teething problems

[Cronos]

It's turn 250 and instead of struggling against an inhospitable new world, my minions have created a utopian paradise of plenty. The mind flower has spawned and I am so far ahead the prospect of clicking end turn for the next 21 turns makes me feel a bit ill. Its not exactly an engaging prospect.

Seriously, this game has some balance issues. xeno cavalry are unstoppable (fully upgraded they are more powerful than siege worms... but they come in unlimited supply!), diplomacy is nonexistant and favours and resource trading are next to useless. I thought you could trade favours for military alliances, but it's for resources only and really I had so much xenomass i didnt know what to do with it. This game is not one of managing scarce resources. Spamming units is fine as there are no maintenance costs attached to them. I took over the europeans just because i was bored. I had around 18 units to their 3. I've played my first game on Gemini, but the game is still really just in sandbox mode. fine for a hit and giggle, but its not the strategic opus i was hoping for. I think i have almost +40 health and 12 cities, with all powerful trade routes powering my empire. The concept is there, but shame, its still a fair way from being a balanced product.

Also for some random reason 3 units spawned near my mindflower.... just to help me along? Potentially a bug so will attach a save.

 

[Sprenk]

Congratulations! I think Gemini must be too easy for you. You might be thinking of it as just two steps down from the toughest level, the equivalent of Emperor in BNW, but actually it's more like the Prince equivalent (just 3 steps up from the bottom).

 

[Camikaze]

The units spawning near your capital are probably from covert ops (assuming you were recruiting defectors). The notifications for that aren't brilliant.

 

[Cronos]

I have tried a second game at the highest level. Honestly this game has a a host of issues. I don't know where to start. Maybe giving affinity units a 500% upgrade is a good starting point. The mechanics work but the balance of the game is Broken broken broken. Terrible release. sacked my life is too short

 

[Cronos]

Alright my comments, such as the are, (welcome the debate if you disagree):

Ok in no particular order my comments are as follows (admitedly after 2 games):

- Other resources such as basalt. fungi etc have no impact on the game. i.e they are irrelevant to diplomacy;
- you cant trade favours for wars, the concept of a world war between factions will never happen. (In context this happened in civ 3, it's a massive backwards step here, especially with the new affinity system);
- there are no end game stats, no score, no leaderboard, no demographics no anything, it's as if the game designers wanted you to play and forget, which is what I wish I did to be honest;
- There is a quest that you destroy a station, by the request of station a. Once achieved you will only get 50% trade yield from station a, far less a yield than if you kept station b operational. geez just the first early game indication that the cost benefit analysis of the systems of this game have not been thought out;
- I had a quest to build a petochemical station in my capital. quest was contingent on petroleum being in my crosshairs. no petroleum, no chance of the quest being achieved. BROKEN. at least make it in my borders. why make a quest like that in a game with no chance of it being achieved? I am beginning to think what sort of game systems are these?
- woah so health is apparently a big deal? Maybe? There is some peanlty for low health. aparantly 10% penalty to science and culture when you're unhealthy. OK let's put that in perspectitve. Global science can be at 100 after 100 turns, give or take. Ok 10 beakers down for unhealthy city. Each city can support 2 trade routes. An external trade troude can generate 10 beakers plus energy easily (give or take). But every city can support 2 trade routes. err thats what I would call broken mechanics in nice terms...seriously did no one have a clue about cost benefit analysis in terms of game balance? Just capture a city and give it 2 trade routes as a puppet.
- Just on that you can dominate with -1000000000 health, smamming units once you get to affinity level 6/7 and their unique units. Health isn't a driver of this game;
- where do you want you trade routes to go?;
- Why build a manufactory? a mine is one less prod. but you suffer 2 less health with a manufactory. Why ever build a manufactory? Oh that's right, game balance is irrelevant and health doesn't matter;
- So I had a trade route to a station. Maybe I am wrong, but can you not engage in diplomacy to stop other civs attacking that station? Why not? Hello diplomacy where are you in this game?
- cant trade favours for alliances
- can only trade for science and energy;
- even when a civ is on its knees, they won't be able to trade you all their science for peace as you don't share a cooperation agreement ;
- please select a trade route:
- Why cant you boost health with resources? why cant you trade said resources? why has diplomacy gone so far backwards since 2008? Fungi etc should be tradable. fek why even bother with other civs, the aliens are a much stronger menace?;
- Ok so the balance of unique units is just plain One:
- normal units are strength 10 or so. unique units are strength 35 or so???? riiiiiight.
- take for example an overseer is an advanced supremacy unit, strength 26. takes 6 turns. same city a CNDR, advanced unique unit will take 5 turns but is strength 38. game balance anyone?

This game is just a race to unique modifiers. the unique units are so far out of kilter and the tech web means that even at the highest difficulty you can have tier xxxxxx units vs tier 1 of the ai;


Geez I have another 2 pages of notes after my first 2 games. It just goes on. You can't teach common sense and while the game and AI understands what's happening, they can't make up for the poor design and game balance that is utterly without a proper beta testing session. Playing this game is like reading a first draft of someone's novel, great conept but lacking the re-write. Seriously needs 3 more months of refinement. good luck all with it. I feel a bit disappointed I wasted my money. I should have known better. I love civ and I see that there is a future in fixing this, but this is basically a giant swiss ball of cheese lobbed down the hallway by firaxis, good luck if you're a mouse

 

[Fr33lanc3r]

Just a few thoughts:

• 
  As your health deficit increases in multiples of 10, so does the detriment. You must not have gone down that far if all you thought happens is -10% to culture and science.

• 
  If health doesn't matter, why not build manufactories everywhere? Your point is counter intuitive, further, manufactories have some techs, virtues, and quests that increase their production further past a basic mine.

• 
  Last I checked you couldn't assign trade routes in a puppet, so you'd have to anex the city to make up for the BPT loss, and that's more unhealth.

• 
  So you're also suggesting that wheat, stone, and sheep should be tradable in Civ:5?

• 
  Quests drive you to do certain things, as in any game where there are quests, it's not to hand you free loot.

• 
  CNDR really only sees that kind of strength if grouped properly, as with most Supremecy units, while its strength is a bit scary, they're kinda weak on their own.

• 
  Why not boost health with the items they give you (buildings, biowells, etc), or if you want tiles to boost it, mod the game and see how it plays out, there may be a balance issue they're trying to cover.

• 
  The station you destroy will be replaced (assuming there's stations left in the pool of ones available). So destroying it isn't necessarily a total net loss, just a temporary loss.

• 
  The main mechanic that I'll agree with you on is affinity teching units. But this would happen tech wise in Civ:5 as well, you'd tech past someone and be wrecking their Cav/Muskets with Stealth Bombers.

 

[Ace_Khal]

I agree there are some early balance issues, but not all of these. Diplomacy needs some work. The A.I. does not prioritize affinities - which are critical for your military - enough IMHO. I think health should hurt your population more through starvation or rebellion.

 

[Cromagnus]

Gemini feels like Warlord to me. Slightly easier than Prince.

 

[Minor Annoyance]

Just a few thoughts:

• 
  As your health deficit increases in multiples of 10, so does the detriment. You must not have gone down that far if all you thought happens is -10% to culture and science.

• 
  Last I checked you couldn't assign trade routes in a puppet, so you'd have to anex the city to make up for the BPT loss, and that's more unhealth.

• 
  
  I got down to 50 unhealth and did not find the penalties all that bad.
  
  Also, I don't think you did check if you could assign trade routes in a puppet because you most certainly can. I've done it.
  
  Although I'm not as angry as the OP there is much to improve on. That is undeniable.

 

[chumchu]

This failing is not just a balance issue, it undermines the central story of the game: colonising a strange unhospitable dangerous planet.

I played my first game at the second highest level without knowing what I was doing and I still roflstomped the AI. Is it even possible to lose this game? Has any decent player done so? Will the AI reach a victory in 200-250 turns? They do not put up much of a fight, but maybe they can suprise you. Can the Aliens destroy cities?

Trade routes are brokenly good and tediously micromanagable. The rate of return on a trade route is 3-5 turns whereas most buildings have a rate of return of 30-50 turns. There is no challenge in colonising this inhospitable planet, you just build a trade depot and two trade routes in every city and then it can more than sustain itself. They seriously need a redesign.

The tech web looks neat but it is too easy to get to the really strong things early, especially if you get the free technologies. If they had used the fourth orbital for more than one tech, it might work better.

 

[Cromagnus]

Also, I don't think you did check if you could assign trade routes in a puppet because you most certainly can. I've done it.

Only if that puppet has a trade depot.

 

[Minor Annoyance]

Only if that puppet has a trade depot.

Yes, but that's true of every city. Feed it enough production and it will build one eventually.

 

[Cromagnus]

Yes, but that's true of every city. Feed it enough production and it will build one eventually.

Sometimes "eventually" means 50 turns. The city manager may decide that a trade depot isn't a priority. Just like in Civ 5 where the city manager might go 100 turns and not build a library.

 

[Sprenk]

Sometimes "eventually" means 50 turns. The city manager may decide that a trade depot isn't a priority. Just like in Civ 5 where the city manager might go 100 turns and not build a library.

You see, that's the sort of improvement to the AI which the developers ought to be able implement fairly easily. It's now apparent to all of us that trade depots ought to be one of the first buildings in every new city--if not the very first. Same with Pioneering--it should be one of the very first techs, if not the first. If you'd just program in a sensible building and tech queue, the AI could do a lot better.

 

[Blicero]

Fully agree with the OPs main complaint. In addition to the balancing issues, the game lacks a soul. It's hard to differentiate all the items on the screen (terrains, resources, units, trade routes, borders). There is no feeling of threat, despair or challenge. And also it lacks seriously some TLC. Interface is horrible (key board short cuts anyone? Civilopedia with hyper links)? Come on, this is basically just a skin of Civ 5 and you couldn't even bring these over?

Shameful release. Wish I had my £30 back. I probably won't play this again, even if they made an attempt to fix it. And this is someone with 1100 hours logged into C5.

From another perspective, well done, Firaxis! Looks like you took on a big wad of revenue for pretty much no cost.