Pigalle said:To get something to compare with; how many turns are there in a CivIII game?
Maximo said:If there are more turns in Epic, but it takes more turns to do everything, doesn't it even out and just make the game longer?
That's right. Meaning these extra 6 hours are filled with moving units around or pressing the end turn button. Because, in a quick game, a normal game, or an epic game, you will always start in the ancient era, and by the end of the game be around the spacefaring era. Whether it took 550 turns or 295 to get there.Maximo said:For instance, if there are 3 times as many turns in a Epic game, but it takes 3 times longer to do everything, dont you just end up at the same point with the same techs and same units at the end of the game (it just took you 9 hours to get there instead of 3)?
Dida said:Tech still goes too fast on epic, because it also take longer to build stuff. It is the ratio between production and tech discovery that is the problem.
FenrysWulf said:Amen to this. I want to be able to build at the same rate and have the technology go slower. I've found in the few games I've played so far on normal that I don't really get around to conquest until everyone has tanks because there are so many buildings to produce. I want to use my knights and my other older units for awhile before they are obsolete, but if it takes 50 turns to build one then I'll still never get a sizeable force put together before they're obsolete.
DrD said:And what about city growth? Theoretically they grow at the same rate, since acertain amount of excess food is needed, and this amount does not change in epic (right?)
This means that your cities can grow more, produce more hammers and commerce, and offset some of the higher costs for techs and units. But of course as they get bigger it's harder to keep them happy and healthy. What do you think?
Because, in a quick game, a normal game, or an epic game, you will always start in the ancient era,