire to make near-constant city spamming (without any regards as to placement/terrain, no less) the hands-down best strategy in most cases. This game report by Sulla is a great example. Also check out the next one he's got posted, which he does as France.
I know strategy-game AI usually is somewhat lackluster, but it's downright stupid in this game. Particularly when it comes to combat. It's not exactly terrible at diplomacy, just kind of sociopathic and weird.
I have to say, though, I played Civ IV on Noble and found that to be a pretty decent challenge for me. Easy enough that I could win a comfortable majority of my games, but hard enough to be interesting. I haven't lost a game of Civ V on Prince yet, though to be fair I abandoned one that was going poorly. My very first game I won a science victory as India, without knowing jack about what I was doing.
of course, this does mark the first civ game during which there is a way to win with a limited number of cities
Eh, you can do well with a small empire in Civ IV, at least on Prince. Combat is harder, so it's more difficult to defend against a large, aggressive civ, but victory is certainly feasible. The last Civ IV game I played to completion was a cultural victory in which I only had 4 cities for nearly the entire game, with 2 more founded about 50 turns from the end. This was on a small fractal map, not duel-sized or anything - I was working with perhaps half as many cities as the AI civs.
It's true though that the per-city social policy cost increase represents the most direct mechanical means of discouraging expansion in regards to a specific victory type that we've seen so far. The problem is that it's almost the only reason not to expand indefinitely; if you aren't going for a cultural win, it's simply outweighed by the benefits of city spam.
Persia declared war on me, so I bribed rome into going to war with them. Well a few turns after that rome decided that they didn't like me very much and declared war on me. So now we're stuck in a 3 way slug fest, But at least I have 4 city-states on my side.
Steam decided to install the patch, and now it errors out when I try to load a pre-patch game.
Nerfing maritime city states would be the best bet I think. They're overpowered no matter how you play.
There was a post on Civ Fanatics by someone who just tried to get the biggest city possible with granaries, MCS, hospitals etc. and he ended up with something like 45 pop.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=392615
And Disney World is nowhere in sight.
Overpowered either way though
I don't know if city-state bonuses really need to be nerfed. I think it would be OK if they just changed the AI so that the other civs made more of an effort to get them on their side. I also wish they would tinker with the city-state requests; it feels like 90% of the requests are to destroy other city-states, even when it doesn't match the requester's personality.
also, how the fuck do you develop a vendetta against another city-state that exists thousands of miles away in an era when "the world is round" is considered a dangerous concept?
And Disney World is nowhere in sight.
+4 to your capital, +2 to other cities which is then doubled when you enter the Renaissance Era, I think.
attempt to figure out refrigeration or something?
like
their research is basically tied to the real civs, right?
you'd think they would show a little gratitude for like, sanitation or the fucking wheel
Seriously, at some point I have to be bribing them with gold because the alternative is to eliminate half of all the city-states
They need a wider base of city-state requests at the very least
PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
i didn't do anything, assholes
This game I was playing as Germany and I wanted to get my last complete policy track, Autocracy, on a large continent map
Only to figure out later that Autocracy is really best for smaller empires, and smaller empires don't do well on large maps, especially naval-oriented ones
so I tried to get a cultural victory about mid-late game, when I wasn't set up for it at all, and by the end of the game (2035 or so is when I quit) I had 3/5 complete tracks, a shitty economy, unhappy citizens, no army, and France closing in on my borders
so ehhhh next time I can be a bit more expansionist
gonna play me some BABYLON
every time I build a second city, I can't build anything there.
GOD DAMN IT PLAYTEST THIS SHIT BEFORE YOU RELEASE IT
I presume they have to keep multiplayer updated for the DLC civs.
So yeah everyone has to update :P
is anyone still playing it? :c
I should uh.. play again