mitsho
Deity
What Gameplay Philosophy do you prefer? Are you an early game-player or a late game-player? Are you a Micromanager or a Strategist? Do you prefer CivRev over the Total Realism Mod?
I personally am a fan of Rhyes and Fall of Civilization. The Mod is already smaller regarding the empires you play than usual civ, nevertheless, the latter times get too tedious for me to play, partially due to the longer loading times, but also due to the more options and the increased micromanagment.
As I see it, Civilization is a game that starts you with few units, techs, cities and options, the more the game advances, more options come into play: Religion, Government, Techs, more ressources, more unit types (siege, flight), corporations, United Nations. This grows exponentionally so that the late game is inherently more complex than the starts. For me, this results in the fact that I mostly play the ancient and medieval times. Which I find is a pity.
So what do you prefer, a game with few options or one with a big variety? Keep in mind the few options don't necessarily have to mean less "content". There could be ways for example to "automate" certain aspects later in the game (like workers!!!) or generally, who says that a medieval army can consist out of 5 knights, 3 pikeman and 2 longbowman while a modern needs to compromise 4 battleships, 15 tanks, 7 artillery, 2 spies, 4 bombers and 8 infantry?
I personally advocate for LESSER units/decisions etc. even in the late game. I know I personally will be most probably in the minority in this forum, but nevertheless, I wanted to ask people in here. Because "core questions" like this are in my opinion what is the biggest deficiency with Civ. (which the developers actually seemed to have recognized themselves with the Civ Rev - Franchise which unfortunately only goes the way of "dumbing down" and does not offer a realy solution?
And this is for me the bigger question than which civ will be in (hint: more interesting would be how the civilizations play! )
I personally am a fan of Rhyes and Fall of Civilization. The Mod is already smaller regarding the empires you play than usual civ, nevertheless, the latter times get too tedious for me to play, partially due to the longer loading times, but also due to the more options and the increased micromanagment.
As I see it, Civilization is a game that starts you with few units, techs, cities and options, the more the game advances, more options come into play: Religion, Government, Techs, more ressources, more unit types (siege, flight), corporations, United Nations. This grows exponentionally so that the late game is inherently more complex than the starts. For me, this results in the fact that I mostly play the ancient and medieval times. Which I find is a pity.
So what do you prefer, a game with few options or one with a big variety? Keep in mind the few options don't necessarily have to mean less "content". There could be ways for example to "automate" certain aspects later in the game (like workers!!!) or generally, who says that a medieval army can consist out of 5 knights, 3 pikeman and 2 longbowman while a modern needs to compromise 4 battleships, 15 tanks, 7 artillery, 2 spies, 4 bombers and 8 infantry?
I personally advocate for LESSER units/decisions etc. even in the late game. I know I personally will be most probably in the minority in this forum, but nevertheless, I wanted to ask people in here. Because "core questions" like this are in my opinion what is the biggest deficiency with Civ. (which the developers actually seemed to have recognized themselves with the Civ Rev - Franchise which unfortunately only goes the way of "dumbing down" and does not offer a realy solution?
And this is for me the bigger question than which civ will be in (hint: more interesting would be how the civilizations play! )