Things that work, things to fix

I have created this thread so that us CivWorld players might communicate which aspects of CivWorld we think work well, and which aspects need improvement.

WORKS:
Minigames: I think these provide players with different gameplay opportunities, so that the primary collect-build cycle is broken up a bit. I also think they provide a great way to chain resource collection, and I feel that they are balanced.


NEEDS IMPROVEMENT:
Battles: There isn't enough transparency with how battles work. I do not yet understand the battle mechanics, and many players seem similarly confused. No comments yet on combat balance.

Teams: This is by and large the element of the game that needs the most tweaking. At least in the game I am playing, the first few hours make or break the whole thing. If one team makes a few good/lucky decisions early on, their success snowballs, which encourages people to leave losing civs and join the winning civ. Civics like Closed Borders do nothing to keep teams small, as there seems to be no disadvantage to having more players.

*

These are my comments, pick them apart or add on as you wish.

I'm pretty sure tech costs scale with Civ size. Smaller teams can research more quickly.

Battles. I'm no expert, but the biggest thing is defense defends and attack attacks. I realize that sounds obvious, but I mean even counterattack value uses defense. So when you are attacked, a Phalanx will always be significantly better than a Legion and will do more damage to enemy units.

I do think there needs to be a more transparent mechanism that encourages more even civ teams. Players who are one of the first to join a civ should get some nice bonuses that scale down for those who join later. I think this would keep teams fairly even and the games interesting.

Sounds reasonable, and yes there needs to be a anti-snowballing measure...

I also don't see how the timeline works. How long are we supposed to be playing? We're at 15something in the Baroque Era now and we're researching Masonry... So the tech scale seems to be a bit off, or those my civ just suck?

The Battles need more cleaning up

And please reverse the Chat, so that you first go to your own civilization chat and then to the general one ;-)

The Wonders imho need a tight strategy as they get stolen again and again, which kinda is a disincentive for using them...

I think that's it for now, not really ordered though

I also don't see how the timeline works. How long are we supposed to be playing? We're at 15something in the Baroque Era now and we're researching Masonry... So the tech scale seems to be a bit off, or those my civ just suck?

Click to expand...

This is what I mean when I say large civs have a huge advantage. When a civ achieves an era victory, the era advances, whether or not your civ has achieved anything similar. I'm in the same boat, researching Code of Laws when the game is in the Enlightenment Age. Once a large civ starts teching they pull away from everyone else and can achieve the new victory prerequisite techs faster.

The Wonders imho need a tight strategy as they get stolen again and again, which kinda is a disincentive for using them...

Click to expand...

This too. Combat is badly tilted in favor of huge civs. I do like how Technology works in terms of winning and losing (that is, the winner learns all techs the loser knows), because that is a disincentive for large civs to badger small civs (nothing to gain) and an incentive for two larger civs to battle it out. But my civ almost never builds wonders because they're stolen right out from under us. Again, larger civs have more people that are available to coordinate battles. For example, if you're a member of a large civ and a battle is going to happen at 3AM local time, chances are there's someone on your team who lives somewhere where it's a reasonable hour and can still replace units when they die. Small civs can't do it as easily (and I'm not waking up at 3AM for a Facebook game... OGame, maybe, but not Facebook).

It would be nice if they could make the players civilization chat be default.

Clarification on what certain buildings do. Do they act as drop off point or not, do they improve the resource being worked or not. Now Granary notes this, but Lumber Mill for instance doesn't.

Also do you need a Theater and a Museum or does the Museum replace the Theater in function and things like that. Needs to be more clear.

To much focus on Production and Food atm I feel. If you build those you can buy the rest of what you need by selling those resource because they are so wanted. Maybe certain buildings and units shouldn't only cost Prod but also Culture/gold/food/science ect. Dunno or that's to technical/difficult for what's the FB game is meant as though.
At the moment there's more use for Food and Prod then there is for the other 3 resources. So if those become more useful, things might even out more. (Not that making a culture victory feast-able in Civ has been easy in the past )

CustodianV131 said:

Clarification on what certain buildings do. Do they act as drop off point or not, do they improve the resource being worked or not. Now Granary notes this, but Lumber Mill for instance doesn't.

Click to expand...

They help in producing that resource. For instance, I had a scientist that was a bit far away from my palace and was only earning 3 . When I built a library adjacent to the house it became 10 . From what I understand, the closer you put the building to the citizen, the less time they have to walk and therefore the more you make.

CustodianV131 said:

To much focus on Production and Food atm I feel.

Click to expand...

I've read this several places, but personally I still have a merchant and a scientist citizen. With a ginormous market I hate to not use a merchant.

In game 129 there has been a lot a talk about how the larger civ (America) had a tough time attacking a much smaller enemy (Russia) due to the simple fact that there were a lot of Americans contributing to the battle in disparate ways.

In other words, Bigger is only better if it's also well-cooridnated. But that's just on the battle side.

In terms of economy, Yes, there's something broken about the balance between the large civs and the small ones. But this is only a closed beta. I'm sure they're working on it. Don't forget - We're the guinea pigs!

Are two libraries better than one? What are the differences between the various food and production sources?

Battles are unclear if you ask me. Total strength 4 horsemen wiped out TS 16 horsemen. TS 8 natives wipe out 10 archers with a much higher TS...
Probably the math will be correct somewhere... but it isn't visible enough imo.

Also is who attack what totally random? Sad to see the 1 unit attacking the 20 enemies while the 40 units in the spot next to it, only get attacked.

Would be nice if we could get at least an name of the work of art being puzzled upon? Some info below the picture might even be better (or even a link, but you might want to keep people in the game )
Civ always tried to educate, would be great if that can kept here.

Same goes for technology, but maybe I'm asking to much of a FB game? (New to FB "gaming")

Transparency does seem to be one of the key problems here, both in regards to battles, but also to how the resource system works.

If you want the optimal production, you need to have a house next to water, forest and/or houses of same kind of citizen, which is also close to their workplace and their dropoff place. This is a fine balance, but I didn't really learn anything about how positioning mattered during the tutorial.

In game #130 as the Romans I tried to add my armies to the upcoming battle, only it kept saying there were no slots for my troops. That was rather annoying. I wish it would better explain why I couldn't add my troops, or something other then 'no slots available'.

in the wiki, it says that the political minister can veto, while in the game it says that it can accelerate votes. obviously it's the former rather than the latter and this is a smaller issue than anything else, but it should still be fixed anyway.
and,

mitsho said:

Are two libraries better than one? What are the differences between the various food and production sources?

Click to expand...

as far as i can tell, each house (for example, scientists) can only work one building (library) each. but someone correct me if i'm wrong.

awesome said:

as far as i can tell, each house (for example, scientists) can only work one building (library) each. but someone correct me if i'm wrong.

Click to expand...

but multiple citizens can work the one building? (aka granary or liberary)
i currently have 3 famers working 2 orchids and 1 vege patch, but using 1 granary ... they seem to appear to be cuing up to use the granary, is this just a graphical thing or should i build a second granary?

can't access the game on my work laptop, probably some kind of flash/proxy thing... wishing there's a way around it...

I think each house/citizen works on one "resource", but as long as the associated building is adjacent it provides a bonus.

Selous said:

but multiple citizens can work the one building? (aka granary or liberary)
i currently have 3 famers working 2 orchids and 1 vege patch, but using 1 granary ... they seem to appear to be cuing up to use the granary, is this just a graphical thing or should i build a second granary?

Click to expand...

yeah, more than one farmer can use the same orchard. and you shouldn't need more than one granary. i should've said one resource building rather than just building, sorry (and in the case of workers, each can work more than one resource).

what is the point of luxurys? eg incence marble oxen silk? are they just for trade? i bought some marble, and it didnt seem to do anything

Selous said:

what is the point of luxurys? eg incence marble oxen silk? are they just for trade? i bought some marble, and it didnt seem to do anything

Click to expand...

The movement of the price (both bids and offers) of the luxuries appears to have two components:
1) (the main one) Other players buying and selling
2) slow random fluctuations.

(2) is especially noticeable near the start of a game when not many people have invested in the luxuries yet.

Their purpose seems to be mainly a money sink. I'm not 100% sure but I'm guessing they increase in value over time even if other players don't invest in them.

As far as I know the luxuries do not affect the happiness of citizens.

I did notice there is a competition that is run from time to time for who owns the most luxuries. Probably gets you a fame point (which isn't worth anything but bragging rights).