Folder full of unfinished games.

[eldiablonoche]

When I'm playing the warmonger, I like to have multiple fronts to help manage the tedium... currently wrapping my first Scramble Earth and pushed into Africa with my land force while my frigates sailed to South America. Conquered my way to peace on both fronts and sandwiched the French Empire with boats off the coast of Spain and land units through Turkey. My final push will be sending the land force into Russia (Iroquois nation) while the boats soften the Zulu over in N.America...

Ironically, having the two fronts probably takes longer (but then, war is naturally the most time consuming tactic) but it doesn't FEEL like it since I've always got some important maneuvering to do.

 

[lindsay40k]

Oh, and there's another thing that winds me up. Loads of units and cities vying for my attention. A city that can shoot an enemy comes up. I click on a nearby unit to take its turn before the city, say to shoot before the city. But it doesn't select the unit, it deselects the city and then jumps to the next unit in the game's order of priority.

Which, if I'm quickly left-clicking units and right-clicking targets, can mean a catapult running off in front of some enemy Horsemen.

I like 1upt hex tile games in general. But I like to be able to organise stuff and delegate things like 'move this army to this area' to an AI lieutenant.

I mean, I remember watching a friend on some RTS in the mid 90s where he'd set up battlegroups assigned to keys that could be given rally points. The AI in CiV as far as I can tell already has systems in place for building a cohesive army and arranging the units in it. Rally points are not difficult to make, and games without them are difficult to enjoy. I hope they sort this out as it's a fun game when I'm not managing traffic jams.

 

[Cpt Oblivious]

As far as strategy games like this go, Civ is actually pretty light on the amount of micro... and the prevailing idea in this thread seems to be that there's too much micro? What?

 

[Barghaest]

Oh, and there's another thing that winds me up. Loads of units and cities vying for my attention. A city that can shoot an enemy comes up. I click on a nearby unit to take its turn before the city, say to shoot before the city. But it doesn't select the unit, it deselects the city and then jumps to the next unit in the game's order of priority.

I disabled auto-cycle of units (in game options) for this very reason. Now I just hit > key to check next unit after I've moved all the ones on screen I want.

 

[Drakarska]

That, is perhaps one of the most compellingly honest statements I've seen concerning Civ V in a long time. Kudo's for your honesty Bechhold.

 

[GoStu]

As far as strategy games like this go, Civ is actually pretty light on the amount of micro... and the prevailing idea in this thread seems to be that there's too much micro? What?

Not sure I agree. My strategy gaming background is Starcraft, and while there's certainly more APM involved, I can finish a match in the time it takes to re-order every unit in a Civ 5 lategame turn.

If you try and give a long-distance move order, they so often stop because they somehow know something moved on that tile (curse the AI's obsession with randomly shuffling troops around every turn!). So now you have to give it a 2-3 turn move order or less just to make sure it completes.

There's a certain point (usually where I know i'm the runaway high-tech warmonger) where I wish I could just select all my units and give them the order "Head to that side of the map and kill everything on the way", AKA the "1-A to Victory" of Starcraft 2 endgame. After that point, I'm bored in Civ Domination.

 

[bbbt]

All the end games in civ are boring once you know you've won. Science/cultural victories you're basically just hitting next turn over and over, and using the appropriate GP as you can buy them.

The ending is only interesting when it's close (you're trying to get influential on that last civ before another civ finishes the spaceship, etc.). And this rarely happens with the AI (either you are clearly dominating, or, on higher levels, you know you've clearly lost).

Domination is the worst though, agreed. Compounded by the horrible path-finding. Hitting enter for next turn is much faster than having to re-arrange all your units. I usually only do dom victories on standard or smaller maps.

Remember also that you only have to take their capital, not every city.

 

[lindsay40k]

I guess a compounding factor is that the military aspect can be interesting in a peace victory. It's something to do whilst waiting for parts to build or bars to fill - keep an eye on rivals who might go to war, arrange border defences, escort musicians, and organise potential counter strikes.

When the only thing to do is to organise a large invasion force that needs babysitting every turn with no secondary concerns, the game takes on a major tedium. Even if it's for a single precision strike on the last cultural powerhouse.

 

[Novalia]

Yes very frustrating. It would be nice if the unit asked for movement clarification when he gets closer to the point you've directed him instead of 10 turns away.

 

[HerrDoktor]

Well, I have many, but not because I find the endgame boring - I do, but by then I've already trying to pursue the carrot in my front. It's only that you have to sleep at one time (or have a life to attend to, but that can be avoided). Loading a previous game doesn't have the same effect as playing it all in one sit.

 

[Cpt Oblivious]

There's a certain point (usually where I know i'm the runaway high-tech warmonger) where I wish I could just select all my units and give them the order "Head to that side of the map and kill everything on the way", AKA the "1-A to Victory" of Starcraft 2 endgame. After that point, I'm bored in Civ Domination.

I guess we just have a clash of ideology; I just can't get the idea behind the game automating or playing for the player, even if I can acknowledge the time/effort drain late game can be. I've just always seen it as a price of playing the game.