Col II is a Sloppy Product

I dont see how you guys are still managing to complain about this game. I bought it, played it for about 2 days and forgot about it months ago. I will definitely not be buying games from Fireaxis anymore without reading reviews. This is by far and away the worst game I've payed for since, well, since I can remember. I'd rather play simfarm. LOL it came on a floppy disk, thats how long its been.

I feel your pain though

Shiggs
 
Öjevind Lång;7315073 said:
BAD THINGS

25. Finally and ultimately, there is the circumstance that this is plainly not "an independent game using the game mechanism from Civ IV". This is a mod of Civ IV, nothing more, and done on the cheap to boot. Let me stress that my list of things that aren't right with this game is far from exhaustive.
Click to expand...

Hi Öjevind!

You seem a precise person since you writed so big list. I myslef awaited too much from this game as well. The original game needed near the same game mechanism, the new things what could add something to the game is not too effective.

I mention two examples:

1. Ranchman system. I don't agree with you in that question, this can be easily fit to the logic of the game. It is sad that horses are soo cheap and stables produces only 2 horses/colonist. What's more, so much horses needed to a stable or a ranch. In that conditions, much better way is buying all of your horses in Europe rather than breed them in the new world.

2. The different founding father accumulating system. My problem with that is that almost always the political point are the neck of the battle, except religional fathers if you don't have enough missionaries or prechers. In practise there is still one requirement of all FF-s.

I add that I appraise that FF accumulating is no more luck dependent. You can choose your later FF-s at the very beginning of the game.
 
Bluetooth said:
You can’t really expect a game to be designed exclusively for you so you have to take the good with the bad. The beauty of Firaxis games are that you can change almost everything. I played the game for a couple of days and I didn’t like the way the King increased the taxes so I changed it. Now the maximum tax raise is 1 % giving me all the time I need to trade and build up my Colony.
Click to expand...

I don't want to change such things because it would take away something from the value of my victory. It is enough pain that there is no colII Hall of Fame unlike CIV4 where you can demonstrate your knowledge.

Sid won't plan a game exclusively to any of us, but he and Firaxis should listen to the mass whom they sell products. Our opinion about the ideal colII can be different, but there are frustrating disadvantages of the game what should have been checked and I think the whole game is too monotone and short at the same time.

My personal problem is that the game can be get to known too quickly. I could win it after some weeks of practising at the hardest diff and independent start (it is just under the latest one). CIV4 had showed me surprises again and again for a long time. COLII didn't.
 
kovacsflo said:
Hi Öjevind!

1. Ranchman system. I don't agree with you in that question, this can be easily fit to the logic of the game. It is sad that horses are soo cheap and stables produces only 2 horses/colonist. What's more, so much horses needed to a stable or a ranch. In that conditions, much better way is buying all of your horses in Europe rather than breed them in the new world./QUOTE]

Hi! :) I agree that the rancher system *could* work well, but horses should increase even without a ranch; and I don't think they should compete for fodo with your colonists. Let them eat grass! Also, in the original game, the price for horses went up in Europe if you and/or the AI colonies bought lots of them. Actually, that meant that during one period one could make a fair bit of money by selling surplus horses in Europe. I miss that one. Of course, when preparing for the War of Independence towards the end of the game, I always started to hoard horses, including in wagons.
Click to expand...
 
Hi! :) I agree that the rancher system *could* work well, but horses should increase even without a ranch; and I don't think they should compete for fodo with your colonists. Let them eat grass! Also, in the original game, the price for horses went up in Europe if you and/or the AI colonies bought lots of them. Actually, that meant that during one period one could make a fair bit of money by selling surplus horses in Europe. I miss that one. Of course, when preparing for the War of Independence towards the end of the game, I always started to hoard horses, including in wagons.[/QUOTE]

Yes, it just could work well. I think spontenous horse increasing can't be fit into the core logic of colonization imo.

I agree that it is quite hard to imagine that fishers give fish or crabs to breed horses, however the amount of fertilizers is affected by agricultural products (since fertilizers are by products of agriculture and food industry). The most realistic system should be the following: breeded horses never can be more than the amount of your farmers' production (no fishes could be given to horses), BUT it shouldn't decrease food production. So, horses would eat the non-edible parts of vegetables.

About your second idea, all trade goods in colII should be more flexible, it is not too realistic that it is a good business to sell ore, buy tools from that, and carry it back to the new world to produce guns.

Btw are you Scandinavian?
 
kovacsflo said:
Hi! :) I agree that the rancher system *could* work well, but horses should increase even without a ranch; and I don't think they should compete for fodo with your colonists. Let them eat grass! Also, in the original game, the price for horses went up in Europe if you and/or the AI colonies bought lots of them. Actually, that meant that during one period one could make a fair bit of money by selling surplus horses in Europe. I miss that one. Of course, when preparing for the War of Independence towards the end of the game, I always started to hoard horses, including in wagons.
Click to expand...

Yes, it just could work well. I think spontenous horse increasing can't be fit into the core logic of colonization imo.

I agree that it is quite hard to imagine that fishers give fish or crabs to breed horses, however the amount of fertilizers is affected by agricultural products (since fertilizers are by products of agriculture and food industry). The most realistic system should be the following: breeded horses never can be more than the amount of your farmers' production (no fishes could be given to horses), BUT it shouldn't decrease food production. So, horses would eat the non-edible parts of vegetables.

About your second idea, all trade goods in colII should be more flexible, it is not too realistic that it is a good business to sell ore, buy tools from that, and carry it back to the new world to produce guns.

Btw are you Scandinavian?[/QUOTE]

I honestly see nothing wrong with horses breeding naturally, the way settlers do. Then one could have stables, ranches and ranchers to increase the breeding rate. If they consume a minor amount of food, that would be OK with me, but not the present system where it almost seems one has to choose between horse-breeding and new clonists.

Yes, I am Scandinavian - Swedish. :)
 
re: ranch system

i still don't think i like the notion of horses breeding in the warehouse, but am considering modding in bonuses for outdoor buildings

+1 free horse/turn for stables
+2 free horse/turn for ranch
 
jenks said:
re: ranch system

i still don't think i like the notion of horses breeding in the warehouse, but am considering modding in bonuses for outdoor buildings

+1 free horse/turn for stables
+2 free horse/turn for ranch
Click to expand...

Personally, I'd prefer a bigger increase rate for hroses. In old Col, one could actually make a nice profit selling horses in Europe if one's colonial rivals engaged in a lot of warfare; their buying horses affected the price.
 
Meh, it needs a patch but it is a good first effort. Most of the people whining just are upset that it is not Civ4. It's a different game with different appeal. That is all.
 
Oerdin said:
Meh, it needs a patch but it is a good first effort. Most of the people whining just are upset that it is not Civ4. It's a different game with different appeal. That is all.
Click to expand...

I disagree, I think many people are unhappy because the gameplay is massively inferior to it's 10 year old predecessor.
 
I think it is because of the comparison with the old game, which despite the buggy AI was just wonderfully plain, simple, and with kitsch, cheery background music to boot.

I used to run the outpost strategy because there was a cap on the colonies you could build, though this time it seems that I will need a different strategy. The map is small because in the last game you weren't allowed to build enough colonies to fill the map - simple answer - increase the max number of colonies and keep the turn limit as it was!

Also, the reasons for wanting to intentionally limit the colonies that you build will make me think twice about taking that far-flung European colony, which sounds like it would be undefendable. Before, with a little infrastructure, you could create a mini conclave that was self-sufficient enough to survive.
 
Kathandrion said:
I think it is because of the comparison with the old game, which despite the buggy AI was just wonderfully plain, simple, and with kitsch, cheery background music to boot.
Click to expand...

I myself liked original col for its profession system. Creating an economical strong colony was a requirement of victory while playing col.

I supposed (and hoped) that this system will be streghtened, but instead of (not mentioned the ranch system) we have less possibilities to build colonies. The whole game is just preparing for the war, no time for building.

And the war itself is very boring. The same troops fight against the same kind of troops in the same tiles. Turn by turn, and if AI has 250 units (what is normally in the hardest diff) then in every turn 12 units land in your oldest coastal city.
 
Öjevind Lång;7532895 said:
I honestly see nothing wrong with horses breeding naturally, the way settlers do. Then one could have stables, ranches and ranchers to increase the breeding rate. If they consume a minor amount of food, that would be OK with me, but not the present system where it almost seems one has to choose between horse-breeding and new clonists.

Yes, I am Scandinavian - Swedish. :)
Click to expand...

I still think that it is quite strange that horses can eat fish and crabs, horse breeding not at all should be consume food IMO - if there are free lands to breed them. That could be another way - all tiles could have an exact horse breeding rate, ranchers should stay in a tile instead of in the colony. Stables and ranches of course still should increase this rate. For example a grassland tile should create 4 horses/turn with a free colonist what could be increased by a farm, river, stable, ranch and master ranchman. With these modification horse breeding in colonies would have its importance.
 
kovacsflo said:
I still think that it is quite strange that horses can eat fish and crabs, horse breeding not at all should be consume food IMO - if there are free lands to breed them. That could be another way - all tiles could have an exact horse breeding rate, ranchers should stay in a tile instead of in the colony. Stables and ranches of course still should increase this rate. For example a grassland tile should create 4 horses/turn with a free colonist what could be increased by a farm, river, stable, ranch and master ranchman. With these modification horse breeding in colonies would have its importance.
Click to expand...

While I see the benefits, turning horses into a manufacturable resource doesn't realy fit with the whole 'birds & the bees' fundamental :mischief:

Unless they had cloning technology & incubation vats back then...
 
Öjevind Lång;7532895 said:
Yes, I am Scandinavian - Swedish. :)
Click to expand...

Hey, me too. I can't recall Col I being all that popular in Sweden.
 
Öjevind Lång;7552156 said:
I never met anyone who had played it, though I did meet people who played Civ.
Click to expand...

It is interesting. Both Col I and Civ I were quite popular in Hungary, but instead of, Col II couldn"t be bought in our shops - I had to order it from Belgium. All other Firaxis' games what I know did, even Civilization Cronicles which I doubt it was a really profitable product in Hungary (even if I bought it) becaue of its price and the lack of translation.
 
TehJumpingJawa said:
While I see the benefits, turning horses into a manufacturable resource doesn't realy fit with the whole 'birds & the bees' fundamental :mischief:

Unless they had cloning technology & incubation vats back then...
Click to expand...

I would perceive it as the horses simply being tied to a fence post or grazing in the back garden or kept inside the stockade or something like that. I don't think the intention ever was to think of the horses as literally boxed up in storehouses.
 
Öjevind Lång;7559242 said:
I would perceive it as the horses simply being tied to a fence post or grazing in the back garden or kept inside the stockade or something like that. I don't think the intention ever was to think of the horses as literally boxed up in storehouses.
Click to expand...

Even carrying horses or other animals so far away is quite difficult. I'm a food engineer and we studied about carrying chicken to the butchery factories. You must pay attention to several things like enough air condition, keep the tempperature in a medium value and so on. It meant carrying between small distances, not from Europe to America!

Also I'm sure horses need even more attention than chickens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

caketastydelish
Why didn’t I win the game?
Replies
3
Views
332
caketastydelish
caketastydelish
D
Counterplay to privateer rushes ?
Replies
1
Views
272
eondr
E
PDX Firefly
Millennia | Community Q&A II
Replies
7
Views
1K
Ita Bear
Ita Bear
A
(7-52) Remove notification when a trade route from another player is plundered
Replies
7
Views
212
Tekamthi
Tekamthi
AcaMetis
Nobles' Club 352: Joao II of Portugal
Replies
16
Views
755
antimony
A
Top Bottom