Tweet
Having played the game with every available second of free time for the last week, I'm going to pause for a moment and post some thoughts and proposed solutions to a few of the problems I perceive with the game.
First, let me assure you that I love the game. It's keeping me up at night, preventing me from concentrating at work, and generally getting me into hot water with the wife.
It is not perfect, however. Nor do I presume that my vision of "perfect" will match everyone else's. Some things that bother me won't bother you, and some of the things that bother you won't bother me, that's just the way it goes.
1) Colonies: I can't help but think that colonies were added early during the developmental cycle, and the AI's all out REX strategy (a nod to whoever first thought that phrase up) was added later. I like the concept of colonies, implementation is impossible however as the AI will just plunk a settler down right next door and there goes your colony. My solution would be that a colony has a culture/border radius of 1 (the surrounding 9 squares). This would prevent you from losing your colony due to an AI settler, though if their culture was strong enough to "push" into the colony you'd still be screwed (perhaps this could be an act of war?). If culture from one of your cities "pushes" itself into the colony, it would still disappear. It would also allow you to seal off strategic gaps in your border, this would be self limiting as you are giving up a pop point for the land grab. It would allow you to actually use one of the cooler features in the game.
2) Tone down the AI's Rapid Early eXpansion (REX): At least at the lower difficulty levels. Ratchet it back just a notch. Here's a story- my wife, who is a casual gamer, tried the game. When I checked on her a couple of hours later, she was almost in tears of frustration with dealing with the AI's incessant expansion. Really! It turned her off to the game (Chieftain level). Here's my fear/theory. The Firaxis game designers read these boards. They've read all the exploits gamers used against Civ2's AI. The Firaxians set about closing most of the loopholes and designing an AI that used some of the human tactics against the humans. And, to some extent, they succeeded. They sought to make the game challenging, and they did. However, I fear they may have made it too challenging for the beginner/casual gamer. Really, playing the easiest level should not be an exercise in frustration. Don't touch the higher levels, just the lower ones.
3) Get rid of Sudden Unit Death Syndrome (SUDS): I can accept that a city might revolt on me after conquest. I do not accept that all my units just go poof when this happens. I'd be willing to accept: a) being moved one square out of the city, b) a random chance of damage to each unit so moved, c) auto capture of 0 defense units by the "resistance", and d) a random number of conscript level defense units magically created in the city based on city size, with an attendant loss in city population.
4) Fix Air Superiority: Please.
5) Fix Airpower vs. Ships: Planes should be able to sink ships. 'Nuff said.
6) Corruption: The thing to remember here is this is a game. A game should be both challenging and fun. The current corruption system is nothing more than an artificial brake on human expansion. Being a perfectionist builder, this doesn't bother me most of the time but I can see it being a game breaker for some Alexander type players. I'm not saying get rid of corruption, I actually like the current system. I'd change two things- a) Ditch the penalty for being on another landmass. That kills my favorite type of game, Island Hopping. And b) allow more means of controlling corruption. For example, a Police Station should also lower corruption. Certain technology advances should help with corruption, as faster travel and instantaneous communication ameliorate the distances involved. Flight, Radio, and Satellites would be perfect for this. Decide on a max corruption recovery level based on a particular government, and work the percentages backwards from there. Give the city the opportunity to recover at least 25% of it's production, based on a worst case city placement/best case government + tech + improvements.
7) Advisors: I like their comments but I'd like them to be more forthcoming. I'd like an "All" choice in addition to "More", that way I don't have to keep clicking to get their pearls of wisdom.
8) Diplomacy/Trade: I'd like it if there was a screen I could go to review all of my current trades/agreements. Am I getting hosed on my deal to the Zulus for Wine? When does my Mutual Protection pact with the French expire? To answer these questions I have to start negotiations with the Civ. I hope that calling on the other leaders doesn't result in a drain in relations, because I'm nagging them every other turn just so I can review what is going on with my empire.
9) Resources: Love 'em. Sure I don't like it when there's not a drop of Oil in my territory, but that's realistic. I look at it like this, if every Civ was guaranteed resource placement within their borders, why bother having resources?
10) Combat: While some report wildly unpredictable results, I can honestly say I haven't seen many. In general, like 90% of the time, the better unit wins. Occasionally the luck breaks the other way. Oh well. If you want assured destruction, nuke 'em. It's too bad that Firaxis didn't predict the uproar that would arise on these boards the first time someone's tank was beat by a spearman. They could have saved some grief by simply autorenaming the ancient units as time went on, so that in the Modern Era Spearman=Militia, for example. Honestly, guys, it's the stats that matter. Do you honestly think the "Spearman" unit is still fighting with spears in the 21st Century? Just think of it as a militia unit, or light infantry, or National Guard, or drunk shotgun-wielding pickup-driving Texans. Whatever it takes to get you over the hump and back to suspending your disbelief.
11) Governors: If I could, I'd round up every one of my governors and have them shot. I'd love an option to completely turn them off and force the computer to prompt me for my next build order. Or default to the same build order if I last built a military unit. I find myself shrieking (ok, not really, but I want to) at the screen, "Damn you Governor Pataki! We are in the middle of a war with the hated Aztecs! Why on earth would you decide to start building the Forbidden Palace? Damn it man, build Infantry!"
12) Unit selection: If the computer wants me to move Settler A, but I am much more interested in working with Artillery A all the way across the continent, I'd like it if the game didn't jump me back to Settler A after I was done with Artillery A- it should default to the next unit in the same stack. It is maddening coordinating wars the way it is.
That's it. I'm sure I forgot something, but that's what bugs me about the game. And really, they aren't major complaints. Overall, though, I give the game two big
. It's addictive and fun and... oh screw it, I'm going to go play some more...
First, let me assure you that I love the game. It's keeping me up at night, preventing me from concentrating at work, and generally getting me into hot water with the wife.
It is not perfect, however. Nor do I presume that my vision of "perfect" will match everyone else's. Some things that bother me won't bother you, and some of the things that bother you won't bother me, that's just the way it goes.
1) Colonies: I can't help but think that colonies were added early during the developmental cycle, and the AI's all out REX strategy (a nod to whoever first thought that phrase up) was added later. I like the concept of colonies, implementation is impossible however as the AI will just plunk a settler down right next door and there goes your colony. My solution would be that a colony has a culture/border radius of 1 (the surrounding 9 squares). This would prevent you from losing your colony due to an AI settler, though if their culture was strong enough to "push" into the colony you'd still be screwed (perhaps this could be an act of war?). If culture from one of your cities "pushes" itself into the colony, it would still disappear. It would also allow you to seal off strategic gaps in your border, this would be self limiting as you are giving up a pop point for the land grab. It would allow you to actually use one of the cooler features in the game.
2) Tone down the AI's Rapid Early eXpansion (REX): At least at the lower difficulty levels. Ratchet it back just a notch. Here's a story- my wife, who is a casual gamer, tried the game. When I checked on her a couple of hours later, she was almost in tears of frustration with dealing with the AI's incessant expansion. Really! It turned her off to the game (Chieftain level). Here's my fear/theory. The Firaxis game designers read these boards. They've read all the exploits gamers used against Civ2's AI. The Firaxians set about closing most of the loopholes and designing an AI that used some of the human tactics against the humans. And, to some extent, they succeeded. They sought to make the game challenging, and they did. However, I fear they may have made it too challenging for the beginner/casual gamer. Really, playing the easiest level should not be an exercise in frustration. Don't touch the higher levels, just the lower ones.
3) Get rid of Sudden Unit Death Syndrome (SUDS): I can accept that a city might revolt on me after conquest. I do not accept that all my units just go poof when this happens. I'd be willing to accept: a) being moved one square out of the city, b) a random chance of damage to each unit so moved, c) auto capture of 0 defense units by the "resistance", and d) a random number of conscript level defense units magically created in the city based on city size, with an attendant loss in city population.
4) Fix Air Superiority: Please.
5) Fix Airpower vs. Ships: Planes should be able to sink ships. 'Nuff said.
6) Corruption: The thing to remember here is this is a game. A game should be both challenging and fun. The current corruption system is nothing more than an artificial brake on human expansion. Being a perfectionist builder, this doesn't bother me most of the time but I can see it being a game breaker for some Alexander type players. I'm not saying get rid of corruption, I actually like the current system. I'd change two things- a) Ditch the penalty for being on another landmass. That kills my favorite type of game, Island Hopping. And b) allow more means of controlling corruption. For example, a Police Station should also lower corruption. Certain technology advances should help with corruption, as faster travel and instantaneous communication ameliorate the distances involved. Flight, Radio, and Satellites would be perfect for this. Decide on a max corruption recovery level based on a particular government, and work the percentages backwards from there. Give the city the opportunity to recover at least 25% of it's production, based on a worst case city placement/best case government + tech + improvements.
7) Advisors: I like their comments but I'd like them to be more forthcoming. I'd like an "All" choice in addition to "More", that way I don't have to keep clicking to get their pearls of wisdom.
8) Diplomacy/Trade: I'd like it if there was a screen I could go to review all of my current trades/agreements. Am I getting hosed on my deal to the Zulus for Wine? When does my Mutual Protection pact with the French expire? To answer these questions I have to start negotiations with the Civ. I hope that calling on the other leaders doesn't result in a drain in relations, because I'm nagging them every other turn just so I can review what is going on with my empire.
9) Resources: Love 'em. Sure I don't like it when there's not a drop of Oil in my territory, but that's realistic. I look at it like this, if every Civ was guaranteed resource placement within their borders, why bother having resources?
10) Combat: While some report wildly unpredictable results, I can honestly say I haven't seen many. In general, like 90% of the time, the better unit wins. Occasionally the luck breaks the other way. Oh well. If you want assured destruction, nuke 'em. It's too bad that Firaxis didn't predict the uproar that would arise on these boards the first time someone's tank was beat by a spearman. They could have saved some grief by simply autorenaming the ancient units as time went on, so that in the Modern Era Spearman=Militia, for example. Honestly, guys, it's the stats that matter. Do you honestly think the "Spearman" unit is still fighting with spears in the 21st Century? Just think of it as a militia unit, or light infantry, or National Guard, or drunk shotgun-wielding pickup-driving Texans. Whatever it takes to get you over the hump and back to suspending your disbelief.
11) Governors: If I could, I'd round up every one of my governors and have them shot. I'd love an option to completely turn them off and force the computer to prompt me for my next build order. Or default to the same build order if I last built a military unit. I find myself shrieking (ok, not really, but I want to) at the screen, "Damn you Governor Pataki! We are in the middle of a war with the hated Aztecs! Why on earth would you decide to start building the Forbidden Palace? Damn it man, build Infantry!"
12) Unit selection: If the computer wants me to move Settler A, but I am much more interested in working with Artillery A all the way across the continent, I'd like it if the game didn't jump me back to Settler A after I was done with Artillery A- it should default to the next unit in the same stack. It is maddening coordinating wars the way it is.
That's it. I'm sure I forgot something, but that's what bugs me about the game. And really, they aren't major complaints. Overall, though, I give the game two big
. It's addictive and fun and... oh screw it, I'm going to go play some more...
Comment