Recent content by mzprox

I won a deity game, space vic aro750und 1700 ad, 15 cities, I thought i was going great, yet my end score was 750..

Or a simpler solution: let units have two stats, speed and movepoint. For example melee unit would be speed 2 movepoint 3. That means that they can move maximum two tiles each turn, but it can be a hill (2 move point required) and a flatland ( 1 move point)

The most balanced solution would be if units couldsave up movement points: up to one movement points could be saved for the next turn if not used up in the current turn. The maximum number of tiles a unit can make stays unchanged.

I too played lots of games of civ1-4 and haven't heard the expression "sod" many times and definietly not as something gamebreaking. Those games were more focused on strategy than tactical warfare, but tactics were very integral part of the game, especially in civ4. There were counters to...

1upt will never satisfy those folks who just hate the idea that archers shooting through cities, that the map is filled with units like a carpet, that no matter if you have a ten unit mixed army you can only attack with one per turn as the targt city happens to be on the coast next to a...

feed the world is usually taken first.. i never got the option to choose it on high difficulties

I realized that in current system stacks of ranged units can be broken, but: -as suggested ranged units may get bigger reduction when stacked with other ranged -some melee units, notably cavalries, could cause flanking damage on ranged and siege weapons as for other anty stack mechanism: siege...

Being dissapointed that civ6 hadn't improved its 1upt system significantly I thought I'd write down my ideas. I have no doubt others already thought of something similar, but anyway, here it comes: My ideal system is a hybrid, as stacks of units are alloved, but penalized. The basic rule if a...

I usually use all the +100% building yields for each district type. I like the +1 amenity/per garrisoned units in peace time the other s are more situational: army, settler, builder, wonder production bonuses when needed

in my deity game one ai reached information era in 1300 ad, I was still industrial. However game says I'm leading science victory..

Quite the contrary actually. I never automated my workers unless there was no more meaningful work for them, and I tended to only wage defensive wars. I still think that builders require more micro as you have to manage them as finite resource, but I have no problem with others disagree...

For me builders require more micro because: -every decision is much more important -It's not like you send a bored worker with your new settler, you probably have to buy one builder at site, then you have 3 charges, likely you forget about when your new city would need an other -questions like...

I wonder which one do you like more. For me builders are definately much more strategic, however the micromanagement they require is just too much.. I don't think it's worth it. Also when the builder cost get too high, I just end up many many unimproved tiles and since it's not intuitive to see...

a scout might catch the barb scout, a warrior however can eliminate the camp before it starts spaming units. I usually start with scout-warrior-warrior-slinger and buy a builder whenever i get enough money

I always build a city when it can secure at least two luxuries even if i have more several copies of them already.. the ai will buy it and from that money i will buy an other settler eventually.