Lack of Diverse gameplay...?

[GunnDawg]

So it seems as though the majority of the games are all played out the same way with no diversity. From turn 1 I can basically know whats gonna go on.

Found City, trade with Europe or natives, or war with the natives.

Aside from that there really isn't much going on. Sure you could war with the other nations but there really isnt much diversity or diplomacy or replay value.

In regular civ 4 there was a ton more options and ways a game could play out. One of my favorite strategies when I wanted to get rid of another civ was to use diplomacy and politics to get another civ to war with the one I wanted dead.

What do you guys think? lack of diverse gameplay ?

[Steve Clark]

With only one victory condition (and a simply one at that), all you have to do is to focus on getting the means to achieve that end. It is possible to do other things, the game does give you that, but there is no need actually. For example, the only commodity you should buy from Europe are the three things you need to win and they let you do that without any consequences.

[GunnDawg]

That is my point... with only one way to win, its not really necessary to do much of anything else. And again, there isnt enough going on to let you do a whole lot. Fight natives or fight other countries.

[Steve Clark]

Originally posted by GunnDawg
That is my point... with only one way to win, its not really necessary to do much of anything else. And again, there isnt enough going on to let you do a whole lot. Fight natives or fight other countries.

If you don't bother fighting natives or other countries, then it means you win quicker.

[GunnDawg]

yeah but winning the game isnt everything. Its about having fun, finding new ways to go about things and creating a diff story/game each time you play it.

Sure I could do the whole "boost your economy and get LB's at the last moment and win" but why would I want to do that over and over and over with no diversity?

Are you missing the point of my post?

[Steve Clark]

No, because you said it clearly

with only one way to win, its not really necessary to do much of anything else

There is no way you can do that in a Civ4 game. Maybe it's not fair to compare Col2 with Civ4 since it is designed to be a scenario with only one victory condition. However, as I said, there are a lot of things in the game but they do not mean anything. The other threads are talking about how we can do other things that end up being meaningful (or have consequences). But right now, you have to force yourself (with house rules or whatever) to not take the single, chosen path to the only way to achieve victory.

[devincutler]

Lack of diverse gameplay is a big issue with this game.

On the one hand, the very nature of the game suggests a necessary narrowing of gameplay due to its narrow subject matter.

However, I think a good game can have a single victory condition, yet many interesting ways to achieve it.

Some things to do:

1. The strength of the REF needs to be ramped way up. Once you know how to win, it is really textbook. However, the ramping up of the BEF needs to be done independently of the LB mechanism. I think LBs need to have SOME affect on the REF. After all, it makes sense the king would ramp up his forces as rebellion begins to smolder. But money (as in Col 1) is also a great mechanism, and forces the player to consider how to spend his money wisely.

Beyond that, the AI of the REF is what really needs improvement. Right now I can easily set up a single city in harms way, know for certain the REF will not sail inland to hit even a coastal town, and concentrate my entire force around that city.

I'd like to see a combination of:

A. The REF landing from the motherland
B. Indigenous bodies of REF troops that appear just outside of settlements.
C. Cities have a chance to go Tory equal to 100% - LB%.

I would like to see the REF retain city defense bonuses. The colonials should still be able to cause havoc by ambushing the REF en route between cities. Likewise I would like to see fortifaction have some u sefulness so that the Colonials could defend them at least somewhat.

I would like to see the victory requirement change from killing every REF unit to preventing the REF from capturing half or more of the total population of your settlements over a certain number of turns. This, in conjunction with improved REF AI, would stop the single city battle that happens now.

I would like to see an actual potential rival expeditionary force ala COl 1 as well as mercenaries for hire.

2. Diplomacy, especially viz a viz the other European powers needs to be revamped so that it matters. The other EPs need to be more aggressive early on, as they were in Col 1, and you need to be subject to demands to DOW them ala Col 1 (and history). You also need the ability to trade with the colonial powers, albeit at less of a price than with the home country and with ramifications of improving diplomatic standing with the EP and angering your own king.

The counter balance to all of this would be the fact that if you help the other CP too much then their colony will DoI first and possibly win the game. OTOH if you engender good relations with these, then during your own DoI they should be more willing to help.

3. Diplomacy with Indians needs to be allowed after the DoI. Specifically, gaining Indian allies during the DoI (I mean new allies...not ones that have an alliance before the DoI) and even allowing the REF to ally with indians that hate your guts.

At the very least, these changes would allow a choice of a go-it-alone strategy, a seduce or wipe out the indians strategy, or a seduce a European rival to help strategy.

4. Only allow revolution when BOTH a % of LB is attained and a minimum threshold of LB is attained. That will stop % exploits while still blunting ICS.

5. Separate Culture from LBs. This makes no sense. Culture should be based on population, working the land, road networks, and possibly certain buildings. Now you open up anothe rpossible strategy....culture.

Devin

[rf_900]

Lack of diverse gameplay is a big issue with this game.

True, after reading threads with specific problems I think that this phrase sums it all better. The bugs will be fixed by modders or official patches but something else needs to be added to improve the gameplay.

I can see two paths here:

1-Add different victory options, although it breaks the reach for independence thing it will allow other ways of playing the game as it is.

2-Make changes to other aspects of the game so that they are significant towards the DoI. Especially relation with fellow Europeans, Goods production, generation of bells and cultural borders, Founding Fathers (ok when bell generation from the start is not a bad thing), Indians (not acting like normal civilizations, they should have special rules for relations to them and actions).

Still I am having fun with the game as it is.

[Unimatrix11]

@devin: point 2: When trading with other colonies, the price for the goods should be negotiable - you dont want to sell for less, than the price is in your motherland, but the others wouldnt wanna buy for more than the price in their motherland is. So, if you have been producing a hell lot of, say, furs, and sold them to your motherland, making the price go down, to say, 5, while the other colony has been producing, say, silver, doing the same with it´s price in their homeland (while their price for fur is still at, say, 10 or so, and yours for silver is, say, 15), it would make sense (and should be possible), to sell your furs to the other colony for a price between 6 and 9 (taxes need to be part of the equation obviously) and buying their silver for a price between 6 and 14.

[Steve Clark]

Originally posted by rf_900


True, after reading threads with specific problems I think that this phrase sums it all better. The bugs will be fixed by modders or official patches but something else needs to be added to improve the gameplay.

I can see two paths here:

1-Add different victory options, although it breaks the reach for independence thing it will allow other ways of playing the game as it is.

2-Make changes to other aspects of the game so that they are significant towards the DoI. Especially relation with fellow Europeans, Goods production, generation of bells and cultural borders, Founding Fathers (ok when bell generation from the start is not a bad thing), Indians (not acting like normal civilizations, they should have special rules for relations to them and actions).

Still I am having fun with the game as it is.

I only have a minute to responde but thinking about this overnight, I think you hit upon two themes that I had thought of that could improve this game (or make it more replayable). I understand the revolution as the main goal but it should be augmented by other things, else it becomes too easy and too gamey. Second, changing other aspects would lead to more critical decision-making on our part as the consequences of our actions become more pronounced. Stockpiling arms from Europe should come at a cost beyond a buy/sell transaction - perhaps to the point where that becomee more difficult to continue and you would have to look to other sources or means. More later...