Obviously you can see the difference, but it's more difficult to read. I too frequently have to mouse over tiles to be sure of what they are. I can only imagine what it must be like for a color-blind player. It's a baffling design decision.
As someone else mentioned, unexplored land is blank paper, out of sight is "drawn-in" land on the paper, line of sight is animated and alive. If you're color-blind the difference between pencil-sketched features and full-bodied ones should help.
It took some getting used to, but I don't have a problem differentiating between the fog of war and unexplored territory at this point. I'm 37, fwiw. If you struggle with it just think of it as the game prodding you to explore the entire map ASAP.
I don't find much difficulty telling between the fog of war and unexplored.
Trying to discern what various details are in the fog of war (i.e. if I'm trying to figure out my next spot to settle in) is a challenge (without yields on). That's true of the settling lens as well though - I normally have to click on a non-settler to go back to a normal display and figure out where I wanted to settle.
But there's a number of details I have difficulty discerning tbh: telling the difference between forested flat land and forested hills is a challenge without having yields on, telling when a tile has been pillaged (it's much more apparent in the strategic view with the flames).
I generally play on lower graphics settings, which I think is most of it - I think a lot of the distinction was essentially designed for the peak graphics settings. But the strategic view is lovely and clear, and works for all settings!
NO, not at all ... maybe many of them just use bigger displays (aka cheap TVs) ... ... there is no problem.
I was already more than twenty when 'the very first CIVILIZATION' boardgame by F. G. Tresham and Hartland Trefoil Ltd. came out and it was nice to be a student at that time.
[One thing that amazes about this Civilization is how minimalistic it is. It has no different types of soldiers, no forms of government, no buildings within cities, no wonders of the world, no multiple ways to win / score points and no great leaders. It has significantly fewer techs. The only thing it has more than the others are disasters. It sounds like a game for people who like to take punishment. However, despite the simplicity, it does not lack in strategy. You have to plan ahead very carefully. You have to be shrewd in negotiations. There will be chaos, but amid the chaos you will realize that your civilization can still march ahead steadily. Losing people and cities is not as bad as it seems. It is your culture and your civilization that matters. Wealth and territories come and go, but no one can take away your knowledge. That is what Civilization is about.]
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
... there is no problem.
