Soren Johnson on Characters

[The_J]

Soren Johnson has added a new blog post, about why the characters were added to Old World. Have a read here: https://www.designer-notes.com/?p=1714

Besides that I'd like to mention that ICS is "infinite city sprawl" , this part is interesting for me:

Simply put, characters add a dynamism to Old World that prevents it from reaching ECS, the usual fate of most 4X games. The most obvious way characters disrupt the game’s stability is via diplomacy. Simply having foreign leaders actually change – from death or abdication or even deposition – over the course of the game makes a huge difference. Perhaps you have a great relationship with Phillip of Greece but not so much with his heir, Alexander, because you offended him at a dinner years before? The latter’s eventual ascension (unless, say, some unfortunate accident might come to pass) will mean that your diplomatic status with Greece could go from good to bad. The amazing thing about this outcome is that it flows completely naturally from having real characters who age and die; players aren’t shocked when relations change and, indeed, expect them to change.

It is hard to articulate how significant a departure this is from a tension that has always bedeviled Civ games – that players expect diplomacy to be predictable, but predictable diplomacy inevitably becomes boring. Players will frequently rant over “unpredictable” or “random” AI leaders who suddenly go from being a friend to an enemy. These shifts are necessary for games to not slowly calcify from their earliest diplomatic states, but there are few ways to make these changes thematically palatable when the leaders never change. Civ games have experimented with all sorts of opinion modifiers that give a reason why a leader might change their opinion of you, but the most natural reason is that there is now simply a new leader who has a new set of relationships, memories, and opinions.

It is very true for the Civ games. In theory, you'd expect to set your foreign politics once, and that they then never change, which is indeed very boring. Civ has lacked there the interesting part, to make it more dynamic. Adding characters is indeed a good way to change this, IMHO, despite that it's kind of a "random event", but more predictable and long lasting.

Interesting read again .

 

[PiR]

I usually don't like much random things in 4X, but in OW they will very natural. And for characters, the change is half predictable in advance, so I don't mind the randomness, it actually spices up the game.

Side topic as you mentioned ICS: I still feel more cities are always better in OW though?

 

[jguy100]

I agree that having more cities is generally better in Old World. But with the limited number of city placement points, I don’t think you can truly achieve ICS, even if you wanted to. Especially compared to the craziness of Civ 3.

I feel like the point about relations changing when foreign leaders change conflicts with the previous post about micromanagement. I either need to be constantly keeping tabs on heirs/political machinations of foreign countries, which feels like a lot of work. Or I risk my healthy relationships crumbling because the RNG decided that some twerp (that I've never had a single event with) doesn't like me. Seems like micromanagement was migrated from citizen placement to foreign affairs.

 

[vorlon_mi]

What span of history does Old World cover? Soren wrote several blog posts where he notes that his game doesn't need to manage aluminum, oil, or uranium because the game doesn't cover time periods where those resources are relevant. Does OW just "end" in 1400CE or something?

 

[Solver]

It's Classical Antiquity. There are no specific years given like in Civ, but it certainly doesn't go to 1400. It's a much more detailed exploration of a specific era.

 

[Dale]

What span of history does Old World cover? Soren wrote several blog posts where he notes that his game doesn't need to manage aluminum, oil, or uranium because the game doesn't cover time periods where those resources are relevant. Does OW just "end" in 1400CE or something?

You can consider it "Classical" era. The rise of Empires like Egypt, Babylonia, etc, to the fall of Rome.

 

[PiR]

Except that Rome rarely falls at the end of the game?

 

[Stalker0]

I do think OW's system help remove SOME of the predictability, but sadly much of it still remains. At the end of the time, the endgame of OW is as boring and "click the button" type play as most 4x games inevitably degrade into.

 

[Dale]

I do think OW's system help remove SOME of the predictability, but sadly much of it still remains. At the end of the time, the endgame of OW is as boring and "click the button" type play as most 4x games inevitably degrade into.

What do you think would fix that?

 

[PiR]

I think there are two different topics. The predictability of how the story (if you like roleplaying) will evolve is continuous. The endgame can be however a bit boring if you know you've won but still need to do many clicks to "prove it". I find this endgame boring part much much shorter than in civ (so far I've just played few games though), maybe because there are less turns, or thanks to the DV, or the orders, maybe all of that, I'm not sure.

 

[Dale]

I think there are two different topics. The predictability of how the story (if you like roleplaying) will evolve is continuous. The endgame can be however a bit boring if you know you've won but still need to do many clicks to "prove it". I find this endgame boring part much much shorter than in civ (so far I've just played few games though), maybe because there are less turns, or thanks to the DV, or the orders, maybe all of that, I'm not sure.

So the DV was brought to help reduce the feeling of end game "End Turn Simulator". Is it that the DV comes too late, or that the AI is keeping up enough to negate the DV?

 

[PiR]

For me the DV was in perfect timing to end a game where I had made so many cities that it was obvious I could crush everyone. I haven't played enough game to say in which cases it fails at its goal.

 

[Stalker0]

What do you think would fix that?

The Eternal Question of 4x games! So let me give some thoughts:

1) More late game resource sinks. I generally find that by the late game I have lots of basic resources, I'm overflowing with money, I have more metal than I can spend, etc. So perhaps something to provide a more definitive use of my resources.

2) More interesting cultural options. So once I hit legendary culture....that's kind of it. Yes I can get legendary 2 but its not really doing much for me. One thing that's annoying is I find by the time I'm getting the big cultural items (elder specialists, big culture buildings)....I have already hit legendary....so all that extra culture just feels like a waste. I wish there was something more you could do with your culture.

3) One idea might be to allow certain ambitions to be worth 2 units of ambition.....but be really ambitious! They might have a time limit like quests, and be super difficult. This gives me a fun late game challenge, I can win faster but I have to get creative....maybe the building ambition basically requires a builder archetype to have a chance at, so I start changing up my heirs, or maybe it requires huge expenditures of resources (hitting on point 1 above). Aka I want to feel that finish the game is really special, instead of just clicking the box until done.

4) The competitive AI mode helps a little (I turn it on by default). I don't think it kicks in soon enough though. Its pretty easy to maintain peace with the AI even on high difficulties in the late game. The tributes they ask early game are a real cost...but by late game they are a pittance compared to what I have.... and so I am happy to bribe them to stay peaceful and quiet.

 

[Taefin]

1) More late game resource sinks. I generally find that by the late game I have lots of basic resources, I'm overflowing with money, I have more metal than I can spend, etc. So perhaps something to provide a more definitive use of my resources.

This is why I love the “can buy/sell orders” and “rush units with money” laws. I can get through 200k+ gold worth of resources in one last DV aspiring war that will feel sufficiently epic and quick.

Realistic leader lifespan setting is also among my favorite settings.

 

[Dale]

1) More late game resource sinks. I generally find that by the late game I have lots of basic resources, I'm overflowing with money, I have more metal than I can spend, etc. So perhaps something to provide a more definitive use of my resources.

Are you upgrading units and having late game wars? Also, are you playing at high difficulties? I find at The Great with all the settings for AI dialed up my army becomes the resource sink.

2) More interesting cultural options. So once I hit legendary culture....that's kind of it. Yes I can get legendary 2 but its not really doing much for me. One thing that's annoying is I find by the time I'm getting the big cultural items (elder specialists, big culture buildings)....I have already hit legendary....so all that extra culture just feels like a waste. I wish there was something more you could do with your culture.

Each time you fill the culture metre you get a top level culture reward event, plus also another VP. So I suppose there is still a point to culture at that stage. Maybe it's that it doesn't fill that hole completely?

3) One idea might be to allow certain ambitions to be worth 2 units of ambition.....but be really ambitious! They might have a time limit like quests, and be super difficult. This gives me a fun late game challenge, I can win faster but I have to get creative....maybe the building ambition basically requires a builder archetype to have a chance at, so I start changing up my heirs, or maybe it requires huge expenditures of resources (hitting on point 1 above). Aka I want to feel that finish the game is really special, instead of just clicking the box until done.

That's sort of what the Crowning Ambition is for. Super ambitious final ambition to top it all off. I've always though that ambitions open up the game for more rpg type ambitions that what is currently there. You know, like "Find the Fountain of Youth" type of ambitions. Rumours of a heroic sword with the sheath, pomel and blade spread around the World. You must HAVE the sword!

4) The competitive AI mode helps a little (I turn it on by default). I don't think it kicks in soon enough though. Its pretty easy to maintain peace with the AI even on high difficulties in the late game. The tributes they ask early game are a real cost...but by late game they are a pittance compared to what I have.... and so I am happy to bribe them to stay peaceful and quiet.

As well as "play to win" we've also added an AI advantage dial. So PTW is based around detecting when the player is nearing a win, and the AI's getting negative opinion buildup to push more hostile actions towards the player.
AI advantage is a per turn boost in yields from the very beginning, similar to what Civ traditionally does.

Again, difficulty plays massively into how peaceful the World is.

 

[Stalker0]

Are you upgrading units and having late game wars? Also, are you playing at high difficulties? I find at The Great with all the settings for AI dialed up my army becomes the resource sink.

I'm playing on the The Great or the one right below it (I play around with various settings). And yes generally most of my wars are late, because again its extremely easy to keep the AI on peace until the endgame trigger pushes them into war.

 

[Dale]

I'm playing on the The Great or the one right below it (I play around with various settings). And yes generally most of my wars are late, because again its extremely easy to keep the AI on peace until the endgame trigger pushes them into war.

You would be at the top of our player arc then because our analytics are showing around 50% of games are at The Just and The Good levels (fairly even split between the two). About 7% are played at The Great.

 

[Taefin]

AI advantage is a per turn boost in yields from the very beginning, similar to what Civ traditionally does.

Sorry if you already answered this over on Discord, but for the updated AI Adv does the reduced cost of projects and specialists reduce the civic cost of these or the food/stone cost?

 

[Stalker0]

Each time you fill the culture metre you get a top level culture reward event, plus also another VP. So I suppose there is still a point to culture at that stage. Maybe it's that it doesn't fill that hole completely?

Its basically a matter of degrees. The amount of culture you need for legendary 2, compared to the paltry benefits it provides you.... isn't worth investing in. If I get Legendary 2 I'll take it, but I would never super focus on culture to obtain it, there are much better benefits by investing in other things at that point.

 

[PiR]

That's sort of what the Crowning Ambition is for. Super ambitious final ambition to top it all off. I've always though that ambitions open up the game for more rpg type ambitions that what is currently there. You know, like "Find the Fountain of Youth" type of ambitions. Rumours of a heroic sword with the sheath, pomel and blade spread around the World. You must HAVE the sword!

Seems a good concept to me, yes.
Many games in other genres have an escalating difficulty that culminates towards "the final boss". Maybe there needs to be a final trial at the end. Like everyone ganging up against you.

I currently have a game where I feel I have won, but I'm only 8/10 ambitions + leading score (40 to 28 I think), and the turns start to be very long on my machine, I'm not sure how to even rush anything, wondering about giving up this one. Probably I'll choose the Peace with all ambitions and I'll give away everything to hostile AI to have them sign it! ^^