Press build preview

[TheSpaceCowboy]

I’ll look forward to more videos with greater focus in game setup.

I am disappointed, though, by the randomness of civ/leader combinations if this is the default setting, which I believe it is.

I'll be selecting every Leader and Antiquity civ every time, so as to avoid such nonsensical pairings

 

[Gori the Grey]

But then they'll get nonsensical later, no?

 

[queenpea]

But then they'll get nonsensical later, no?

Yep.

 

[Krikkit1]

Yeah, they said each age would be ballpark 200 turns, I think.

119 =/= 200.

It's just math. You can't argue with math.

They said Maximum 200
119=<200

Moving along the legacy path makes it end earlier.

 

[TheSpaceCowboy]

But then they'll get nonsensical later, no?

Not if they follow a predictable geographical path

 

[Gori the Grey]

But there aren't enough of those, are there? Just China and India. And then some sort of pre-EU Paneuropia.

 

[AriochIV]

Marbozir said there's two settings for game speed; one conventional speed setting, and another that makes Ages last longer or shorter.

 

[queenpea]

Marbozir said there's two settings for game speed; one conventional speed setting, and another that makes Ages last longer or shorter.

The age speed setting configures how “sensitive” each age is to player actions that push the age forward.

 

[TheSpaceCowboy]

But there aren't enough of those, are there? Just China and India. And then some sort of pre-EU Paneuropia.

Those are the most clear cut historical stacks, but every civ has a geographical path that it defaults to if possible

 

[chaosprophet]

The age speed setting configures how “sensitive” each age is to player actions that push the age forward.

Oh, that is great, will generally play in a way where it is affected less, don't want the ages shortening too much because of players.

 

[gdr_willter]

One thing I noticed from Quill’s video was that the Age of Antiquity ended at turn 119

I personally think that’s way too soon. It might have to do with how he played and the settings but this is a small concern for me.

Maybe some tweaking to the Age progression is needed

You have an advanced option for the Age length. It's different with the game speed option.

 

[moysturfurmer]

You have an advanced option for the Age length. It's different with the game speed option.

Well sure, but the default settings shouldn’t make 1400 year gaps between the end of Antiquity and start of Exploration a common occurrence. I would hope the age progression points are fine tuned in the run up to release. Could be as simple as capping the max age progression figure. It’s a problem that will only be exacerbated as Firaxis allows for larger maps with more CPUs, as they’ve implied they were doing post-release.

 

[Krikkit1]

Well sure, but the default settings shouldn’t make 1400 year gaps between the end of Antiquity and start of Exploration a common occurrence. I would hope the age progression points are fine tuned in the run up to release. Could be as simple as capping the max age progression figure. It’s a problem that will only be exacerbated as Firaxis allows for larger maps with more CPUs, as they’ve implied they were doing post-release.

Actually it’s more just adjusting the years each turn takes and making it dynamic.

 

[Potworny]

Link the years to age progress, I say

 

[Krikkit1]

Link the years to age progress, I say

Well you don’t want it directly linked (otherwise you have big jumps in the middle of an age)

But..
Start the years moving fast, and if they get too far ahead of the age progress, start moving them slower

So
Standard speed 200 turns
Antiquity 4400 years (22 years/turn)
start at 50 years per turn and at points drop to
40, 30, 20, 10 years per turn…when you drop depends on how far you are in age completion v year.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

Just remove the years. Sorted.

 

[Krikkit1]

Just remove the years. Sorted.

No, people want the years…and it’s good to have. Just the current “Age progression” makes it Easy to connect Years to actual events in game to increase that immersion
So you aren’t launching rocket ships in 340 BC…or 1340 AD …or even 1840 AD (you might be launching them in 1914 though if you are science focused…but that doesn’t seem as bad)

And that can also allow some gap, but not too much.

 

[Taefin]

I was surprised how much the civ select screen and artwork look so familiar to HK, some civs’ artwork I wouldn’t be able to tell which game I was playing.

Having watched the videos and seeing how limited expansion is by the end of antiquity, and how early into exploration you can get a settler to the other continent, I think a fully symmetric HL/DL would have worked just fine.

 

[reddishrecue]

I was surprised how much the civ select screen and artwork look so familiar to HK, some civs’ artwork I wouldn’t be able to tell which game I was playing.

Right? I Was thinking the same thing, so familiar to HK.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

No, people want the years…and it’s good to have. Just the current “Age progression” makes it Easy to connect Years to actual events in game to increase that immersion
So you aren’t launching rocket ships in 340 BC…or 1340 AD …or even 1840 AD (you might be launching them in 1914 though if you are science focused…but that doesn’t seem as bad)

And that can also allow some gap, but not too much.

For me they are more immersion breaking than helpful, or at least have been in the last couple of Civ games.