Late-game boredom

[Kneet]

Hi everyone,

I'm relatively new on the forum (although apparently I had an old account lying around somewhere), but I've been playing Civ for quite a while, so just a quick hello: hello!
Anyways, I was wondering if any of you share the same problem I do: late game boredom. I usually play marathon speed on terra maps (immortal difficulty, raging barbarians and aggressive AI), so that certainly helps in prolonging the game, but that's not what makes it boring. Usually around the time I get cannons and rifleman/infantry, I roll over the computer players one by one, but doing so is no fun anymore, because I know I've already won. And the computer also knows I've already won, but keeps pestering me with his incessant little units and large distances to cross any way.

To be more concrete: in one of my recent games I was Huayna Capac and started off in a great spot, and swordman-rushed my nearest neighbour - pericles I think it was. That's not usually how I do things (I usually like building many wonders and used to do things the peaceful way), but if opportunity comes your way, you grab it I guess. In any case, by the time I got to cannons, I had 2 vassals and only 1 AI with vassals remained. After some initial exciting struggle I broke them and had to finish the map, but in the end I just started a new game because I just didn't like spending an hour micromanaging my military into the ~30 cities I still had to conquer.

So basically what I'm asking is: how do you avoid that kind of anticlimactic ending? Moving up a difficulty might be solution, but in the early game immortal is a real challenge for me and I end up starting a new game at least 1/2 of the starts, and that's not taking into account the map regenerating until I hit an OK spot to start.

Greets!

 

[civverguy]

Hello!
Yes, I think many people here suffer from late game boredom. Usually going for a military victory seems to be anticlimatic, since you keep on getting stronger and stronger, while your opponents stay around the same strength.
Maybe going for a cultural victory is an option, considering you have to micromanage carefully to balance culture in cities, and you're going to be backwards in the late game.

 

[Sisiutil]

I would recommend that you turn off raging barbs and aggressive AI. While both settings make the early game more challenging, the former setting does the same for the AI, while the latter practically guarantees, in my experience, late-game tech lag for your computer opponents as they struggle to pay for their huge (but obsolete) armies at the price of proper research.

Even so, late game boredom is unfortunately common--I experience it fairly often too. Firaxis seemed to respond to this in BtS by adding more modern-era units, but this just made it worse, by necessitating even more late-game micromanagement.

We play the game for fun, and if you find the early and mid-game the most fun, I see nothing wrong with abandoning a game that's further along to start a new one. It's your leisure time, spend it however you wish.

You may also want to have a look at the Legends of Revolution mod. It was built to resemble an expansion pack, and adds several features which can make the late game more challenging--specifically by making it harder to maintain a large empire.

 

[the343danny]

First, I'd suggest trying a mod. I would recommend Legends of Revolutions, because it spices up late game navy, as well as it keeps you from rushing everybody and killing them all through revolutions.

And second, dont play that way. I play immortal too, with aggressive AI. I never rush anybody ever, because it is too powerful (and causes revolutions if they are far enough) and that makes it boring. In my current game, my army is the most advanced and powerful, and I can easily take out the next high scoring Russia, as they're still running around with macemen while I have rifles. I killed off two of their invading stacks, and France backstabbed them. I let them live because I found simply killing them off too gamey, thus boring. I think the best way to be able to enjoy civ is to be able to enjoy when the AI is succeeding. I left Russia live because I wanted to see them defeat France and become even more powerful.

So what I mean is, if you want to end your late game boredom, dont play to win, but play civ to see the world evolve. I think it definately helps to love history, because often times I find myself creating history for each of my games (weird I know).

That also doesnt mean you cant win. I win nearly all of my games, I just dont go rambo and go for conquest or something. Actually, I do, but I dont keep the land that I conquer. If I find myself going for a warlike game, I create strong vassals to help me out, and I give the cities I take to them, or the civ I defeated right then, or if its right along my border I might keep it.

 

[Protozoan]

Anyone else here abandon a game after the point that you've clearly won without going through the final acts of 'winning'.

 

[groobz]

If everyone already has the game won before you reach the modern era then you may as well play on a higher level.

If I play on prince difficulty I usualy can always have the game won before the modern era so playing the modern era is rather pointless but if play emperor difficulty I usualy find myself lagging behind in the modern era frantically trying to catch up/make alliances/make brash moves. So maybe try moving up a difficulty level.

 

[Protozoan]

The thing is I can just get by in Emperor, but get crushed when I try it on Immortal.

So far I like winning, so Emperor it is.

 

[georgjorge]

I feel the same as the original poster, after the first one or maybe two major wars that I win the game often seems decided because of the snowball effect. Solution: Don't start those wars! Try to win a game where you don't take your opponent's land but develop the land you settle as good as possible (maybe make an exception for very early rushes or razing the cities of nearby warmongers), go for a space victory. You still have to maintain an army for defensive purposes though (don't use Always Peace, the AI still builds armies and is at a disadvantage because of that). You can mess around some more with the settings, like going against some tech/culture lover on a Duel map...

I find the late game to be more interesting this way, you don't have to manage so many cities and have to squeeze out the most of the non-military advantages you can get (economic traits, wonders, corporations etc). The only disadvantage is that with Aggressive AIs and vassals turned on, if an AI like Shaka wins some wars and starts to chain-capitulate others you can't do anything about it if you don't have a large number of cities to fight him, but if you can get that AI to Friendly you could still win space before someone builds the UN (reaching the domination limit with vassals isn't that common).

 

[Sveon]

Long story short: I do. Early game -> less tedious micro -> more fun. Late game -> more tedious micro -> less fun.


Short story long:

Spoiler :

I certainly suffer from late game boredom. Early and mid-game I usually have a manageable empire that I have designed carefully to get the most out of. Maybe one quick war using small manageable stacks of units. Mainly its strategic thinking like; this would make a great heroic epic city, or I should use all this riverside grassland I got for cottages and try grab the Kremlin in the future. I better join this faction rather than the other etc.

Late mid game is usually a warmongering and pretty thoughtless affair of pummelling with siege -> kill the wounded. Try getting the edge in land/pop at least until the diplomatic picture sort of halts me.

Enter Late game: Now I have a lot of new cities without a plan. I either spend a lot of worker-micro on transforming them or I play them as provided knowing I play very sub-optimal. If I must continue warfare to win I now need 50 unit stacks and transports and destroyers and air units and what not. The diplo start changing, trade deals are cancelled and everyone is apparently everyone's worst enemy. Each turn seem to take forever so I start playing quick and dirty and I usually suffer for it and probably rage-quit and hate the game for 10 minutes. Then I start a new save smelling the fresh clean air of uncharted territory and endless opportunities!

My conclusion: The strategic aspects of the game are a whole lot more appealing than microing of workers and checking every city every other turn to see why it is polluted or unhappy. I also think the combat system is sad for an otherwise epic game. I'm looking forward to Civ5. I think they may fix the tedium of late game warfare with less units. I sincerely hope they put more effort into the city governors as well because they are lacking (and apparently in love with spy specialists).

 

[Darth Caesar]

On my last game I played as Julius Caesar on the Earth on Marathon Spead and Noble Difficulty I controlled Europe and Africa by 500 AD and by 1500 AD I controlled Asia and had a huge army with which to attack the Americas where Monty had Huayna and Roosevlet Vassaled Long Story short
COMPLETE DESTRUCTION FOR MONTY!!! In the end Me --> Monty --> It was alot of fun.
Ahhh good times

 

[MarcoPollo]

I don't usually finish my games. I have a few victories of each type, but since I have seen the end shots of each victory type, I am not enticed to go through the work of seeing it again.

I call it winning momentum. Having a huge tech lead, and more units/land than my closest rivals tends to make want to stop.

Of course the map make a bid difference to how a game finishes. Finishing on a Pangea map require a different skill set than an archipelago.

 

[SmokedSalmon]

I would like to be able to change the game speed where the research takes longer (marathon) but building units, buildings and improvements are quicker (normal), this way I would be fighting wars in the dark ages instead of staying friendly with the enemies until later in the game when I am stronger.

At the beginning of an epic game it takes about 38 turns to create a settler but about seven turns to get the next research, I would like to change these around so I could stay in the Roman era longer without waiting 25 goes to create a warrior.

 

[Sisiutil]

That should just be a matter of mucking around a little in the XML. Perhaps one of the modders around here could give you a hand, or you can always go ask in the Creation and Customization forum.

 

[s.bernbaum]

FWIW, building units on marathon is not slowed down in proportion to building anything else, so you will get your units faster, relatively speaking, than on other speeds.

 

[Poocho]

I was gonna start a new thread, since this is only a slightly related issue (though I do agree with many of the above sentiments), but I don't like cluttering friendly forums with questions that have possibly been asked multiple times. One of the things that I think makes the modern era boring for me is, well, the music. I simply don't like it as much as the previous ages, and there isn't enough variety. It's not epic enough for me.

So, what I want to know is: How do I play music from ALL eras during the modern age? I tried copying and pasting all the music files from the other ages into the modern folder with the rest of its songs, but that didn't work.

Any tips?

Just my thoughts,
Poocho

 

[Sisiutil]

So, what I want to know is: How do I play music from ALL eras during the modern age? I tried copying and pasting all the music files from the other ages into the modern folder with the rest of its songs, but that didn't work.

Any tips?

You were close. Just copy everything to a new folder, then when you hit the modern age, go to the game options, Audio tab, and enter this folder as your Custom Music Folder.

If you want any music (different from the in-game music) to play automatically during a certain era, you'll have to modify the XML files, I'm afraid--though I seem to recall there was a utility posted hereabouts for editing the game music, so have a look around if you're so inclined.

 

[Kneet]

I just disabled the in-game music and use iTunes to play my own. I guess you'd expect a slight decrease in speed because you're running multiple programs at the same time, but in any case, I haven't noticed a drop in speed, so it's probably not that big.

Also: I've tried Legends of Revolution and that does keep it interesting somewhat longer, but I've noticed my research speed is waaay slower now, they took out the praetorian :'(, and turns take longer to complete. Maybe because of the increased AI (although I haven't noticed much difference yet) and the increased number of civs due to spawning from revolutions and barbs. Long story short: I like it, but not all of it. And if they'd take out the new leaders that would be an improvement too.
Haven't finished a game yet though, so I can't say if it really helps to do what I tried it for.

 

[Darth Caesar]

One of the things that I think makes the modern era boring for me is, well, the music. I simply don't like it as much as the previous ages, and there isn't enough variety. It's not epic enough for me.Poocho

I disagree the Modern Age Music is Awsome IMO.

 

[Scoottr]

HIstory in the making mod has an option for Flexible Difficulty. This makes the game harder if you start running away with it and drops back down if you lag behind.

Hard to really note it happening, but that is how it is advertised.

 

[Darth Caesar]

Also: I've tried Legends of Revolution and that does keep it interesting somewhat longer, but I've noticed my research speed is waaay slower now, they took out the praetorian :'(QUOTE] WHY WOULD THEY TAKE OUT THE PRAET IT IS THE BEST UNIT IN CIV!!! Sorry but really what is the Romans UU in LoR