'Rising Tide' expansion announced!

[ZTZaorish]

I'm not sure it should unless they actually show those as mini buildings like civilization 5 and other games did, I would like to see how they look. But maybe that's just me. And show you these new buildings are shaping your Civilization.

Cities now just look so generic even when you have mixed affinities. But I'm guessing that is such a low priority.


Little building sprites please ???

On second thought I think only the first of each affinity building should bump you up a level as well as technology and quests adding the rest.

I agree 100% here. Building sprites near cities is just another step to creating this game's world, and making BE more unique.

 

[Lord Tirian]

Little building sprites please ???

Yeah, I miss them, too. I actually quite like Civ5's approach, namely that only certain special buildings get their unique models, e.g. the stadium or the lighthouse. More "common" buildings like granaries or workshops just got subsumed into the general cityscape.

Some big buildings that definitely deserve their own model are, IMO:

• Borehole (I'd love to see this more than anything else because of Thermal Borehole memories from SMAC)
• Defense Perimeter
• Launch Complex
• Mind Stem
• Observatory
• Ultrasonic Fence
• Water Refinery
• Xeno Sanctuary

This is mostly based on aesthetics, really. These are just things you'd expect to be able to spot easily on a satellite image unlike, say, a optical surgery or clinic.

It's quite interesting that the Supremacy-aligned buildings are much smaller or abstract, conceptually, and wouldn't warrant a big model.

 

[Kutuzov]

1) Agreed, I think techs should contribute something but not full levels. In fact, I'd argue that a solution would be using buildings and improvements as one of the sources of affinity XP.

Not necessarily as yields, though, but as one-off requirement. For example, if over 50% of your pop lives in a city with an Old Earth Relic, gain Purity XP. Over 50% pop has a Network? Supremacy XP. And so forth (each of them is an one-off, of course). That way, you even have the interesting side effect of acquiring XP if you conquer a city and it somehow keeps certain buildings/wonders.

2) I like the idea of tying tech into it but that implementation sounds a bit awkward and fiddly. Having a "fixed", less tech-dependent affinity system would help enough already, if done right.

The trouble with this is where will you unlock these buildings and improvements? On the tech tree, right? In which case, you will still beeline the requisite techs to build these improvements with the additional requirement that you have to build the specific building or improvement to get the affinity points as well as any further micro-management that might be required. Unless you removed the culture it generates at present, pretty much 100% of my population live in cities with an Old Earth Relic so I'd always see Purity burgeoning in my Empire.

I don't care if they go that way or not. However, if the complaint is that the tech web allows us to beeline the affinity techs, this doesn't really help. In fact, it just adds further requirements. Fine by me but you'd have to code the AI to be able to handle this system properly as well.

My own preference towards developing affinity levels would be to use Civ V's religion mechanics to develop affinities instead. True, that's a HUGE amount of work. But they did that work for Civ V with Gods and Kings so you never know.

 

[Acken]

Some brainstorming:

1. Make affinity a yield but not separated in 3. You get "Affinity XP" that you then use to raise affinities. Use the opportunity to make hybrids interesting too so that cross-spending is worth it. The yield could come from whatever source. A very simple example would be to give affinity XP when researching techs (no matter which one). That way you no longer beeline affinity techs but will select the techs you really want. You just get affinity along the way. I'd also rework the way science works so that we get rid of these stupid academy spams.
However it's true that such a system wouldn't be very immersive.

or

2. Branching quests could be the way to raise affinities. You'd get a "web" of quests with "difficult" objectives that give you the XP (harder than just clicking an option). Multiple options to complete one would be how you get one affinity over the other or start a hybrid affinity. For example you could have:
-starting quest
A. eradicate 2 alien nests
B. get 2 in your territory +Harmony
A1. Build 2 explorers to make an expedition on the remnants of the nest +Supremacy
A2. Build 2 marines to burn any remnants +Purity
A1 and B could branch further:
B1 Study the aliens by building a dome on the nest +Supremacy
B2 Spend time naked with them by building a XenoReserve +Harmony.
A11 Build a lab to make a special weapon with this new knowledge +Supremacy
A111 Raze a city +Supremacy
etc.

Obviously like the first idea you'd want to make hybrid affinities worth it.
Then you could couple it with better building quests. If building quests had more difficult objectives you could try to find the fastest/most efficient way to synchronise your quests objectives. It would create a lot of theorycrafting surrounding how to best synchronise the tech web with the affinity objectives and the building objectives.
This is an immersive way to do it but the AI requirement are way higher than the other solution (on how to complete objectives, optimal synchronisation is not necessary for the AI since the difficulty levels are there to help)

 

[Socratatus]

I`ll wait and see. Doubt I`ll buy it any time soon. Still seems too little.

 

[Mustakrakish]

2) Unit upgrades shouldn't be so tied with affinity = > again, let me explore the web. Getting OP units just by beelining affinity is NOT good. Maybe in addition to affinity level, there should be also a tech requirement for say, upgrade unit to stage 3, or even better maybe there should be stages within stages (yo dawg). What I mean is, umm, here's a simplified example:

From reaching needed affinity level, we got stage 2 'basic' infantry with 10 str, by researching tech A we can equip said unit with new weapons/equpment/whatever and it's now a stage 2 'veteran' infantry with 13str (with ability X). By researching tech B we can either further upgrade the now stage 2 'veteran' to 'elite' 17str infantry (with abilities XY) OR we never even got tech A, and went (reasons) straight for tech B, upgrading stage 2 infantry to slightly different 14str 'veteran' (with ability Y).
>
Now we reach needed affinity for stage 3 'basic' infantry with 14str. Now we CAN equip it with same tech A or B or both, netting us a more powerful stage 3 'elite' 21str infantry OR we can research techs C and/or D which gives us more powerful upgrades for stage 3 infantry, that stage 2 infantry could not handle (can't equip).

I thought about this again and I think that it would be better if said tech A, B upgrades would actually be mutually exclusive, and let there be more of those (say ABCD), THAT way I actually get the variety I want and freedom to chose where to aim etc.

 

[Gritf]

My bet is going back to the "quests give you affinity exp" back. I usually play my games with Ryoga's Affinity Quest Fix. So when those quests above turn 100 start it gives me quests like build this improvement or that one building in this city, or expand next to a certain resource.

I like those because they always ask me for things that are good for my civ on their own but also rewars me for pulling that extra effort. Also they sometimes make me double think my tech beelining because skipping some earliers techs may be more benefitial, making different gameplays more different.

Also they give me some feel of direction or drive to do things different. At least one of them even make you turn an affinity victory into a contact one and viceversa. Or go culture instead of academy spam viable, help you going wider or just deploying more units to secure a random expedition site or expansion location.

I just wish there were more variety and creativity in those. After a few playthroughts it feels as it there were room for more different quests.

 

[bryanw1995]

I remember a prerelease interview where Ed Beach hinted that ocean cities could be a thing, but refused to comment further on an expansion.
Interesting, but until I am satisfied with the state of the game I already bought I can easily contain my excitement.

I just did some reading on Ed...check this out:

http://www.civilization.com/en/news/2015-04-the-hubble-telescope-then-and-now/

Sooo many people don't remember (or weren't around) when Civ 5 was being called the death knell of the Civ series... (anyone remember how hard it was to get a stable multiplayer game going?). And look at it now haha.

Super excited for the expansion, I think it will add a lot of much-needed content to the game. Firaxis has a history of adding both breadth and depth in its expansions.

Oh man, I remember. I really liked the original, basic civ5, and I got into some pretty heated discussions with people who felt disappointed/sad/betrayed by civ5. I really enjoyed the expansions and G + K, but I drifted away from the game before BnW came out and probably only have 10 or 15 total BnW games under my belt. It's nice to see that civ5 eventually got to a good place, let's hope that BE gets there, as well.

Well, add one more to that count b/c I stayed up until 4am this morning playing some BnW. It's definitely more fun in the mid/late game now than it was in the beginning.

 

[Hail]

I don't care if they go that way or not. However, if the complaint is that the tech web allows us to beeline the affinity techs, this doesn't really help. In fact, it just adds further requirements. Fine by me but you'd have to code the AI to be able to handle this system properly as well.

I do care. they should. yes, science is king. it is so in any civ game to date.

the AI will get an affinity xp multiplier (>1).

as mentioned elsewhere, adding affinity xp to improvements and/or buildings actually makes the "tech web" a web.

obviously not any improvement (farms come to mind) should add affinity xp.
devs need to think real hard about how to differentiate affinities so they actually play uniquely.
like supremacy - has more pop; purity - less pop, but more multipliers from buildings; harmony - tiles have more yields; etc.
around such general ideas as above, affinity xp should be added to buildings/improvements.

from RT, I want the devs to fix obvious issues, separate affinities more and add more qualitive stuff. quantity of any entity can always be increased by modders.

 

[AriochIV]

Science is king, and it should be. Especially in a science fiction game.

But a technology "tree" is less compelling when there is only one optimal way to traverse it. In the current setup, there is no gameplay reason to research any tech that is not along the Affinity path for your particular victory condition.

 

[Mustakrakish]

Science is king, and it should be. Especially in a science fiction game.

But a technology "tree" is less compelling when there is only one optimal way to traverse it. In the current setup, there is no gameplay reason to research any tech that is not along the Affinity path for your particular victory condition.

Exactly.

 

[Lord Tirian]

But a technology "tree" is less compelling when there is only one optimal way to traverse it. In the current setup, there is no gameplay reason to research any tech that is not along the Affinity path for your particular victory condition.

An additional problem, I think, are the wonder leaf techs. In principle, having optional techs isn't bad... but if you research one and don't manage to build the wonder first, it's a complete waste of science without the "refund" you get for investing production. More of a niche problem than affinities, but also something problematic.

Perhaps the answer is rewarding people for the number of techs per ring - basically, make it work like the synergy bonuses of the virtue trees, for every X techs of a ring, you gain affinity XP, with the type decided by the techs you research.

That way, the total number of techs is tracking progress (not bad), you get some reward for pushing towards outer rings (discourages grabbing cheap techs, good) but you now get affinity based on the overall theme of techs you research instead of specific ones.

It still means that there are encouraged directions for every affinity, but I think that's a bonus.

 

[Galgus]

Science is king, and it should be. Especially in a science fiction game.

But a technology "tree" is less compelling when there is only one optimal way to traverse it. In the current setup, there is no gameplay reason to research any tech that is not along the Affinity path for your particular victory condition.

Ideally it shouldn't eclipse other yields to the extent it can now.

It could be healthy for the game, in my opinion, for Culture to also play a role in Affinity progress and thus victory progress.

With that going for heavy Culture could become more viable, since aside nabbing some extremely powerful deep virtues in Prosperity mid game heavy culture doesn't do much.

(And has rubber banding diminishing returns with each bonus costing more, unlike Science.)

After all, the story of the Affinities isn't just progress in technology, but how people respond to it.

 

[Lord Tirian]

IAfter all, the story of the Affinities isn't just progress in technology, but how people respond to it.

Very true and would be a neat mechanic if we had a separate affinity level cap and actual level. Techs could drive the maximum affinity you have, while population, culture and/or science could drive the actual affinity level (each to a varying degree). That still makes science important but lessens its absolute power somewhat.

Even looking at Civ:BE as it is, it feels like a missed opportunity not to have more affinity levels/XP tied to your virtues and having less of them in the tech web.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

It could be healthy for the game, in my opinion, for Culture to also play a role in Affinity progress and thus victory progress.

I would LOVE to see some virtues also grant affinity points. They need to be late virtues, in order to make mid game culture more important to get.

 

[Karl0413]

I would LOVE to see some virtues also grant affinity points. They need to be late virtues, in order to make mid game culture more important to get.

Well, Might already has a Virtue that boosts affinity yields from technology.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

Well, Might already has a Virtue that boosts affinity yields from technology.

True, but I was thinking virtues that actually points towards a specific affinity.

 

[Galgus]

Very true and would be a neat mechanic if we had a separate affinity level cap and actual level. Techs could drive the maximum affinity you have, while population, culture and/or science could drive the actual affinity level (each to a varying degree). That still makes science important but lessens its absolute power somewhat.

Even looking at Civ:BE as it is, it feels like a missed opportunity not to have more affinity levels/XP tied to your virtues and having less of them in the tech web.

That system would work nicely, though I'd also take a simpler system where virtues and affinity techs both raise affinity level.

I would LOVE to see some virtues also grant affinity points. They need to be late virtues, in order to make mid game culture more important to get.

In my opinion it would be best as a sort of kicker based on the number of virtues adopted.

Something like every three or five virtues your affinity level goes up.

That said I think Might should keep its status with virtues that directly help increase your affinity level.
_____________________

So far as virtues pointing to specific affinities goes, I see reasons for and against it.

On one hand, it could help the immersion by asking the player to make philosophical questions.

On the other, each affinity could support a rather broad range of ideology within certain confines, and not every version of an affinity would have the same culture.

I think it would be best to instead have a secondary affinity virtue system - sort of like Ideologies in BNW.

They could offer more extreme bonuses that make each affinity play significantly differently.

This is how I would do such a system, updated to support hybrid affinities.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

In my opinion it would be best as a sort of kicker based on the number of virtues adopted.

To do that, I think the kicker would have to be a fixed number of affinity points to whatever affinity the player chooses. So, you would get a pop up that says "you get +10 affinity XP. Please choose which affinity you want the points to go to: purity - supremacy - harmony".

 

[Galgus]

To do that, I think the kicker would have to be a fixed number of affinity points to whatever affinity the player chooses. So, you would get a pop up that says "you get +10 affinity XP. Please choose which affinity you want the points to go to: purity - supremacy - harmony".

I agree, that is how that would need to work.