Domination change?

[Hyper Nova]

What is everyone's thoughts on the new requirements to actually be incontrol of all capitals and not just snipe the last one? Personally I think this is a welcome change. Now makes it feel like you must actually dominate rather than sneek round the back of a run away and snipe his capital.

 

[adwcta]

Yes, but it makes late game warfare all that much more difficult to pull off. The science changes better have slowed down that spaceship significantly.

 

[Ricardo_]

It makes much more sense this way.

 

[Merciorum]

Is that not how it already works?

EDIT: Oh, I see. Yes, that is better.

 

[Hyper Nova]

Is that not how it already works?

Nope you currently just have to be the only one in control of your own capital. So in essence you could let a run away take over the entire world then snipe just his capital and win.

 

[EgyptRaider]

I always thought it worked like this in the first place haha (I never went Domination)

 

[Rajjah]

One more reason for me to keep time victory off. At least with the science victory you can attack and nuke the eggheads with the space ambitions....there is no nuking the hands of time.

 

[Theoderic]

Conquering all capitals will be a tough task. I would rather propose that the domination victory condition should be:
- last civ that owns its original capital
- and owning more than half of the original capitals.

 

[Altisma]

What is everyone's thoughts on the new requirements to actually be incontrol of all capitals and not just snipe the last one? Personally I think this is a welcome change. Now makes it feel like you must actually dominate rather than sneek round the back of a run away and snipe his capital.

Domination Victory needs to be about controlling 75% of the world's population, not Capitals. Capital Sniping hasn't changed.

 

[Loaf Warden]

Domination Victory needs to be about controlling 75% of the world's population, not Capitals.

I have to agree. Making it about capitals at all is arbitrary and, you know, game-y. Not that the idea of winning at history isn't game-y, but controlling a significant enough percentage of the world's surface and population would be a much better way to represent world domination than simply taking out everyone else's capitals.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I have to agree. Making it about capitals at all is arbitrary and, you know, game-y. Not that the idea of winning at history isn't game-y, but controlling a significant enough percentage of the world's surface and population would be a much better way to represent world domination than simply taking out everyone else's capitals.

No... 75% of the world's population doesn't necessarily involve much war... and the "domination" victory in Civ V is the 'conquest' victory, ie the military one.

By focusing on the capitals, it means you have warred against another civ and conquered an important city of theirs (ie you completely won).. without having to annihilate their last little city.

This just extends it so that you can't just capital snipe a runaway... instead if it is a civ that has wiped out other civs, you need to take Several major cities from them. Ie a real/long term war that you are definitely the victor of (for anything but duel maps that is)


Essentially in the new Conquest, as well as the new Cultural victories... you must beat every civ... and every civ will struggle against you.

 

[Loaf Warden]

No... 75% of the world's population doesn't necessarily involve much war...

I said "surface and". I don't care how much you spam Settlers, you're not going to control 75% (or some other similarly large percentage) of the world's land area without taking a lot of it away from other civs.

By focusing on the capitals, it means you have warred against another civ and conquered an important city of theirs (ie you completely won).. without having to annihilate their last little city.

Capturing another country's capital does not mean you have completely won. History is full of examples of capitals falling and countries not being destroyed as a result.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I said "surface and". I don't care how much you spam Settlers, you're not going to control 75% (or some other similarly large percentage) of the world's land area without taking a lot of it away from other civs.

Well it doesn't involve war against everyone.. I probably should have included that disclaimer... and it also doesn't necessarily involve a lot of war.

It would be good if they renamed the Domination to Conquest, to clear up the misperception.

Right now if you want a victory for controlling land and population/being a buch better civ than everyone else, that is what the Time Victoruy is for.

(Perhaps if they renamed time to "score"... and said Highest score when time runs out OR when someone has a score 2x more than the sum of all other scores)

Capturing another country's capital does not mean you have completely won. History is full of examples of capitals falling and countries not being destroyed as a result.
.

In the Game of civ V, you have completely won that war... unless it is a Capital snipe that is reversed after a couple turns. (and the new rules have improved that... since you can no longer just capital snipe the runaway.. instead you must crush each civ into irrelevance (since they will hate you for losing their capital), and the only one that you can 'capital snipe' is someone that only Has their own capital)

 

[God of Kings]

Well it doesn't involve war against everyone.. I probably should have included that disclaimer... and it also doesn't necessarily involve a lot of war.

It would be good if they renamed the Domination to Conquest, to clear up the misperception.

Right now if you want a victory for controlling land and population/being a buch better civ than everyone else, that is what the Time Victoruy is for.

(Perhaps if they renamed time to "score"... and said Highest score when time runs out OR when someone has a score 2x more than the sum of all other scores)

For the 2x more than the sum of all other scores, what about multiplayer duel matches, in which one player does not settle on the first turn (often to move to a more favourable starting location)?

 

[Matthew.]

Oh. I was unaware of this change. Doesn't particularly affect me greatly since I tend to have most of the map in my dom games anyway.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

For the 2x more than the sum of all other scores, what about multiplayer duel matches, in which one player does not settle on the first turn (often to move to a more favourable starting location)?

Maybe 2x all other scores + some fixed amount

That way a Score civ could beat a Space civ. (the only win you can't really defend against)

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Btw, Religion and something else is now taken into account for score if nobody remember that.