I'm pretty sure that both are wrong. Even with Strategic Balance Horses are limited unless you're Russia. Spearmen are capable of defending them.
Going for Gold: Units
- Thread starter Stalker0
- Start date
I like strategic balance because if I have horses and neighbor doesn't, neighbor loses. Or vice versa. Aztec, Greece, Persia, or Zulu have a chance but I anyone else is screwed until swordsmen (and you can just pillage their iron).
I don't like it because if I have 10 horses and 12 iron, I have more strategics than I ever need. When I have strategic balance enabled, the only time I ever build a spearmen is for Terracotta Army.
Last edited:
tu_79
Deity
If I'm not wrong, sparse resource doesn't remove tiles with strategics, it just lowers the quantity that such tiles can produce. In this case, monopolies should not be more likely than in normal.
Anyways, it's not the same to play against AI in King than to play multiplayer. I'd advocate strategic balance for any MP. I agree with you that strategic balance gives me more strategics than I ever need.
What do you reply to those that think that horseman are OP? Fortified defense!
Anyways, it's not the same to play against AI in King than to play multiplayer. I'd advocate strategic balance for any MP. I agree with you that strategic balance gives me more strategics than I ever need.
What do you reply to those that think that horseman are OP? Fortified defense!
I'd like to talk about Air Units. Not sure if it deserves a separate thread, but some observation from my heavy-warmonger Venice game:
- First of all air they come too late. Air combat is an interesting part of the game, but in many games you just can't use them because the game ends.
- They are extremely costly. If i'm not mistaken - One Triplane cost almost as much production as Pentagon!
Grabbl
Prince
- Joined
- May 25, 2016
- Messages
- 431
But then the culture leader simply takes all sites, doesn't he? That seems even worse to prevent snowballing.
What could help however is putting a limit on the number of archaeologists alive at one time (like for the Assyrian Siege Tower), then the tech leader wouldn't simply be able to send its archaeologists all over the world while spamming them. And there is suddenly an incentive to dig out the (closer) sites on own territory before sending out archaeologists to farer ones.
tu_79
Deity
The atomic era passes so fast....
Yep, i'm thinking of moving Flight to the left on a tech tree (as well as other aircraft-related techs). I mean Aircraft was used in World War 1 and it should somewhere about the end of Industrial.
And from game-design perspective - it would be cool, because starting from Modern Era Aircraft should be playing key role in battles and right now it is barely noticeable, because you just do not have time to build planes. By the time you get your first 5-10 planes - the game is already about to end, if not ended
ElliotS
Warmonger
Modmod it if you want. Airforce modmod.
tu_79
Deity
I was thinking more of slowing late game science rushes. A Prince player expects to play more than 400 turns, sometimes over 450. But you get better, play in higher difficulties, and suddenly the game becomes much shorter. So short that you can't build enough planes to make it count. Actually you could, if you weren't so focused with winning.
This is a problem that civ has had for a long time. It also comes down to player preference.
We can’t slow the game down without pushing out CV and DV...otherwise SV just becomes a bad victory condition. Further you have people that feel they have won and want the game to end instead of clicking end turn for the last 20 turns.
It’s a tricky balance. Probably the best way to simulate it now is with the variable win option (forgot what it’s actually called), the one where end game win conditions aren’t revealed until late in the game. That can cause some shifts and push the win timing back.
I like that idea. Industry could give +1 max archaelogists too, making it more attractive for CV
Its a neat idea. You could use museums to bump the limit if you wanted.
I really like this idea as well. Could set a limit of 1 or 2, or perhaps tie the limit to something like the number of museums your empire has. Anything that slows it down a little bit would be good.
Are tech costs in Atomic and Information eras also locked? I was thinking that Atomic era techs could be 25% more expensive and Information era could be 50% more expensive (those numbers are just examples, maybe should be different). That way planes would have higher impact and late game units, like XCom, Giant Death Robot etc could actually be used, because right now it's not really the case, unless there is no victory conditions enabled besides Domination. It's not the first time when I hear on this forum that late eras passes very fast. With that, other victory requirement should also be increased, like amount of tourism needed per enemy culture and number of votes for Diplomatic Victory.
Your last point proves why we shouldn’t increase it. If you do, all end game stuff has to be rebalanced. Not doing that.
G
I have had games where GDRs see use, but they are pretty rare. XComs do come into play as a last ditch effort to pillage out the winning player.
Personally planes see good use for me. What's great about them is I can set my entire civ to building them, and then concentrate them wherever I need. So amassing 10 of them doesn't take that long if I have the oil.
Personally planes see good use for me. What's great about them is I can set my entire civ to building them, and then concentrate them wherever I need. So amassing 10 of them doesn't take that long if I have the oil.
Ok, that makes sense. Any idea how to make late game units matter? Because they are also locked in the tech tree, right?
I was thinking that it could be a culture and science requirement, similar to how wonders work
