Spring Patch Info

[Trav'ling Canuck]

We can’t tell if there is any delay right? Well, we do know more after 19:00 CET

More speculation on my part, that the patch was intended to go live last week and the video appeared briefly before being taken down because it was autoqueued to match the expected patch release prior to delay, rather than someone hitting the "upload" button by mistake.

I could be completely off base. Regardless, Firaxis' isn't "late" or "delayed" because they haven't promised a release time. It will presumably come when they have it ready.

 

[Tech Osen]

How hard can it be to give some sort of ETA? Finding it a bit inconsiderate.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

How hard can it be to give some sort of ETA? Finding it a bit inconsiderate.

We as a community have a documented history of asking for ETA, then getting absolutely off the rails and ugly if something happens and it's a few days late. I don't blame them one bit.

 

[Aristos]

We as a community have a documented history of asking for ETA, then getting absolutely off the rails and ugly if something happens and it's a few days late. I don't blame them one bit.

True (that's why, i.e. Paradox never ever gives a date). But then again, you don't release teasers saying "soon" either... consistency is the key.

 

[Tech Osen]

We as a community have a documented history of asking for ETA, then getting absolutely off the rails and ugly if something happens and it's a few days late. I don't blame them one bit.

Well, people need to learn what the E stands for then. A rough estimate of this week or next week should be doable.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Well, people need to learn what the E stands for then. A rough estimate of this week or next week should be doable.

I agree. I think we can assume "soonish" at this point though

 

[Aristos]

Well, people need to learn what the E stands for then. A rough estimate of this week or next week should be doable.

Welcome to the Instant Gratification Era...

 

[Leathaface]

Past 1PM EST, still no downloads on Steam.

 

[Leyrann]

We as a community have a documented history of asking for ETA, then getting absolutely off the rails and ugly if something happens and it's a few days late. I don't blame them one bit.

Surely not CivFanatics right?

As for steam and reddit... Well, they should just either get moderation, or ignore them completely. Other developers, like Riot Games, show that giving ETAs can work very well, and let's be real, League of Legends isn't known for having a nice, well-educated community.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Surely not CivFanatics right?

As for steam and reddit... Well, they should just either get moderation, or ignore them completely. Other developers, like Riot Games, show that giving ETAs can work very well, and let's be real, League of Legends isn't known for having a nice, well-educated community.

I've seen CFC get pretty unruly towards devs, but not as bad as forums that allow cursing and have lax moderation.

 

[Ever Adrift]

I've seen CFC get pretty unruly towards devs, but not as bad as forums that allow cursing and have lax moderation.

I still play WoW casually from time to time. Rarely I'll poke my head into the major WoW forums to see whats in development... if you want to talk about bad forums with lax moderation...

 

[Disgustipated]

Well firstly, for that to work, a lot of fundamental concepts have to be changed.

1) The AI cannot declare war simply because it wants to, and should declare war when the relationship is bad (similar to BNW system) of course, we can separate the AI into "good" and "evil" AI personalities as in BNW too... (Theodora VS Attilla for example) with evil AI being harder to befriend to begin with. AI should follow their personalities rather than just be total jerks whenever they feel like it so you can at least predict what they are going to do (for people who want that, there's then random personalities option in civ V... I don't mind having a few backstabbing villains in the cast, but let it at least be obvious who's who). I've been betrayed by Tomyris, of all people, too many times more than I can count for example, had high level alliance, then suddenly won't accept friendship despite being at +50 or so... dozens of turns later, she declares surprise war. Same with Gandhi who simply accepts a joint war and refuses friendship after eras of alliance.


2) War must be VERY punishing, especially to the offender (give defender more advantages) and at best it should be a lose-lose situation for the aggressor (when he declares war he achieves his goal of slowing down/destroying his target--this should come at a cost of giving other, uninvolved AI chances to overtake him); the happiness penalty system and courthouses, as well as buildings breaking in BNW does this fine... war should not have a separate side reward to it aside from inflicting a minus to the target civ who you feel is winning. Encourage overtaking your opponent by outrunning them rather than just kicking them in the shins.

3) Warmonger penalty must be like in BNW. You are to become public enemy number 1. Let every surprise war after ancient era trigger an emergency. Make AI offer HORRIBLE trades when they hate you (makes no sense that having -100 from warmonger penalty, they still want one of my luxes for 20 gpt... while being allied with them they offer only 5 gpt)

4) Bring back non-war ways of retaliating (world congress and UN in BNW).

In terms of diplomacy, BNW does it way better. Civ VI has always been a joke with this regard that I do not bother with diplomacy other than the super early game as an option not to get instantly killed.

Sounds like you want to turn this game into Brave New World. I disagree with almost everything except #1. I'm not sure why they went away from aggressive and passive civs. As it is, any civ at any time can declare war on you. There are no good guys or "bad" guys. Makes me wonder if they did this for politically correct reasons and didn't want to offend any groups of people. It's just strange having leaders like Shaka and Genghis be nice guys, and they usually are in my games. #1 I completely agree with.
I have my hunches about political correctness in this game, and I feel it's why they won't make certain leaders like Shaka aggressive. I also feel it's why American and England suck in this game.


#2 just isn't realistic from a historical point of view. Wars were very lucrative for everyone all the way up until WW1 and WW2, it was only then it became too economically draining to wage offensive war. Empires like Rome and many other benefited greatly from war, it didn't hurt them at all. War should only become punishing in the atomic era in my honest opinion. Even in the atomic and information eras, you should still be able to wage war if you have objectives you can quickly attain, but long drawn out wars should be very punishing both on offense and defense.

I hated #3 in BNW. It forced me to play the game peacefully. Once I had an embargo on me and my economy was falling apart and units disbanding. War was just too punishing in that game, which made playing the warmongering civs less fun. I felt like the game was telling me to play a certain way, but why give us warmongering civs if you don't want us to use them? Pass on this one.

#4 I'm okay with after a certain point (the atomic age I mentioned a couple paragraphs up).

 

[shaglio]

I still play WoW casually from time to time. Rarely I'll poke my head into the major WoW forums to see whats in development... if you want to talk about bad forums with lax moderation...

Me: What's the best rotation for my Unholy Death Knight?
Troll 1: Why are you playing Unholy? You should be playing Frost!
Troll 2: DEATH NIGHTS SUXXX!!!! PLAY A ROUGE INSTED!!!!!!
Me: Uh, thanks, those were extremely helpful responses

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Me: What's the best rotation for my Unholy Death Knight?
Troll 1: Why are you playing Unholy? You should be playing Frost!
Troll 2: DEATH NIGHTS SUXXX!!!! PLAY A ROUGE INSTED!!!!!!
Me: Uh, thanks, those were extremely helpful responses

I got a very similar response from Steam about flying bombers in War Thunder.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Well firstly, for that to work, a lot of fundamental concepts have to be changed.

1) The AI cannot declare war simply because it wants to, and should declare war when the relationship is bad (similar to BNW system) of course, we can separate the AI into "good" and "evil" AI personalities as in BNW too... (Theodora VS Attilla for example) with evil AI being harder to befriend to begin with. AI should follow their personalities rather than just be total jerks whenever they feel like it so you can at least predict what they are going to do (for people who want that, there's then random personalities option in civ V... I don't mind having a few backstabbing villains in the cast, but let it at least be obvious who's who). I've been betrayed by Tomyris, of all people, too many times more than I can count for example, had high level alliance, then suddenly won't accept friendship despite being at +50 or so... dozens of turns later, she declares surprise war. Same with Gandhi who simply accepts a joint war and refuses friendship after eras of alliance.

2) War must be VERY punishing, especially to the offender (give defender more advantages) and at best it should be a lose-lose situation for the aggressor (when he declares war he achieves his goal of slowing down/destroying his target--this should come at a cost of giving other, uninvolved AI chances to overtake him); the happiness penalty system and courthouses, as well as buildings breaking in BNW does this fine... war should not have a separate side reward to it aside from inflicting a minus to the target civ who you feel is winning. Encourage overtaking your opponent by outrunning them rather than just kicking them in the shins.

3) Warmonger penalty must be like in BNW. You are to become public enemy number 1. Let every surprise war after ancient era trigger an emergency. Make AI offer HORRIBLE trades when they hate you (makes no sense that having -100 from warmonger penalty, they still want one of my luxes for 20 gpt... while being allied with them they offer only 5 gpt)

4) Bring back non-war ways of retaliating (world congress and UN in BNW).

In terms of diplomacy, BNW does it way better. Civ VI has always been a joke with this regard that I do not bother with diplomacy other than the super early game as an option not to get instantly killed.

I agree with everything except number 3. R&F fixed warmongering penalties for the most part. If we made them worse, it'd become like Vanilla again where diplomacy is just ignored because you get denounced even for coming to people's aid and then the game becomes solitaire.

Of course, Civ 4's diplomacy does most of this and more better than BnW would, except the World Congress.

 

[Xur]

I appreciate communication, but Firaxis isn't communicating; they are announcing. This seems more like the trend of teasers for trailers for movies. We just get teasers for patchnotes for a patch for a game. Teasers annoy me...

 

[RohirrimElf]

I appreciate communication, but Firaxis isn't communicating; they are announcing. This seems more like the trend of teasers for trailers for movies. We just get teasers for patchnotes for a patch for a game. Teasers annoy me...

To firaxis defense. If you follow the developers on twitter and be constructive (dont have facebook but should be same). Sarah/Ed/Pete. You can communicate with them easely. I’ve scored new information multiple times about content R&F and once date next live stream unannouncement. It is true that they are super sensitive on releasing fixed dates. And a lot of new info is very scripted.

I’m not that angry about knowing exact dates as i’m sure the devs cant be certain if they would make it themselves. And thus get burned. What i’m worried about is them not really communicating about major flaws of the game. Just visit the comment section on social media and the same issues keep repeating themselves since launch.

 

[Disgustipated]

Most likely they've run into some issue delayed the patch. It's one reason why giving hard dates isn't that great, and I'm okay with that. I don't need hard dates. But it is nice to have a general approximation so we know if to start a new game or not. This patch doesn't seem to have enough "fixes" to get all riled up about either way. It'll come when it comes.

 

[historix69]

They know how critical fanatics are with updates to Civ so they probably want to run some more tests.
Maybe play testing England to see if they still can stand the test of time with the new changes ...

 

[timmychompchomp]

Most likely they've run into some issue delayed the patch. It's one reason why giving hard dates isn't that great, and I'm okay with that. I don't need hard dates. But it is nice to have a general approximation so we know if to start a new game or not. This patch doesn't seem to have enough "fixes" to get all riled up about either way. It'll come when it comes.

I echo the same sentiments. I ve been waiting to start a new game since Thursday, unfortunately my latest game ended Wednesday night, as luck would have it. I would start a game, but It takes me about a week or two to finish a game due to schedule. Not a big fan of scenarios. Wish we had something to go off.