Recent content by Dasphios

A friend of mine picked it up for me. It still has most of the core problems Civ 5 did, and the manual is (oddly) awful, leaving out critical information. It's buggy and horribly unbalanced, but I think there's some room for fun here, once it gets decently patched up. However- it's...

But that's just the thing: he doesn't read it like an actor trying to convey something, but like a person, reacting way a person would. Look past what you've been taught to expect and you'll see there's depth in the experience, even if it seems to be lacking in the content.

Those're mutually exclusive, I fear- hexes won't tessellate into a sphere.

Don't forget one of my favorite voice acting lines, the one from the Temple of Chiron: "Let the Gaians preach their silly religion, but one way or the other I shall see this compound burned, seared, and sterilized until every hiding place is found and until every last Mind Worm egg, every last...

There I'm going to have to disagree with you. Pandora was less of a "spiritual successor" and more of a "graphical update". Most of the mechanics were the same, but it added almost nothing new, stripped out a few things, and replaced SMAC's fantastic writing with a hollow, token background...

Not quite. Coptic is an ethnic term, not a religious one. The people who built the pyramids were Copts, but they certainly weren't Christians.

I'm kind of surprised no one has mentioned this, but Alpha Centauri's nukes (well, Planet Busters, but they served the same purpose) did wipe out cities- sometimes more than one, based on placement and reactor level. They let me pull off some impressive last-ditch victories, but I don't think...

An interesting detail, but I think that's all it is. It does make me note something positive, though: for all of Civ V's flaws, at least the numbering makes sense (as opposed to Maxis's 1, 2000, 3000, 4, 1; or Square's 1, 2, 3, 2, 6, 3, etc.; or Capcom's 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, oh I give up)...

Do note, though, that although the AI in 4 is better than in 5, it's still not a genius. Don't expect miracles.

Yes, it's true, the unit's name is not a nickname, but as the original post's title noted, they are often referred to as the "landcrap", which is a stupid nickname.

It also has a phenomenally stupid nickname and is hard to spell. At the root of many people's discontent is the expectation that a unique unit should be able to fill every role in an army; that a stack made up of only your UU and some sieges (with the odd X for defense). Landsknechts are far...

Just FYI- the update on the main page says both of the new starting gauntlets are minor, which I don't think is right.

I'm not talking about the company going under; I'm talking about the project making so little money that the owners decide it's not worth it and make the team do something else.

Why did I dislike Civ 5? Well, for one thing, the stupid nickname people gave it- but that's hardly the game's fault. I also think that 2k figured they'd take what has become the standard practice these days of releasing a game in what is essentially a late beta state and (functional, but...

Do you really think it'll work that way, though? Isn't it more likely that if the next one doesn't do well, they'll figure "this isn't profitable" and not bother with more?