Don't punish colonizing like in civ col

kolpo

Warlord
Joined
Sep 25, 2003
Messages
156
One thing I didn't like about civ col is that it punished you for doing exactly what the Europeans did : constantly colonizing and conquering new lands in the new world. I want to build a new empire not a new Singapore. It is ok to have some faction and/or Social Engineering choice focused on staying small, but expanding until there is no more land to expand in should be a viable option too.
 
They talked about balancing expansion vs. growth and it appears to be a different take than in previous games (although I don't think there are details).

I agree that the game shouldn't punish expansion. That being said, I do think it should punish Rapid Expansion. Expansion is supposed to be something that is done after your infrastructure supports it. The most viable strategy shouldn't be settler spam until all usable locations are used up. They've been doing these long enough that, hopefully one day, they will crack the secret to balancing this properly.
 
I think we don't need anything about the outpost mechanics, but it seems that they are pusing for a solution where new cities are for some time just (costly?) drain on your resources, to prevent ICS.
 
The balance between small empires and large empires is still not quite there. Currently in Civ 5, I never go Liberty, and having the resources and land to support going wide is rare.
 
I agree that the game shouldn't punish expansion. That being said, I do think it should punish Rapid Expansion. Expansion is supposed to be something that is done after your infrastructure supports it. The most viable strategy shouldn't be settler spam until all usable locations are used up. They've been doing these long enough that, hopefully one day, they will crack the secret to balancing this properly.

Yes I agree that expansion should be gradual, but still should it be a viable play style and goal to eventually have a gigantic empire.
 
Top Bottom