Seraiel
If you want anything from I please ask in German
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2011
- Messages
- 8,165
I begin to hate smaller maps and normal speed. There are things that make larger maps more difficult, but then it's so difficult to play with less cities i. e., because every city just matters so much. One unit can make a decisive difference in a war effort, but which city should build it, if one only has 10 to choose of, 6 being too far away, 1 being weak, 1 being a Shrine-city building a Bank and the last one being the HE-city, that desperately needs a Cathedral, because the smaller the map, the less different resources are available, making Healthiness and Happiness a really difficult issue.
Then the less trade possibilities. You all know that its important to isolate a target one plans on attacking, but how to do this, if there are only a handful of opponents left, and when the target is the only civ having Astro?
Worst are all the scaling problems. It's not much to be 1T late on a tech that needs 10T to research, but being 1T late on a tech that only needs 3 or 4T? If it's a "race-tech" ?
I don't know if this is understandable, but I just plain hate how fast games progress on Normal or even Quick, especially with the games entering the later eras. They just should have made all end-game techs multiple times more expensive, where's the sense in techs obsoleting within a small number of turns, or even with the ridiculous scenario of "1-turning techs like Satellites, Composites or Superconductors" . There just happens "too much" every turn, and every move is too important. 1T = 1h? I'm at 1T in 3h atm. !
HoF dates imho tell too, that the faster speeds aren't highly contested, otherwise, why would the victory dates be so bad? And then there are those super-games like the 1140 AD Conquest on Huge Normal by kovacsflo, that show, that it's possible to create a really amazing game. I worship games like that, but all they tell me, is that a really good game can be a lot better than most of the games that are on the frontpage, which only raises the expectation I have at my current game. And then so ridiculous, what can be achieved with less effort, like going for a cheesy OCC-PA-Spacerace, finishing in the 15xx. Best example are all those diplo-games, where finishing in 12xx AD is possible without problems with OCC, while only finishing like 100y earlier requires to make a major effort, and play a game that takes 10 times of the time that an OCC game would have taken. How is that fair?
Then the less trade possibilities. You all know that its important to isolate a target one plans on attacking, but how to do this, if there are only a handful of opponents left, and when the target is the only civ having Astro?
Worst are all the scaling problems. It's not much to be 1T late on a tech that needs 10T to research, but being 1T late on a tech that only needs 3 or 4T? If it's a "race-tech" ?
I don't know if this is understandable, but I just plain hate how fast games progress on Normal or even Quick, especially with the games entering the later eras. They just should have made all end-game techs multiple times more expensive, where's the sense in techs obsoleting within a small number of turns, or even with the ridiculous scenario of "1-turning techs like Satellites, Composites or Superconductors" . There just happens "too much" every turn, and every move is too important. 1T = 1h? I'm at 1T in 3h atm. !
HoF dates imho tell too, that the faster speeds aren't highly contested, otherwise, why would the victory dates be so bad? And then there are those super-games like the 1140 AD Conquest on Huge Normal by kovacsflo, that show, that it's possible to create a really amazing game. I worship games like that, but all they tell me, is that a really good game can be a lot better than most of the games that are on the frontpage, which only raises the expectation I have at my current game. And then so ridiculous, what can be achieved with less effort, like going for a cheesy OCC-PA-Spacerace, finishing in the 15xx. Best example are all those diplo-games, where finishing in 12xx AD is possible without problems with OCC, while only finishing like 100y earlier requires to make a major effort, and play a game that takes 10 times of the time that an OCC game would have taken. How is that fair?
Firaxis. I think OCC sets an appropriate bar, but we all know it's beatable every time with non-OCC if you want to. But yea, there are only so many turns you can shave off on quick speed, so don't expect to beat it by much.
and not 
.
.
. This will probably influence my choice of opponents in future. If one chooses strong techers for Spaceraces like Mansa + Gandhi + Asoka + Zara, faster finisih dates should be possible, though they're probably a nightmare to play, but hey, "before fame, there comes suffering" 
:
)
