Recent content by Elenhil

Sure about that? If they are that short of staff, you should really blame it all on XCOM, don't you think?

Then most of what later became Europeans have 'conquered' half the continent during the Great Migration. Relax, Rhye would hardly go out of his way to please each 'proud small people' ;) I'd personally prefer to face rather less obscure historical opponents than the Inuits in RFC. Unless it is a...

Actually, he didn't. He talked about it being punishing to go back on your strategic decisions in CIV - his self-declaimed fifth golden rule of gameplay design. Or, rather, its direct application to Civ. Just why should that be a golden rule is at best arguable. Now, even should I accept his...

If that is your definition of a gambit (which itself is somewhat unorthodox - you're not in 'pretty bad shape' in chess if the opponent doesn't accept your gambit, and that's the origin of the term), then call mine strategies, not gambits. But then Bibor's are not gambits either. The term does...

Much of the fabled unexpected things that could happen any turn and take your game to a new direction were, IMHO, due to Random Events introduced in BtS. Bring them back and everyone'll be happier for it. And less bored.

Formivore, the problem with your list is that it underestimates the gambits you did manage to list. Take "Beelining Education and setting up renaissance RAs". There is so much more to that. Make it Liberty free GE > Porcelain Tower +25% RAs + free GS > Astronomy 100% Rationalism RAs (plus +50%...

No, you can't compare a game which final version saw some 4 years of patching and improving with that of only one year. And even if there will be no expansion to CiV (which you really can't reliably claim), each major patch introduces new content and rebalances older ones, which add to the...

Care to prove your claim? At least, it's verifiable. Compile a list of Vanilla (that's it, apples vs apples, please, no oranges!) CIV gambits and I will make a CiV one.

The OP, on the other hand, is largely devoted to one's musings about how great games should be done, followed by a favourable illustration from CIV... and then, absurdly, an invitation to draw your own unfavourable comparisons with CiV. Somewhat underargumentative for a critical analysis, don't...

Ahem. Apart from being that fan he's talking about (How do you do?), this example goes some way further to make me doubt the OP knows what he's talking about. Tolkien is none of the sort. His style of writing particularly shuns minute detail, making it notoriously hard to tell much about, well...

I've rediscovered this thread soon after I've rediscovered CiV with the latest patch balance change. And I think the devs had, too. Some of the complaints are obviously addressed. Linearity in Social Policies, for example. The addition of culture-producing bonuses to all the threes starting...

Sadly, each patch rebalances the policies for gameplay reasons, which makes them kind of arbitrary and generalized to the point of having very little in common with actual history. Imagine civ traits changed like that. You'd soon feel there is nothing except the title remaining. Which takes...

Any news on that?

By the way, how's the rest of the world in your start? Wouln't a triple luxury start mean that your part of the world sucks so much the script had to compensate it to such an extent?

It's the same as with the cIV version: thin continents directed other than N-S (especially diagonally) look weird compared with Earth.