1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Civilization: Beyond Earth fall update is now live!

Discussion in 'CivBE - General Discussions' started by FXS_MisterKevin, Dec 8, 2014.

  1. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    TR yields now always go to the bigger city - regardless of which city is sending the route. It's a very colonialist sort of idea; I don't like it. Concentrating power has been reduced due to less TRs and lower yields, but now you can't even direct the hammers. They just go the one way - towards the bigger city in general. The calculations are even more arcane than before. I confess I can't make sense of it.

    Battlesuits are in a weird place. They're marginally useful at Aff4, but then Sentinels are just flat out better than Battlesuits at Aff6 until Affinity 10/4 - very nearly to Victory, or simply past Vic conditions if you're beelining tech. Off-affinity 4 is fairly demanding to get, requiring a significant detour from VC. Basically, they're useless most of the time.

    This was exactly what I was afraid would happen with all the asks for weaker UUs at Aff4.

    ETRs are better from new, small, and undeveloped cities. I think I liked it better before. That said, the AI nearly always is boosted. I suppose that's a good thing, though I'm reserving judgement.

    Overall, the complexity and control in TRs is way down. Can't control where the hammers and food go. Smaller yields mean specialization is nearly impossible. Back to having to spam farms everywhere. Fun. Who wanted city specialization anyway?
     
  2. Lord Shadow

    Lord Shadow General

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    2,001
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Buenos Aires
    Never, at any point, did I say the game is illogical due to it being science fiction, nor that "anything goes". I merely pointed out the energy purchase feature in particular doesn't make much sense, and while I agreed it breaks the design pattern, the TD change can't be considered any sillier than the base concept itself. You said such a change disrupted your immersion, while at the same time the very concept of energy purchases doesn't, so that's essentially your subjective perspective. Personally, I find neither thing harmful to my immersion. Maybe to someone else both things would seem disruptive. Who knows. Perspectives.

    All in all, the conclusion you're trying to ridicule is nothing but one you created yourself, out of thin air.
     
  3. Ryoga

    Ryoga King

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2010
    Messages:
    993
    I really don't know what to think about the affinityquestmanager.lua.

    I can confirm that the issue that I reported so many times is still there. AI are given the usual 3 affinity quests (and only those 3), which would make me think that perhaps it's supposed to be that way... except it doesn't make sense.
    Why not making the code made the check in the right place and remove the "ignoredbyai" tags from those 3 quests then?

    What's worse is that in the current state the quest "An Elemental Fate" will never get selected not even for the human player, yet again because the quest eligibility check is done in the wrong place.

    At the very least you won't get "Far Base One" spawning next to you when it's not your quest. But that's because the quest "Dogmatic Engineering" itself was changed. It now checks if the faction has a capital, and if it doesn't... it does nothing.

    In other words, AI that have yet to land can get "Dogmatic Engineering" assigned to them, but they will never be able to complete the quest because the station wasn't spawned.


    What's even funnier is that the old fix doesn't work anymore, because now the new script somehow expects that each faction has at least one possible affinity quest to choose from.

    I really don't get this...
     
  4. Bkeela

    Bkeela Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2007
    Messages:
    215
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    Firaxis, your patch made the Trade Route UI actually worse. The 'city name' gains 'so and so' line makes things more cluttered. What dummies couldn't figure out what the arrows meant? What the UI needs is a sorting option for yields.

    And where is my option to turn off the tech tree colours? I liked the minimalistic black and white icons. Give me an option to turn off the colours!!!!!!!!

    Haven't played enough to form an opinion on other changes, but from what I read in the notes it appears the alien aggression hasn't been changed. So I can keep killing the aliens for science with no consequence and that isn't an exploit? Yet the Establish Trade Route 'exploit' has been nerfed despite me rarely being able to get cities to 4+ intrigue?
     
  5. Ryoga

    Ryoga King

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2010
    Messages:
    993
    Aliens hate decay is now 4 times slower, but if you know about the exploit that allows you to kill aliens with impunity then yes nothing has changed.
     
  6. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    Scavenging is actually barely profitable as it is, compared to other Virtue choices. It's not an exploit at all. If you got smacked down for using the Virtue as advertised, that'd be like selecting Colonist Initiative and actually losing a Colonist you already made.

    Ryoga:

    It's normal incremental process. Fixing something generally breaks something else.
     
  7. Ryoga

    Ryoga King

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2010
    Messages:
    993
    Are you referring to the alien hate or the quest issue?

    Regardless, in neither case there's something new that has been broken, it's rather that which was broken remained broken, and in the case of the affinity quest, they built something upon it.
     
  8. Acken

    Acken Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    5,635
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    QC, Canada
    Haha I knew you wouldnt like it.

    So while you kind of liked it before now we both hate it.

    Almost have finished my apollo game, not sure it's worth finishing.
     
  9. SnowFire

    SnowFire Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2014
    Messages:
    6
    Manannan: I agree, remixing victory conditions is fine by me. I just imagine this would be part of a radical overhaul of the affinities. (Although science should gate these to a degree anyway.)

    Gorb: Tsk, everyone here knows the issues with 1.0 trade routes. The thing is, they should be fixable without a "hack," so why not fix it using existing systems? Adding a prerequisite building slows things down slightly by making you buy 2 buildings outright, if you really want to punish the early trade depot. And of course it's a fix - it makes the instant purchase weaker. (Add in even harsher nerf bats if you like, such as amping up the production cost or making stockpiling energy harder. Clearly there comes a point where depots are as weak as when no purchase is allowed.)

    Moreover, I think you really underestimate the benefits of clarity & consistency. Basically, a game should pick one: either a game element always works the same, or it works differently and the player knows to pay attention to it. Having one-off exceptions can be interesting if sold for *flavor* reasons, but not normally for balance reasons. For example: all Wonders can only be built once in the world. Later Civs added: all National Wonders can be built once per civ. If one Wonder was considered unbalanced, then saying "okay actually 2 can be built" is probably not the right answer, barring an excellent flavor excuse; either nerf the Wonder so getting it isn't so crucial, or make it a National Wonder so that everyone can get one. Or, more radically, make a game where the entire Wonder concept is different, so everyone expects that !Wonders all have a "total limit" that varies from 1-(num players), and they know to check that limit. So.... if you think buying restrictions are interesting, great, but make it a whole system then, don't have a totally random exception. Make it so buildings are all classed as cheap-to-buy, expensive-to-buy, and unbuyable, and it's a setting you're expected to know. That'd be fine, but it isn't what the BE patch did.

    As a side note, have you ever played games - especially board games, where the players have to adjudicate the rules themselves - that are filled with tons of footnoty nitpicks and exceptions? It's potentially quite annoying, and greatly slows down the rate a new player can pick up a game and understand it. I'm a huge fan of the game Twilight Struggle, but it's one of the worst offenders of this. (Performing a coup gets you military ops. Unless the coup is via the card Junta or Tear Down This Wall, then you don't get mil ops, because that'd be too good or something, but you get the military ops just fine from the card Che. Why does Che give mil ops for his coups but Junta not give mil ops for its coups? Because the rules said so, there's no coherent design reason behind it. Or for another example, if the US controls Israel, they get a bonus in the Arab-Israeli War event, but the US controlling South Korea gives no bonus in Korean War event. Why? Because the card says so. There is no intuition about what 'should' happen in many situations, you just have to look up what the rules say.) Making Trade Depots unbuyable breaks the current BE assumption that "all buildings are buyable". Either go big and build a mechanic around this, or keep it simple & not cared about.
     
  10. m15a

    m15a Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,471
    I've seen multiple posts on here regarding confusion about the arrows.
     
  11. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    Acken:

    The thing I liked about the 1.0 TRs was that they linked your empire in a holistic and controllable manner. Now they don't even do that. Might as well roll them right back to the CiV TRs, then! If you can't control where the resources are going, what's the point of asking the player to assign them manually?
     
  12. Varelse

    Varelse Rabble Rouser

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    Messages:
    377
    You can't bring that up without telling us what it is!
     
  13. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    Fixing something doesn't mean creating new things. It means rejiggering the values and code so that something that didn't work before now works. This will usually break something else, usually in the same general vicinity of mechanics, but occasionally something far away, fundamental, and game-breaking.

    This is actually normal balancing activity.
     
  14. Ryoga

    Ryoga King

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2010
    Messages:
    993
    Basically:

    Spoiler Don't read this if you don't want to know how to kill aliens without getting them angry... ever :

    -Since only "attacking" is considered an hostile action and not "killing", passive killing does not cause any change in the "alien opinion". For example aliens that are killed by your units defending near a nest, do not cause any change in the "alien opinion".
    -City attacks are not considered hostile actions at all, even when they kill aliens.
    -Same as above, aerial attacks are not considered hostile actions.
    -Any ranged attack that is launched from any hexes that aren't directly adjacent to the target do not affect the "alien opinion" (this is most likely a bug).
    -The above is true for naval units, whether they attack surface aliens or sea aliens they only increase hostility if they attack from an adjacent tile.


    That doesn't follow with anything that I said.
    There isn't anything of what I found that can be said to have been broken because of this patch fixes.
     
  15. Acken

    Acken Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    5,635
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    QC, Canada
    Oh so that's why. I always wondered why alien weren't aggressive when I was killing a lot of them.
     
  16. simcoast

    simcoast Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Messages:
    22
    So does this patch get applied to existing saved games?
    Or do you have to start a new game to see the changes?
     
  17. Bkeela

    Bkeela Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2007
    Messages:
    215
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    Existing saved games. I've been suffering the displeasure of having 1 trade unit per city suddenly become obsolete. I tried to stop the patch so that I might at least finish my game, but stupid STEAM!
     
  18. KrikkitTwo

    KrikkitTwo Immortal

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    12,316
    They still link your empire together in a holistic manner. You still decide which cities are linked..just the link is perfectly symmetrical (as in sending and receiving routes are the same)
     
  19. simcoast

    simcoast Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Messages:
    22
    Thanks!

    Hehe, yeah I would prefer the patch to apply to existing games straight away, but I can see that some of these changes could really cause some damage to your economy if suddenly applied..
     
  20. Exiged

    Exiged Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2
    I am having this same problem and was hoping to get some info on here. Any luck yet?
     

Share This Page