Regent: Very refreshing

[Klasanov]

Okay, so Im sitting here. The map in the industrial/modern age is getting too slow. I don't feel like another warlord game (No action), nor do I feel like regent (Tried it once, hate it). so what do I do?

I go out of my comfort zone and start up a regent game. Somehow, some people are in the medieval age by the A.D.s, Greek is overrunning me after I make an attempt to wipe them out and fail.

My second game on regent, and honestly, it was refreshing. I didn't survive for long, but at least the AI actually attacks now. I hope they do more than just sit around and declare war on each other for attention. I swear, when Persia and Zululand went to war, one cith changed borders. Same with superpower England and puny Persia.

 

[Zouave]

You're not the only one who has given up on the Industrial/Modern era.

Big game maps are often needed to be interesting. But the slowness of the game, and the tedium of moving all those units without being able to combine them into stacks or have "rally points" or the like is too tedious. I have a game I'd like to finish, but it will take forever as this point.

That is why the lack of scenarios is disastrous. We could go right into a tank-era game with a manageable number of units.

BTW, unless you get a ridiculously bad starting position, Regent is fairly easy with experience. That AI is so predictable. At higher levels it cheats so much it should be shot.

 

[Klasanov]

Actually, the number of units doesn't bother me much.

It's not having any infantry, being able to support upwards of 70 of them, not having a good base for naval power (few coastal cities. Oops), and trying to build 70 infantry (Which would have taken forever. By that time they'd havd modern armor probably) to take on Persia that I hated.

The v1.21 patch seemed to speed up turns a bit. I had a game on huge map that was taking 5 minutes, then 8 minutes, to process one turn. One game I was totally smashing through China and then the game crashed. Now, it seems to take shorter time.

I like long maps too because of the time they take. I am very weary of switching to standard size. I like regent too because civs seem to do stuff, so it takes a lot more strategy to do. My third regent game is going better, although I quite wonder why I got smushed in bewteen Zululand and egypt. Looks like I got some landgrabbing to do.

 

[bobgote]

If your computer is too slow, use smaller maps. It's ok. I used to play only on the huge maps, but now i play on standard or large. It's ok.

And I find that to go through and destroy a civ completely doesn't happen in just one war, unless the civ is particularly weak or small. I find it's best for my citizens that i don't overextend myself, and make peace when my army is at it's limits, rather than just wait until i've made more units. Especially if i'm in a republic (probably not so bad on regent level tho)

you should find that you get used to regent pretty easy, as that transition is not too hard to do. Just wait until you try to go from regent to monarch!!!

 

[Jason Fox]

Originally posted by bobgote
you should find that you get used to regent pretty easy, as that transition is not too hard to do. Just wait until you try to go from regent to monarch!!!

That was the hardest for me so far - regent to monarch. Went from good but very winnable games to getting crushed routinely.

 

[Klasanov]

This is why I like Regent better. There's no challenge in Warlord, although it was a nice training level to orient me to the game.

Could you believe I never played past Warlord in Civ II? Civ II's warlord was a bit different from Civ III's though, I think.

 

[Klasanov]

Another reason is there is much more strategy in regent than in warlord.