Game speed. What do you play on?

[Larsenex]

I have always played on Standard pacing. Last week i fired up a new game on the next slowest pacing, not sure if it was marathon or epic.

Anyway I am really liking it for some reason. The Ages take much longer to get through.

What do you prefer for a long weekend?

 

[Eliminator_Sr]

I prefer standard. Slower speed makes the game easier IMO and more tedious since you have to wait longer for everything. Quick speed is just a little too fast for me to enjoy.

 

[liv]

Standard here too
used to play hotseat on quick but now the era score is not adjusting so it is standard there as well

 

[BTSeven7]

Anyway I am really liking it for some reason. The Ages take much longer to get through.

It’s a fun change of pace, literally I have done the epic speed once or twice and enjoyed those games, but I have to agree with the other two posters. Standard is still my goto game 99% of the time.

 

[BarbarianHunter]

I prefer Marathon. It is very unforgiving. You can’t just play Apogee and spam an archer every other turn if there is a massive army at your gates. More like a chess game, where once you have the fellow in a checkmate situation, it is very challenging to recover.

The problem seems to be that the AI cannot cope with the war/unit build cycle. It seems to declare war as often as it normally would but its units don’t replace quite as well. This is at least the conclusion a couple of us arrived at on another short thread on the subject. The barbarians probably give them more trouble also. The result is an AI that stagnates beyond a certain point.

Ex: I’ll have like a 2500 science per turn, and all the AI’s will have like 150. Deity level.

And playing multiplayer is time prohibitive even @ online speed. Shrug.

 

[Sedwick]

As much as a Marathon game appeals to me, I only get 2 hours to play a week, so I stick with Standard. Quick has the problem of your applied tech (units) becoming obsolete too quickly, before they can move anywhere useful fast enough.

 

[BenitoChavez]

Usually epic, sometimes standard. I like epic because I feel like I get to experience each era without it being rushed. On standard it seems like I'm constantly trying to get era score and constantly upgrading my units. Marathon is too long and I get bored.

That being said, sometimes even on epic I get bored so I switch it up to standard for something faster paced.

 

[Leathaface]

I play on Epic all the time, Standard speed is much too quick for me. I prefer my eras to be long and drawn out and my games to be long. If I have an awesome city I like to be able to play with it for a good amount of time.

I played on Marathon speed in Civ IV, but Marathon in V and VI are too long for me.

 

[blackbutterfly]

Standard.

In Civ V I used to prefer Epic or Marathon but not for Civ VI.

 

[GandhisRevenge]

Marathon. I wish they would have included a 'Historic' (marathon research/standard production) speed

 

[Disgustipated]

I find epic speed to be just perfect for both Civ5 and civ6. I used to like marathon (and even slower than marathon speeds with the Rise of Mankind mod) in Civ 4, but I just can't stand marathon speed in Civ5 and civ6. Epic is the perfect balance between not being too tedious and having time to move your units around to do fun things like conquest or even just barbarian bashing.

 

[SirWill90]

Epic. For one thing, I tend to be a warmonger, so I can get a lot more moves in with more turns. Also the Standard pace is just too quick and hectic for my enjoyment. Marathon is just too drawn out though.

 

[MrRadar]

Usually standard.

I tried epic once and found some discrepancies in the scaling of the deals duration. Usually I load DOF or alliance deals with open borders, gpt and maybe lux elements when I can, and I noticed that they were not ending at the same time as on the standard speed. Iirc friendships and alliances were scaled and lasted longer than the embedded gpt, lux or even open border deals that weren't scaled to match the game speed, which added even more confusion to those muddled trade screens, so I stuck to standard.

 

[gozpel]

Mostly standard, but now and again epic. Epic is great on bigger maps. Then marathon, as I have tried it, is a pain in the bum.

 

[jozef57]

always played epic or marathon but now with 6 i do standard time on a huge map

 

[RohirrimElf]

Always epic. Will switch to marathon if turn times are 1/3 faster on endgame with future pc or performance boost firaxis. Currently playing on i7 6700k processor

 

[comatosedragon]

I used to only play epic in Civ IV, but since since Civ 5 I have only ever played standard speed.

 

[alancsilver]

Same boat as @comatosedragon . I always played epic on civ4, but couldn't imagine playing anything slower than normal now. The game is just too slow

 

[AmtrakQuebec]

I just play on the speed I get from my guy...

 

[heinous_hat]

Mostly Epic, but I enjoy finding ways to cut long production corners in Marathon. Longer speeds generally require some sort of balance modding though, since the developer seems to spend little time there.

Also, it irritates me to read forum posts where people describe specific game circumstances without specifying their game speed. Turn 100? Ok...?