Epic speed (a thread for people who only play normal speed)

[MikeH]

I know this won't be news to most of you but for those of you who were like me, and had previously only ever played on normal speed, I really recommend you try Epic.

Played my first game on Epic at the weekend, it's so much better. Like everyone says it is. I'll never go back!

It might have been my first game but despite adapting to the longer time frames I finally got my first win on Prince as well, comfortably too. It seems to be a lot easier to play on Epic. Took 7 hours 47 which wasn't too bad really.

Wars are just so much easier. Your tactical advantage over the computer really tells and because it takes them longer to rebuild their armies you have some time when you have crushed their main forces to counter-attack and they can't imediately hit you again with newly built (higher tech level) troops. Also, because your workers, units and settlers are relatively faster moving it's a little more forgiving in the early game if you make a bit of a ****-up. On normal speed if you make a mistake that costs you a couple of turns with a new city it's a major blunder. It still holds you back on Epic but slightly less so.

It was only like my 5th game on Prince so I'm sure I would have won on normal speed eventually as I was still learning but Epic just feels better. (and I was hooked on normal speed).

[Adagio]

I have not once played a game on Normal or Quick. The first game I tried was Epic, but from game one it still felt too fast... Marathon is the way to play the game



Unless of course you are like Solver, who made his own speed setting

[eluciv]

Marathon here as well. I always had trouble achieving a domination victory on standard or larger maps at Epic or faster. Marathon seems like it goes slower because everything takes longer to build and research, but I regularly find myself at the end of the tech tree by the early 1900's. That's unusual for me at any faster speed. I also seem to have an easier time staying ahead in the tech race regardless of difficulty. I wonder if the AI isn't as keyed into this ultra-long game style?

[Solver]

Epic's great. I made my own speed just to slow Epic down a little bit more, but not by much, actually. Normal, woo, it feels amazingly fast to me now. Sit down, start a new game, by the end of the session, you'll have Gunpowder. And a longer war can go allthe way from Swordsmen to Musketmen.

I just think that on Epic, the cost of every mistake is higher. If you do something wrong, it takes you longer to rebuild. If you lose improvements to pillaging, it takes you longer to regain them, etc. Epic is thus, in a way, more strategic.

Anyway, the Normal speed is pretty much supposed to appeal to a wide audience. You know, the many general gamers who would have enjoyed Civ if it weren't for long games. And the folks who really want to complete a game of Civ in two evenings. Epic is more for the veterans, because the length of an Epic game matches the length of a Civ3/SMAC game much better than Normal.

Marathon would have been good if units weren't produced much faster than buildigs, which totally switches the balance in favour of warmongering. And IMO, that should not be the case.

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Solver
Marathon would have been good if units weren't produced much faster than buildigs, which totally switches the balance in favour of warmongering. And IMO, that should not be the case.

You know, a lot of people were complaining about how everything in Epic mode took longer to build

[MikeH]

My previous game before this one was on Noble, normal speed and I won in 3 3/4 hours. That seems incredibly fast.

It's quite frustrating that the manual barely mentions the game speeds. Or if it does I couldn't find it (because unbelievably there is no index to the manual). The only mention is under custom game where it tells you you can pick Quick, Normal or Epic speeds.

Anyway, epic for me from now on.

[Adagio]

Why not try Marathon?

[MikeH]

Give me some time, I've only just come to terms with Epic not being purely for micromanagement nerds.

[Solver]

Originally posted by Adagio


You know, a lot of people were complaining about how everything in Epic mode took longer to build

No, the problem isn't that Marathon buildings are slow, the problem is that the units are fast. Buildings = 300% of Normal, as well as research. Units = 200% of Normal. This creates a huge disrepancy, where producing an army compared to producing an infrastructure is MUCH cheaper than on Normal/Epic, where the balace is the same. Thus, Marathon very clearly favors warmongers.

[MikeH]

That does explain why people are able to win by conquest so early on Marathon!

[Solver]

Yep. In many ways, Marathon is a throwback to Civ3/SMAC, where conquering was easier and more profitable.

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Solver
No, the problem isn't that Marathon buildings are slow, the problem is that the units are fast. Buildings = 300% of Normal, as well as research. Units = 200% of Normal. This creates a huge disrepancy, where producing an army compared to producing an infrastructure is MUCH cheaper than on Normal/Epic, where the balace is the same. Thus, Marathon very clearly favors warmongers.

Which was exactly some of the complains of the Epic speed, to build units/buildings took equally longer than it took to invent new techs. A lot of people wanted slower tech, but not slower unit/building build times
I believe this is why there's a difference in unit-building on Marathon speed

[Adagio]

But I do agree, Marathon would have been better if unit production was 300% instead of 200%

[Solver]

Yep, which is what I did with my own pace. Increase research times only from Epic. As a result, more time between techs, but you still can't exactly have all the infrastructure and a big army, and need to choose.

The cheap Marathon units are largely to allieviate the complaint of "units obsolete too quickly".

[James]

Epic for reality.