Game Length?

[Aro]

Everybody here knows how a single turn can be looooong and tedious. In late game, I barely find time to play one miserable turn...


Well, is too late for a wish list, but I would love having the epic sensation of an endless flow of history without all that late game boredom...

[Senethro]

Fine, now heres the follow up.

If your game takes more than ten minutes to play a turn because your empire is huge (and believe me, I make myself miserable with >150 formers with an ICS Hive) what reward do you get from playing the game? Either you have won and don't need to play any longer or its going to turn into a Technology/Scientific victory if there are opponents as large and capable as you.

[Martinus]

The devs said a number of times that they are trying to streamline the game play more, by making the initial turns longer and the end turns shorter than in previous Civ iterations.

One way of doing it seems to be putting some restrictions on expansion, making it more viable strategy to have few large specialized cities than a big number of smaller ones.

Also, since you won't need to build roads/railroads on each tile any more, the end game tedium coming after invention of RR won't be there any more.

Edit: Can't spell.

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Aro
Let me see. I'm on modern age, huge map, at war with four other civs, moving 150 ~ 350 units each turn (and the AI doing the same)...
Nope, 10 minutes isn't even time enough to micromanage my >100 cities.

Let me see. Modern age, standard or large continental map, at war with a couple of other civs, at peace with other two, moving 200 something units... I used to spend about 20 minutes each turn.

I know, I'm a slow thinker. A kind of snail thinker. Actually I started thinking about this post yesterday.

[Aro]

Everybody here is a slow-thinker. That's why we love turn based games...

[Senethro]

Speak for yourself, I play more than a little Enemy territory, Counterstrike and street fighter when I can get it.

[Aro]

Originally posted by Senethro
Speak for yourself, I play more than a little Enemy territory, Counterstrike and street fighter when I can get it.

Shame on me.

Senethro, you don’t have sense of humor, but you certainly have a point. The whole world IS about fast thinking and clickfests, metaphorically speaking.

And you read fast, too. You even miss some smileys, eventually...

[Solver]

Originally posted by Senethro
Solver, to what extent do you micromanage and how tolerant are you of increasing the amount of micromanagement you are to do?

While I hate micromanagement I perform it to the most exacting best of my ability because it wins games and winning games gives me pleasure as long as I accomplish my learning objectives.

Huge maps are anathema to me because I end up creating a huge workload for myself which has me sitting on the same turn for ten mins or more.

I hate tedious micromanagement, and that must be the reason why I was never a great Civ3 player, not rising above Monarch. I found micromanaging Workers to be the most mind-numbingly boring thing in the game... and 10 minutes a turn isn't bad, yet 10 minutes spent only on moving Workers is very bad.

As such, I'm very pleased that there is reduced need for MM in Civ4. I don't mind doing some, but the game starts rapidly losing fun once there is a lot of repetitive MM to do.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Martinus


Also, since you won't need to build roads/railroads on each tile any more, the end game tedium coming after invention of RR won't be there any more.

I never did build roads or railroads on every tile.

[Senethro]

Originally posted by Aro


Shame on me.

Senethro, you don’t have sense of humor, but you certainly have a point. The whole world IS about fast thinking and clickfests, metaphorically speaking.

And you read fast, too. You even miss some smileys, eventually...

My apologies, I think I had disengaged my sense of humour when writing that post.

I would also like to say though that my ability to click is not the greatest asset that I bring to those games, nor is it one exalted above all others at high level of play in them.

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by Adm.Naismith
... I used to spend about 20 minutes each turn.

I know, I'm a slow thinker. A kind of snail thinker. Actually I started thinking about this post yesterday.

I'm in the same boat!

[Kataphraktoi]

enemy territory

game length?

i think a system like smac where it does not go past 100 turns for all practical purposes as far as comptetiveness goes. the MP games i am in are not worker clickfests and the 'fast' speed allows much more strategy imho,whereas civ3 you just have a blob effect where you unstopably get stronger

[MxM]

Originally posted by Solver


I hate tedious micromanagement, and that must be the reason why I was never a great Civ3 player, not rising above Monarch. I found micromanaging Workers to be the most mind-numbingly boring thing in the game... and 10 minutes a turn isn't bad, yet 10 minutes spent only on moving Workers is very bad.

As such, I'm very pleased that there is reduced need for MM in Civ4. I don't mind doing some, but the game starts rapidly losing fun once there is a lot of repetitive MM to do.

Could not agree with it more than I can