Civ Discussion - Siam

[stealth_nsk]

I would like a fourth age as victory rush but with no civ switching. We need so many civs to backfill other ages that I would hate to see work going into 4th age civs instead.

I wouldn't want any age to be just a victory rush. I really hope modern age will be transformed into full age with planned changes to LP and victories. And I hope future 4th aage will be done that way too. It would be a waste of so many great contemporary themes otherwise.

 

[uppi]

That could partially be fixed by making those Vitories require more significant investment to achieve (not necessarily the Legacies but the Victories themselves)
In modern if you finish all the Legacies (but no Future Tech/Civics) the game ends on Turn 140....

Which means they should probably tune the Victories so that an ordinary player on their appropriate difficulty level can focus and achieve one of them by about turn 110-130 or so, and civfanatics Might be able to do it on Deity in 90-100 (as opposed to 40-60 now)

If it is less of a sprint, then there is still time for some buildup in Modern.

Please no. I don't want to play 100 turns of Modern. Turns just take way too long that 100 of them are going to be fun. Yes, a victory on turn 35 does feel quite rushed, but around turn 50 or so, I am pretty much done with the age. And completing victory projects is and has always been the most boring part of the game, as you have done everything you have done and are just waiting for them to finish. So extending those will just make the ending more boring.

 

[Krikkit1]

Please no. I don't want to play 100 turns of Modern. Turns just take way too long that 100 of them are going to be fun. Yes, a victory on turn 35 does feel quite rushed, but around turn 50 or so, I am pretty much done with the age. And completing victory projects is and has always been the most boring part of the game, as you have done everything you have done and are just waiting for them to finish. So extending those will just make the ending more boring.

Well they shouldn’t just extend them by making them longer. They need to extend them by making them competitive…offering counterplay by other players and actually become a Victory instead of just a “you finished the Legacy, press this button to win in X turns”

 

[Leucarum]

Please no. I don't want to play 100 turns of Modern. Turns just take way too long that 100 of them are going to be fun. Yes, a victory on turn 35 does feel quite rushed, but around turn 50 or so, I am pretty much done with the age. And completing victory projects is and has always been the most boring part of the game, as you have done everything you have done and are just waiting for them to finish. So extending those will just make the ending more boring.

Modern still feels like micro is heavily reduced compared to Civ6. But I agree that it is still a bit too much for me. I definitely wouldn't want an age after it

 

[MutilationWave]

Micro reduced? War makes each turn take forever in modern. If I make it to modern without abandoning the game, I'm gonna compulsively grab all four legacy paths for leader experience.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I don't think there's a need to prolong age if it's still victory rush. What I think is needed:

1. Make much more complex victory projects, so instead of beelining, you need a lot of different things to do. I.e. science victory needs some policies too, all victories need some buildings, that sort of things. So, you'll have to spread your civilization development, while keeping focus on your primary victory.
2. A way to break or significantly delay any type of opponent victory projects. I think at least military and espionage options should be available, with appropriate balance, of course. It's interesting for both player targeting opponent victory projects and AI sometimes delaying player projects, so player can't be sure in victory and put all other things aside.
3. Score victory based on overall civilization score - population, wonders, yields, etc. So it would make sense to develop your empire in all cases as with previous point there will be no guarantee that primary plan for victory will be enough.

Something like this should bring the feel of normal game even to the last age.

 

[Leucarum]

Micro reduced? War makes each turn take forever in modern. If I make it to modern without abandoning the game, I'm gonna compulsively grab all four legacy paths for leader experience.

I edited my post to say 'reduced compared to Civ6' which I do think is true. It is still far more micro than I want too so I agree with your sentiment.

 

[magicq99]

I really like the choice of giving them Great People. Showcasing Great People from a less universally known culture was an inspired choice. Unfortunately, great people are too random to usually be worth building with any civ. I hope there's a tweak so we get a choice of great people when we build them, I just find they gather dust otherwise unless I have literally nothing else better to build...

I agree. There are 10 Great People available. So if you want a specific one, you may be lucky and get it instantly or unlucky and need to build all 10 of them. That can be frustrating.

I think one solution might be if the game just randomized the list once, and then offered you a choice of say the top 3 in the list. After you have picked one, the other 2 will be moved to the bottom of the list. With the next great person you then again get the choice of the top 3 in this list and so on. With a system like that, you would have iterated through the whole list with the 4th great person, so in the worst case the 4th choice will include the one you are looking for.

This could also work with a set of only two people offered each time. In this case you would need 5 iterations to go through all of them one time, so in the worst case you would have to built half as many of them as with the current system.

A system like that would still be random, but a bit more predictable, while also offering an interesting decision each time about getting a specific one right now at the "cost" of delaying the other choice.

 

[UWHabs]

I agree. There are 10 Great People available. So if you want a specific one, you may be lucky and get it instantly or unlucky and need to build all 10 of them. That can be frustrating.

I think one solution might be if the game just randomized the list once, and then offered you a choice of say the top 3 in the list. After you have picked one, the other 2 will be moved to the bottom of the list. With the next great person you then again get the choice of the top 3 in this list and so on. With a system like that, you would have iterated through the whole list with the 4th great person, so in the worst case the 4th choice will include the one you are looking for.

This could also work with a set of only two people offered each time. In this case you would need 5 iterations to go through all of them one time, so in the worst case you would have to built half as many of them as with the current system.

A system like that would still be random, but a bit more predictable, while also offering an interesting decision each time about getting a specific one right now at the "cost" of delaying the other choice.

Even just a purely random choice of 3 of any of the remaining at least gives you some agency. It's practically impossible to have a balanced list of 10 of them that works with the scaling cost to each, so anything that just slightly reduces the variance would help.

 

[Leucarum]

it feels to me like the event system is the perfect way to implement giving you a choice of who you get when you build a great person... And you could squeeze in a bit more flavour on each of them too (which helps if Firaxis do more great people from less widely known civs).