Tweet
My computer's hard disk has just omitted an equivalent of a 'sigh of relief' as 1.5GB of Civilization data has been removed.
Having been with Civilization III from the start, I'm now giving it up. For the entire two and a half years the game has been on release with its expansions, I've had the same old problem - sometimes getting the win, but 90% of the time being subjected to harsh luck and even harsher gaming conventions like 'thou shalt not build at higher difficulty levels'.
For example, yesterday I finished a game on Emperor level as the Arabs, and scored 5723 points. However, my addiction needs fueling so I started up more games today - but found that the same old thing was happening. For every one game successful, at least a dozen others set upon by the forces of 'unfairness'.
Whether it be a rush from an AI that starts the game with half a dozen units, an AI that expands into your spaces before you can even conceivably build settlers let alone move them or build roads for them to move over, barbarians attacking your workers and units when you've barely had time to do anything, a terrible starting location, a good starting location which you realize after a few turns is terrible because it's surrounded by jungle, or even the annoying habit of the AI punishing you for building too many buildings while it, on the other hand, is pumping out not just units, workers and improvements but also wonders.
If Firaxis want me, and I'm sure I'm not the only one, back as a customer for Civ4 then something must be done about the harsh exposure to probability. Other games that I have enjoyed and respected like Age of Empires and Red Alert do not start you off in terrible locations. In fact, in Age of Empires 2 you always start with roughly the same resources around you. Perhaps it is part of Firaxis's attempt to make Civilization look like a game for the more mature. However, it is annoying. The introduction of new difficulty levels, as well as continued membership on these forums, makes the prospect of going back in difficulty, or turning barbarians down (I always have them at the level just above sedentary) seem like too humiliating a concession.
Civilization has great potential, but the game's mechanics are still stuck in the primitive set of the original civilization released more than ten years ago. Civ4 needs to be radical, entirely different. It needs to offer a more satisfying way of winning games, challenging but not obnoxiously or overpoweringly so at higher levels. I feel that the current set-up is dying and I do not see a Civ5 unless Sid figures out where properly to address the series' shortcomings.
Having been with Civilization III from the start, I'm now giving it up. For the entire two and a half years the game has been on release with its expansions, I've had the same old problem - sometimes getting the win, but 90% of the time being subjected to harsh luck and even harsher gaming conventions like 'thou shalt not build at higher difficulty levels'.
For example, yesterday I finished a game on Emperor level as the Arabs, and scored 5723 points. However, my addiction needs fueling so I started up more games today - but found that the same old thing was happening. For every one game successful, at least a dozen others set upon by the forces of 'unfairness'.
Whether it be a rush from an AI that starts the game with half a dozen units, an AI that expands into your spaces before you can even conceivably build settlers let alone move them or build roads for them to move over, barbarians attacking your workers and units when you've barely had time to do anything, a terrible starting location, a good starting location which you realize after a few turns is terrible because it's surrounded by jungle, or even the annoying habit of the AI punishing you for building too many buildings while it, on the other hand, is pumping out not just units, workers and improvements but also wonders.
If Firaxis want me, and I'm sure I'm not the only one, back as a customer for Civ4 then something must be done about the harsh exposure to probability. Other games that I have enjoyed and respected like Age of Empires and Red Alert do not start you off in terrible locations. In fact, in Age of Empires 2 you always start with roughly the same resources around you. Perhaps it is part of Firaxis's attempt to make Civilization look like a game for the more mature. However, it is annoying. The introduction of new difficulty levels, as well as continued membership on these forums, makes the prospect of going back in difficulty, or turning barbarians down (I always have them at the level just above sedentary) seem like too humiliating a concession.
Civilization has great potential, but the game's mechanics are still stuck in the primitive set of the original civilization released more than ten years ago. Civ4 needs to be radical, entirely different. It needs to offer a more satisfying way of winning games, challenging but not obnoxiously or overpoweringly so at higher levels. I feel that the current set-up is dying and I do not see a Civ5 unless Sid figures out where properly to address the series' shortcomings.
) and on some occasions, I bump up food production in hills to 2, and mountains to 1... and also enable city building in mountains (The Incas were able to eke out food production in their mountain cities. Also, cities between mountain valleys or small plateaus on mounatins are feasible).
Comment