It feels really bad. If you play huge map, everyone has around three cities. 70% of the map is empty. No need to expand or fight for territory. Just build your hotels and make art exhibitions in various themes. It feels like game for players, that likes Sims (nothing wrong, just looking for something else). Game is balanced by many game mechanics to three cities playing. Three cities is hardly a country or civilization.
My friend ICS got shot in the head
- Thread starter Abbadonlefleau
- Start date
Abbadonlefleau
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 10
I agree with Dishonor, the worst drawback is that we are not fighting for land anymore, which was the most interesting in my mind. I hate having those huge empty lands between me and the others. In the original civilization board game, the only reason to go to war was when you lacked land for your food and HAD to go to your neighboor to find food. I thought that this "border pressure" was part of the DNA...
(but it's still a fantastic game ;-)
(but it's still a fantastic game ;-)
Won my next wide game as Egypt on Immortal.
Early game leaves you quite vulnerable but after you catch up, there's nothing the AI can do to beat you. The amount of culture, production, tourism and gold you can produce makes a wide empire very flexible and less vulnerable.
I mean, I've won the World's Fair and the International Games AT THE SAME TIME ... on immortal. ^^ That should showcase the wide late game power.
It was easier to pull off in G+K though, for sure. But new strategies can still evolve and maybe this will change anyway.
Early game leaves you quite vulnerable but after you catch up, there's nothing the AI can do to beat you. The amount of culture, production, tourism and gold you can produce makes a wide empire very flexible and less vulnerable.
I mean, I've won the World's Fair and the International Games AT THE SAME TIME ... on immortal. ^^ That should showcase the wide late game power.
It was easier to pull off in G+K though, for sure. But new strategies can still evolve and maybe this will change anyway.
This is similar to how NiGHTS played (author hasn't released an update in a while and is apparently abandoning the project), so not really a change for me. I've always placed emphasis on strategic locations for city placement, as opposed to simply churning them out, even at the cost of "wasted space." Seems to work nicely in BNW.
Knut_Are_M
Prince
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2008
- Messages
- 323
ics is ok, if you do not kill off the City States. happiness is harder to get by so you need to focus on getting a religion. India is very good at going wide once you finish Liberty and take basic patronage, and try to finish Commerce.
In BNW you should try and ally as many city states as you can.
But unlike G&K you need to delay ics untill you can get the nessesary Wonders.
That means ics starts in the industrial era With order.
In BNW you should try and ally as many city states as you can.
But unlike G&K you need to delay ics untill you can get the nessesary Wonders.
That means ics starts in the industrial era With order.
I think pure ICS is dead but expasion in waves is still strong. say first 3 cities build NC then another 3 cities build iron works. By then if your happiness are in excessive and land fertile, another 3 cities should be enough for most of the games, or just stay at 6.
killmeplease
Mk Z on Steam
i'm now playing large map, its renaissanse and everybody has 4-6 cities, most of the map is settled
Also, need to add Civs/CS's to larger maps. The ratio is off compared to Standard.
Try ~12/24 on large and ~18/32 on huge, should play out better.
Jewman
Prince
Just finished a game as Assyria. Took over my whole continent and went ICS with every little piece of it. Economy and happiness were fumbling along (despite a great ICS religion) until Order. Order was a game changer with the happiness from monuments, workshops/factories and all the extra production. It did take me about 100 more turns than it would've in g&k to launch my spaceship, but it was still a solid empire that if I had wanted to, could've churned out an army to take over the world in 20 turns.
Jungle Rhino
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2013
- Messages
- 13
I think filling out liberty fast is worth it for a couple of reasons:
1. Getting settler out as you can't just buy them
2. Great Prophet with the free GP - you don't even need a Pantheon to found a religion that way and don't even need to build any shrines early on
Whichever way you slice it you need to lean on Religion to keep your people happy with Pagodas/Religious community type of x per city buffs.
1. Getting settler out as you can't just buy them
2. Great Prophet with the free GP - you don't even need a Pantheon to found a religion that way and don't even need to build any shrines early on
Whichever way you slice it you need to lean on Religion to keep your people happy with Pagodas/Religious community type of x
per city buffs.Jungle Rhino
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2013
- Messages
- 13
Also you still get a lot of gold from plots. You just have to look for sea/luxury resources and keep your city populations sensible. Also trading post spam still works (especialy with commerce).
Similar threads
