On-Topic Off-Topic Forum Thread: Rate'em! Civ's I-V

[OneFootInTheGrave]

I like them all. I have every vision of Civ.

Hi Joseph - you still check this site ... first civ related thread in ages.

[Krill]

I admit I'm not a great player, but the AI really unit spams it seems. I get a kill rate of about 2:1 so it works out. The AI is not very smart.

When wars take over 100 turns, it's not "inability to steamroll". It's ****ing boring. You've gone through four centuries of game-time by the time you can finally wipe out your enemy.

then you're by all accounts doing it wrong. i'm not a good player but i don't waste that much time being needlessly stubborn.

Pretty much this. The aim is about a 10:1 kill ratio when counting hammers, which is about the best you can get when you get to a good break point on the tech tree (say you managed to get to knights before the person you attack gets to Engineering, or if they are really bad Feudalism).

[onodera]

A solution could be disallowing the use of enemy railroads, but still allowing the use of roads. This would also stop people putting roads everywhere just because their workers have nothing to do and make them build forts on the important junctions.
If you are afraid people will bypass border cities (by slogging for a few turns through rough terrain) and zoom towards the unprotected inner cities, introduce the notion of a supplied route, so you cannot use the road if it cannot be linked to your own city without passing through an enemy city or an enemy occupied fort. Once again, your road network is much more important.
You might need to tweak the road-linking algorithm, so two roads that enter the city next to each other aren't linked in front of the city, at least from the supply perspective.

[Hauldren Collider]

Pretty much this. The aim is about a 10:1 kill ratio when counting hammers, which is about the best you can get when you get to a good break point on the tech tree (say you managed to get to knights before the person you attack gets to Engineering, or if they are really bad Feudalism).

I'm counting Cats/Trebs/Cannons which I suicide for the collateral damage.

[Hauldren Collider]

A solution could be disallowing the use of enemy railroads, but still allowing the use of roads. This would also stop people putting roads everywhere just because their workers have nothing to do and make them build forts on the important junctions.
If you are afraid people will bypass border cities (by slogging for a few turns through rough terrain) and zoom towards the unprotected inner cities, introduce the notion of a supplied route, so you cannot use the road if it cannot be linked to your own city without passing through an enemy city or an enemy occupied fort. Once again, your road network is much more important.
You might need to tweak the road-linking algorithm, so two roads that enter the city next to each other aren't linked in front of the city, at least from the supply perspective.

I like this idea

[Tupac Shakur]

I didn't realize you were having that much trouble picking up dudes in your old age.

The gay community is horrifically ageist.

[Elok]

I like this idea

See, a Russian dude agrees with us. They haven't a leg to stand on now; Russkies are +5 for strategy games. Also for snow resistance.

[Elok]

Fast movers means more than just cavalry. You can attack in the early game with HA and mid game with knights. Cultural defences are lower then and it is possible to produce an army that will have odds on attack without catapults.

Sorry, I meant cavalry in the sense of mounted units in general (and later helicopters). And I thought you were saying there was some direct relationship between cultural defense and borders, which is what I was kvetching about. I'm fine with the rugged defense thing, it's the neverending slog through undefended but different-colored territory that gets me POed.

Basically, if you aren't using slavery you aren't playing the game out efficiently, which is probably why you haven't been able to use those tactics effectively.

If slavery's the be-all and end-all here, what are the other three labor civics there for?

Wait, this was actually part of the game? And you think that is good design? WTF that's retarded.

I don't know about good design, but it made spying a lot more fun for me. Haven't you played Civ2/SMAC? There were still strong counters to espionage. Among them the fact that buying revolts was expensive, especially for good cities, and you could rush-buy production from the start of the game in both so cash generally wasn't running over. Unless you were Morgan (in SMAC) or fundamentalist (in Civ2, and yeah, that **** was broken).

[MRT144]

Caste System is if you got mids and are running representation early.

[Krill]

Sorry, I meant cavalry in the sense of mounted units in general (and later helicopters). And I thought you were saying there was some direct relationship between cultural defense and borders, which is what I was kvetching about.

There is. Every time the borders grow in size, the city gains 20% extra cultural defence.

I'm fine with the rugged defense thing, it's the neverending slog through undefended but different-colored territory that gets me POed.

Then basically you hate game balance. That's what it comes down to.

If slavery's the be-all and end-all here, what are the other three labor civics there for?

Serfdom is a trap it is almost always never worth it. Only time is for a few turns when playing a SPI leader if you decide to underinvest in workers to try to do something else (like early warfare to capture cities!) Caste System is mainly used during a golden age to run a bunch of specialists to pump out GS to bulb further tech. Emancipation is basically only worth it if you turn a 100+ tiles into cottages and need to grow them up quickly. It's a civic that should only be used when you have an overarching strategy or all the dumb AI use it for no reason and you can't deal with the unhappiness without using it as well.

I don't know about good design, but it made spying a lot more fun for me. Haven't you played Civ2/SMAC? There were still strong counters to espionage. Among them the fact that buying revolts was expensive, especially for good cities, and you could rush-buy production from the start of the game in both so cash generally wasn't running over. Unless you were Morgan (in SMAC) or fundamentalist (in Civ2, and yeah, that **** was broken).

Basically, buying cities is another implementation of an economic victory, where no one can compete with the gpt output. I have never played either C2 or SMAC though. But what can happen (not always, but imbalances always happen at some point) is that it ends up overshadowing the military aspect of the game and becomes more effective than using military to capture cities because of ancillary benefits in the espionage system.

[Ben Kenobi]

Krill - citybribe is vastly overpowered in Civ2. You can obtain an entire 20+ size city in revolt for 500 dollars, a turn's worth of money plus the units in the city, plus the units within one square of the city for 500 dollars (roughly 175 shields) and the 30 shields for a diplomat. That's not even talking about diploguiding (to violate ZOC), and spying to know the exact size of a garrison. Spies are the second most powerful unit in Civ2, and perhaps the strongest on a unitary cost ratio. The strongest is the caravan. You can win the game by building only defensive units, ships, and caravans. The third strongest unit is the engineer. Fourth, depending on the map, is either the howitzer, followed by the transport vs the transport followed by the howitzer.

[Elok]

There is. Every time the borders grow in size, the city gains 20% extra cultural defence.

Ah, so that's the link, thanks.

Then basically you hate game balance. That's what it comes down to.

Okay. Honestly, at a certain point investing tons of thought into a game turns it into work for me. I mostly play Civ with my son on my left shoulder as he's rocking to sleep. I'm not always in shape to think things through. I once read someone's strategy for crushing at SMAC: don't bother with much production, just monitor every city every turn and buy as soon as it becomes cost-effective. I told him I believed him when he said it was a killer strategy, but all the same...ugh.

Since you're so vehement, though, I'll have to try slavery in my present game. Just as soon as I've slaughtered Gilgamesh and have the leisure to revolt. Having impis and catching him early should make it relatively quick.

[self biased]

we should organize some kind of MP game or something.

[Hauldren Collider]

I'd play a team game.

[self biased]

why a team game?