stealth_nsk
Deity
They already do.Another option might be to have Victory replace the crisis. ie Victories require a legacy finished and the age to be at 70% completion (30% available through Legacies…..so about turn 80)
They already do.Another option might be to have Victory replace the crisis. ie Victories require a legacy finished and the age to be at 70% completion (30% available through Legacies…..so about turn 80)
I don't think they do - you can trigger a victory well before 70% of the Modern Age is passed.They already do.
Modern age has no crises, which is replaced with victory. And I believe once the option to end the game in other ages will roll out, victories in those ages will also be replacing crises.I don't think they do - you can trigger a victory well before 70% of the Modern Age is passed.
There needs to be a term to describe what type of "civ game" someone wants to play. I think what you are referring to would as too short is for a game of "Classic Civ". And there could be term for the new shorter versions which have been made possible by Civ 7.Recently we've discussed that modern age is too short, because victory comes too early.
For example, this sounds like a FPS campaign too me. 30 minute game and then on to the next game. Would be unsatifing to someone wanting a "Classic Civ" experience but appeal to some.Playing antiquity only? Collect resources, finish your projects and the game is over.
If you had to bring the Age Progress up to 70% before you could start a victory project that might be interesting. Some might say it's just artificially making the game longer, but it would also give you a reason to pursue other legacy paths to make the progress meter fill up faster.Modern age has no crises, which is replaced with victory. And I believe once the option to end the game in other ages will roll out, victories in those ages will also be replacing crises.
Oh, I got it. Yes, that's really cool idea.If you had to bring the Age Progress up to 70% before you could start a victory project that might be interesting. Some might say it's just artificially making the game longer, but it would also give you a reason to pursue other legacy paths to make the progress meter fill up faster.
I've just thought a bit more. If by this moment several players fulfill victory conditions, this condenses victory to how fast each player could finish victory projects. It's not great as in this case the only thing which matters will be your maximum production in one city for projects which require building (with some modifications like previous legacy paths). And economic victory become the worst, because you almost always could save enough gold and influence and finish the victory in exactly double the number of other civs turns (14 for standard size default settings).If you had to bring the Age Progress up to 70% before you could start a victory project that might be interesting. Some might say it's just artificially making the game longer, but it would also give you a reason to pursue other legacy paths to make the progress meter fill up faster.
If you had to bring the Age Progress up to 70% before you could start a victory project that might be interesting.
Yes that's what I was trying to say, would definitely need refinement though.Oh, I got it. Yes, that's really cool idea.
I wrote that other legacy paths should somehow affect victory projects, but haven't thought about this solution.
They would still have to alter the Victories themselves to be more interesting. with them being expensive and with multiple ways you can use resources/mechanics to speed the process up.I've just thought a bit more. If by this moment several players fulfill victory conditions, this condenses victory to how fast each player could finish victory projects. It's not great as in this case the only thing which matters will be your maximum production in one city for projects which require building (with some modifications like previous legacy paths). And economic victory become the worst, because you almost always could save enough gold and influence and finish the victory in exactly double the number of other civs turns (14 for standard size default settings).
I’d probably say no, because that would mean you would have to consider what the benefits would be for the next age if completed.Once they add single age games with their own victory projects, do you think it'd be better to have those projects be available in multi age games?
Best option would probably be letting you choose, but I'd like to hear everyone's opinions.
I think victory projects will be just for the last age (any of 3 could be set as the last one). They don't make much sense for ages not ending the game.Once they add single age games with their own victory projects, do you think it'd be better to have those projects be available in multi age games?
Best option would probably be letting you choose, but I'd like to hear everyone's opinions.
Definitely just for the last age.Once they add single age games with their own victory projects, do you think it'd be better to have those projects be available in multi age games?
Best option would probably be letting you choose, but I'd like to hear everyone's opinions.
I assume your main point is that the AI can be ignored in the last age, and that this is a problem. And here, I fully agree.I have found that in modern I can practically ignore the AI unless they are attacking me. I just beeline getting my factories up and running, load them up, build an army just in case the AI gets aggressive, and wait. I play on epic speed, and am completing game on turn 65 consistently. (so would be around 40ish on standard speed). I don't even care about the majority of modern age buildings.
Since the patch, I don't even build museums or other culture buildings in modern era because if I'm not playing for culture victory they serve no purpose. Its economic or scientific if I want to get it over with fast (or get a duel victory), and military if I really just want to take my time and burn the world down. Culture now takes too long to be the quick option and is too tedious to want to invest time in if I want to draw things out. There's just no incentive to fight the AI for artifacts.
I think you'd struggle to get a turn 40 econ victory in the Modern age on standard speed on a standard map (on Deity). You need 6 techs to get Factories online, so that's roughly 20 turns. Then you'd need roughly 10-15 turns to complete the legacy path (that's if you have 50 resources, which is doable, and you buy all the factories on the same turn you unlock them). Then you'd need at least 14 turns to complete the world bank (2 turns * 7 civs). That puts you at 44 turns right away - fastest possible run. I completed the culture victory a few days ago in 36 turns. 4 turns for natural history. Bought 4 explorers immediately and then 2 more over the next 5 turns. Those explorers got me 12 artifacts before turn 20. Then I got 2 from overbuilding and 1 city-state conversion. And had a 15 turn worlds fair. With the addition of the natural wonder artifacts, you can reliably get 10ish artifacts from the first round at least if you have a town/city on every continent and can immediately buy the explorers.I have found that in modern I can practically ignore the AI unless they are attacking me. I just beeline getting my factories up and running, load them up, build an army just in case the AI gets aggressive, and wait. I play on epic speed, and am completing game on turn 65 consistently. (so would be around 40ish on standard speed). I don't even care about the majority of modern age buildings.
Since the patch, I don't even build museums or other culture buildings in modern era because if I'm not playing for culture victory they serve no purpose. Its economic or scientific if I want to get it over with fast (or get a duel victory), and military if I really just want to take my time and burn the world down. Culture now takes too long to be the quick option and is too tedious to want to invest time in if I want to draw things out. There's just no incentive to fight the AI for artifacts.