Recent content by DarkSchneider

That tradition goes back to Civ I, that's why Chariots were so powerful. The main difficulty in winning on Emperor in Civ I is how quickly your towns reach their happiness limit. So the exploit was playing on Pangaea, researching The Wheel as your first tech and cranking out Chariots. Every city...

I think Civ II could probably have been won without the Caravan -> Wonder exploit, but there were so many wonders that felt like must haves I couldn't bear to keep playing if I missed The Pyramids/Michelangelo's Chapel/Leonardo's Workshop/Adam Smith's Trading Company/etc/etc/etc. The power level...

Back when I played Civ 5 I generally played on King difficulty, so I could see how it would be different for Deity. I also played before BNW, but I've now purchased it because I heard how good it was. I'm pretty sure I beat Civ 5 on Immortal once with a lot of save re-loading but I haven't tried...

I am getting back into playing Civ 5 after a long hiatus and I stumbled upon a reddit post that linked to this article. The last time I played was during the release of Gods and Kings so I thought playing a strong Civ would help ease the transition back. I generally agree with this tier list...

I am tired of the AI declaring war on me when they have no easy way to reach me, and wouldn't do any real damage even if they did. I feel that the AI declaring war should follow the typically MMO - means, motive and opportunity. The AI must have all three to declare war!

I've played Civs 1-5 in order, and (for its time) Civ V appears to be the worst of them. Not to say that it is unplayable, but if you expect it to be better than Civ IV, it won't be. If you really enjoy tactical combat, Civ V can be the equal of IV, but if you don't, Civ V is much, much worse.

I think it may make a difference, but I'm not sure if the relationship is linear. Is your power rating is proportional to the shield cost of all of your units? Or the power? Does it take promotions into account?

I would vote for removing the 1 automatic damage 'feature' too. It just gets silly when the power discrepencies get bigger. As for the gameyness with the damage, I think they mean the range for damage was increased, but I've seen my units do more damage than expected as well.

I've been seeing the weird graphical glitches lately too. I think mine have something to do with the clouds that cover unexplored terrain.

I think that the best game choices in reality based games (aka Civ) also make the best logical sense. A more realistic goal would be to have a particular number of the structure built. Also, once the capability to produce an Ironworks is achieved, there's no logical reason to take it away...

Under a logical game model, the number of cities to build the National wonders would probably have been fixed or based on the map size. Something along the lines of "Your civilization needs Engineering expertise to build the Ironworks, which requires you to build 5 Workshops first" But since Civ...

You I was playing a Civ game today, and I started building the National Wonder of Ironworks. This wasn't hard, because I generally build Workshops as the first or second structure in new towns. However, at the time I started, I was at war with the Iroquois to the West, and shortly afterward they...

Actually, with the post-patch cap, you can no longer use one city to make another happy, as the happiness provided by an entertainment structure is capped at the city population size. I discovered one of the other least logical pieces of the game. If you are building a national wonder, and...

If you remember, Civ IV had discounts. The tech tree was much less linear, because you didn't need to get all prerequisites to research a new technology, but you got bonuses for every additional prerequisite technology you did research. My lord, is there a single thing that Civ V got right...

This has messed me up a number of times, I strongly feel it should be a cleanshot if either intermediate tile is passable. This gets even worse with the English longbowmen.