Does anyone else get bored of domination victory?
- Thread starter Rebun
- Start date
In one game, I was trying to build every wonder (or capture every city with a wonder) with the hopes of getting a cultural victory. When I got to the UN, I was surprised that Alexander got a diplo victory the next turn. I won't ever build it again unless I'm going for the diplomatic victory - what a rip off.
The next turn? it takes 10 turns for the UN to vote. Or you talking about a pre-patch game?
jtb1127
Deity
Nope. I like getting domination. Lots of war can be pretty fun.
danieladler
Warlord
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2005
- Messages
- 272
Taking every little civs capital in order to win is quite tedious work. Better to have like in Civ4 when you controlled a certain percentage of the world. I mean, when you have taken out the biggest civs, the game is already won. Going on for another hundred turns knowing that you have already won feels quite meaningless. In most of my games i end long before the actual victory because once you know you have won there is no point in going on. Like in chess.
At harder levels you often have almost permanent war with the rest of the world so it forces you to start eliminating your foes before they get the nukes. So even when i try to go for cultural or scientific victory it often ends with domination victory.
At harder levels you often have almost permanent war with the rest of the world so it forces you to start eliminating your foes before they get the nukes. So even when i try to go for cultural or scientific victory it often ends with domination victory.
^Agreed.
At high levels, especially with the latest patch, more-or-less nonstop war is coded in to bog you down; you expect it. The most fun is the first 100 turns, getting your civ up and running in the face of 2 or 3 DoWs. You're 3 turns from getting the GL and war is declared--makes for an interesting next 20+ turns.
Heartily agreed that the CivIV domination victory condition is far superior to the tedious slog of shifting units from one end to the other of your map to win a domination victory. Only Diplo is worse.
I often quit mid-game if victory looks too easy, though lately I like to try to run 2 paths to victory at the same time, usually domination vs science, and see which I can pull off first.
At high levels, especially with the latest patch, more-or-less nonstop war is coded in to bog you down; you expect it. The most fun is the first 100 turns, getting your civ up and running in the face of 2 or 3 DoWs. You're 3 turns from getting the GL and war is declared--makes for an interesting next 20+ turns.
Heartily agreed that the CivIV domination victory condition is far superior to the tedious slog of shifting units from one end to the other of your map to win a domination victory. Only Diplo is worse.
I often quit mid-game if victory looks too easy, though lately I like to try to run 2 paths to victory at the same time, usually domination vs science, and see which I can pull off first.
Just scored a cultural victory with France on Immortal, but I had to balance my military and economy and everything else to get there. Ended up doing some conquering, some teching, and it was an exciting game. Luckily the AI didn't back stab me. It's really a coin flip. If the AI had a clue, they wouldn't have all been at war with with AND each other at the same time in the beginning. AI still has a long way to go.
Lord Chambers
Emperor
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2001
- Messages
- 1,004
The Civ5 domination goal is better than in Civ4. Civ4 domination is a foregone conclusion where you grind through city after city. In Civ5 if you really have already won you need only execute the weaker civs, not painstakingly crawl your SOD across 60% of the map's tiles. And in Civ5 if you haven't already won, the challenge of winning a war against every opponent, even the second strongest power, is the mountain you must climb. Whereas in Civ4 you could just take the low hanging fruit the whole game and avoid the biggest threat.
Of course, this is all theoretical. The obvious reason for the change of the domination goal is that in Civ5 you would be unable to occupy that much of the world through a blitzing war. Happiness issues would wind you down. People would complain. Having more cities slows you down in Civ5 in a way that they didn't in Civ4. So instead you just need to cap and hold the capitals.
Of course, this is all theoretical. The obvious reason for the change of the domination goal is that in Civ5 you would be unable to occupy that much of the world through a blitzing war. Happiness issues would wind you down. People would complain. Having more cities slows you down in Civ5 in a way that they didn't in Civ4. So instead you just need to cap and hold the capitals.
Becomedeath
The Destroyer
Still, true conquest victories (i.e. utterly eliminating your opponents) has been a VC since the dawn of Civ. It should be there as an option as quite frankly conquering and holding one city isn't exactly hard if you do them all close enough together.
Heck, you can have 5000 years of peace then just nuke your way to victory in 2-3 turns if you plan it right.
Heck, you can have 5000 years of peace then just nuke your way to victory in 2-3 turns if you plan it right.
Brimstone
Chieftain
Yep, I hate it a lot. So, here is what I do, when I set up a game, I set City States to Zero, and add in a few other AI's to fill up some space. Works perfectly.
No more puffed up AI's with 12 CS's under it's belt. Side benefit, lots of cash to spend on RA's, which I hate also, but what are you gonna do, lose?
No more puffed up AI's with 12 CS's under it's belt. Side benefit, lots of cash to spend on RA's, which I hate also, but what are you gonna do, lose?
Hehe, nice, but I actually like the combination of science and domination strategies the most. I like to humilliate other civs by taking their best cities (including capitals) and leave them wallowing in freakish misery forever hehe. That sounds like fun as well as a movie quote, no?
"You keep using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means!"
Some Spanish guy
I dunno, it was a while ago. Either way, it was unexpected since it was the first time I had even gotten that far in the tech (hadn't tried science victory yet and most of my domination / cultural games end when I'm just getting infantry units).
After I negotiate peace at the end of a war (or remove a opponent from the game), there comes a sensation of hollowness and emptiness. Perhaps a bit of lazyness of moving all my units back to my territory or managing all my new cities, workers and such, I don't know. I usually save the game and close it at this point, and it takes a while to come back to it.
It happens in other X4 and Grand Strategy games, too.
It happens in other X4 and Grand Strategy games, too.
PasturedCow
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2011
- Messages
- 33
I find all actual victory conditions boring. What I mean by this is: I like the game and I have lots of fun playing it. But I usually know 100-150 turns in at the latest that I'm going to win so I don't really see the point in playing to the actual victory condition.
I'm not that competetive in the sense that I really care if I win at turn 200 or 210 or 550 for that matter.
I'm not that competetive in the sense that I really care if I win at turn 200 or 210 or 550 for that matter.
