So if they are going to allow cheese tactics like this to win diplomatic victory, they need to raise the threshold to win to at least 20 instead of 10. You can see here where the wonky voting mechanics allow cheesing way to diplomatic victory. Pay attention to what Cyus is doing, and realize that even when everyone else (mostly) is voting for themselves, it in a way counts as a vote for Canada.
Ironically I played as Rome one time and built a Roman Fort right next to it and camped out a legion there for most of the game, not knowing I made an unofficial Pa years before.
So if they are going to allow cheese tactics like this to win diplomatic victory, they need to raise the threshold to win to at least 20 instead of 10. You can see here where the wonky voting mechanics allow cheesing way to diplomatic victory. Pay attention to what Cyus is doing, and realize that even when everyone else (mostly) is voting for themselves, it in a way counts as a vote for Canada.
It may be equally random for the player to navigate. First you have to guess whether the AI will vote A or B. Unless there are tells or they always vote the same way, this will be a coin toss.
If you guess right, then you can get things to go your way by having the most votes within whichever of A or B was successful. I don't think there was any realistic chance that the AI would vote other than naively (i.e. always for themselves). At least in this system you may not know exactly how many votes the AI may buy. That counts as a positive if you're okay with the player not always getting their way, as a negative if you don't like randomness.
Yes, that diplomatic voting looks really annoying. Feels like it should be a separate two-step process: First vote for A or B, and then you see the resutls. Once you see that, then you can vote for who or what you want to apply it to.
You can get strategic resources from goody huts. Interesting. Potato Mcwhiskey was trying to figure out where the got 30 horses, I just saw one of the French guys getting 20 iron from a goody hut, so that answer it.
I would imagine not. This looks like a nightmare for multiplayer. Yikes.
I mean the dynamic of any given game is enough, but then add in the supra interpersonal alliances between the players before the game even starts. Shake head .
Of course Cyrus is voting the same way, that's how Quill knew he would vote for B. The one somewhat balancer is that Cyrus will get his diplomatic favor returned, and he keeps getting more and more. So eventually Cyrus should be able to win a diplomatic victory vote and lower Quill's diplomatic victory points by 1. But at that point he will be back to 0 favor.
Of course Cyrus is voting the same way, that's how Quill knew he would vote for B. The one somewhat balancer is that Cyrus will get his diplomatic favor returned, and he keeps getting more and more. So eventually Cyrus should be able to win a diplomatic victory vote and lower Quill's diplomatic victory points by 1. But at that point he will be back to 0 favor.
So if they are going to allow cheese tactics like this to win diplomatic victory, they need to raise the threshold to win to at least 20 instead of 10. You can see here where the wonky voting mechanics allow cheesing way to diplomatic victory. Pay attention to what Cyus is doing, and realize that even when everyone else (mostly) is voting for themselves, it in a way counts as a vote for Canada.
All Era restrictions were lifted, all policy cards now simply "add on" to the length of time, so yous till have to work through to get those bonuses but no longer have to worry about obseleting or delaying.
So the Tier I, II III simply add the first 2, second 2 and third 2 eras but cover all previous eras.
All Era restrictions were lifted, all policy cards now simply "add on" to the length of time, so yous till have to work through to get those bonuses but no longer have to worry about obseleting or delaying.
So the Tier I, II III simply add the first 2, second 2 and third 2 eras but cover all previous eras.
I don't find the voting system counterintuitive at all. It makes sense. You vote for a resolution (aim for voting blocs or understanding the others' designs) and then you vote for a target or outcome.
However I do find that in a few cases, most importantly the diplomatic victory point award, it will be far easier to exploit the system as the AI is predictably going to vote for themselves.
So this will be a problem.
I think a better alternative for these particular votes would be to SPLIT the votes rather than have them done at the same time. First you vote for a resolution. Then you get back the results and vote on the target/outcome.
It's the same idea in practice... just decouple the resolution and target.
However I can see this being exploited into ALWAYS rejecting a diplomatic victory.
Just saw in quills latest video that he was able to plant a forest next to a lake tile. Am I misremembering or wasn't that a weird thing that wasn't possible before for some reason or am I confusing it with something else?
Hmm... I was under the impression that my allies would complain when I took artifacts. But I can't recall specific instances, maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention.
The way I imagine it, an uproar is raised geopolitically or popularly, and the world won't be satisfied without some sort of conclusion, one way or another.
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.
Well, at least I can still stuff it into a national park. 
.
That was one of the stupidest little quirks in the game. Didn't have to deal with it often, but it was super annoying when I did.
