I'm beginning to think the "Figurine" models aren't just for City States. We see a shot of a dungeon in this short. With the Unique Unit figurine shots we saw in a few shorts, I'm wondering if maybe the Civilopedia will let us look at all the unit/building art in full 3D.
I'm definitely not thrilled that another empire can reduce your Gold or Happiness income by 10% with the press of a button, without any apparent countermeasure.
I'm definitely not thrilled that another empire can reduce your Gold or Happiness income by 10% with the press of a button, without any apparent countermeasure.
It does have an opportunity cost. If they are pressing the button constantly, they can't afford to make as many diplomatic actions that benefit them more directly.
I'm definitely not thrilled that another empire can reduce your Gold or Happiness income by 10% with the press of a button, without any apparent countermeasure.
It does have an opportunity cost. If they are pressing the button constantly, they can't afford to make as many diplomatic actions that benefit them more directly.
They have to spend a resource, but that's not anything that you have any control over. If multiple rivals get angry at you at the same time, they can reduce your income by 40-50% instantly and there's apparently nothing you can do about it (except exterminate them). I can see that becoming a serious problem.
And if Influence is so precious that it's not sustainable, then it seems like it would be a useless option and there's no point in having it.
I'm definitely not thrilled that another empire can reduce your Gold or Happiness income by 10% with the press of a button, without any apparent countermeasure.
It does have an opportunity cost. If they are pressing the button constantly, they can't afford to make as many diplomatic actions that benefit them more directly.
Also, while it is not a countermeasure, there is a drawback to it as they might get revealed ! Now what we don't know yet is what's the impact of being revealed ? Relationship change ? influence cost ? I'd like to know more....
But yeah, at least in VI you could capture the spy and keep it... hope something of the sort exists in VII also
Also, while it is not a countermeasure, there is a drawback to it as they might get revealed ! Now what we don't know yet is what's the impact of being revealed ? Relationship change ? influence cost ? I'd like to know more....
But yeah, at least in VI you could capture the spy and keep it... hope something of the sort exists in VII also
If this system is working as intended, I look forward to it . There are many potential ways to stir conflict in a game where the majority autopilots toward peaceful play (comfort zone) while rewarding interactions between players in a healthy, non-forced way.
My worst-case scenario would be an "endeavor formula": always choosing endeavor X into endeavor Y to maximize yields, disregarding the opposing leaders’ play and the map.
P.S. I have nothing against "peaceful play," as long as it's a "choice" and not something you gravitate toward out of comfort. My theory is that nothing you do is actually "truly" peaceful in this game, as you play to win and, subsequently, make the other players lose, even if your "weapon" of choice is not war.
Well sanctions clearly have an effect on relations. It's not something you'll be able to do often and stay on friendly terms. I don't dislike that civs who are openly unfriendly will be able to spend a yield on making your life miserable
Well sanctions clearly have an effect on relations. It's not something you'll be able to do often and stay on friendly terms. I don't dislike that civs who are openly unfriendly will be able to spend a yield on making your life miserable
The downside of enacting sanctions is the cost of Influence, but also Relationship.
With Machiavelli, we have a clue that Relationship determines what kind of declarations of war you can make, and presumably affects your war support.
So, pushing the sanction button over and over means they can't afford to make diplomatic agreements that benefit themselves. It also gives you the capacity to declare justified wars against them (assuming you choose to) and presumably gives you a support bonus in that war.
It's yet to be determined, but it's possible that relationship decreases with one civ may also trickle down to their allies, meaning that your allies may declare war on them if the relationship malus becomes great enough.
The downside of enacting sanctions is the cost of Influence, but also Relationship.
With Machiavelli, we have a clue that Relationship determines what kind of declarations of war you can make, and presumably affects your war support.
So, pushing the sanction button over and over means they can't afford to make diplomatic agreements that benefit themselves. It also gives you the capacity to declare justified wars against them (assuming you choose to) and presumably gives you a support bonus in that war.
It's yet to be determined, but it's possible that relationship decreases with one civ may also trickle down to their allies, meaning that your allies may declare war on them if the relationship malus becomes great enough.
I am most intrigued to see how this plays out between human players.
Historically, it's never been on the same level. Though Civ 6 and Beyond Earth actually made it possible that the most if not all options were equally available, however, do human players maintain their own level of relationship? Does this mean Agendas now actually work between human players?
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.
. There are many potential ways to stir conflict in a game where the majority autopilots toward peaceful play (comfort zone) while rewarding interactions between players in a healthy, non-forced way.
.
