I'm still not sure how I feel about military victory though. Maybe we eventually need separate threads on the victory types. Maybe it seems too easy? Or not "grand" enough. And every once in a while I do like to just conquer the world. Not often, but it happens. Not sure if that's even possible in this game. I think you'd hit victory before that happens. I also wonder what happens if you conquer everyone in the exploration age. Does the game just end?
I'm still not sure how I feel about military victory though. Maybe we eventually need separate threads on the victory types. Maybe it seems too easy? Or not "grand" enough. And every once in a while I do like to just conquer the world. Not often, but it happens. Not sure if that's even possible in this game. I think you'd hit victory before that happens.
You do have to complete Operation Ivy in order to get the actual victory, so you can just keep conquering instead of investing production into winning.
I'm still not sure how I feel about military victory though. Maybe we eventually need separate threads on the victory types. Maybe it seems too easy? Or not "grand" enough. And every once in a while I do like to just conquer the world. Not often, but it happens. Not sure if that's even possible in this game. I think you'd hit victory before that happens. I also wonder what happens if you conquer everyone in the exploration age. Does the game just end?
It's better. Conquest has now claimed its rightful role as the best way to win any victory. Build a stronger base, weaken your enemies - but if you want to properly win you have to actively produce the victory project.
"Congratulations" - Sarcastically - There are no more lands to conquer , you win I guess with a score of idk... whatever.. 4..
Play the game right next time! I mean, c'mon ,we gave you ships with brimming with gold to plunder and you just ignored them and went straight for all the cities, and you never got to use railroads or see any aero-planes flying around.
You don’t get victory without specifically building the Victory project.
Also, I doubt conquering everything in Exploration is realistically doable.
Either you raze massive numbers of settlements …tanking your happiness because of enemy war support
Or you keep massive numbers of settlements…tanking your happiness because of exceeding the settlement limit.
Eventually yields drop (including $) and you can’t maintain your army
(and hopefully enough unhappiness leads to rebellions that will start to recover those civs, either during the age or during the crisis)
Nope, not for me. I don’t care that it’d be added as DLC. I like DLC and want the game to continue to receive support.
So it being DLC is not the problem. I don’t want a 4th age past modern because I don’t find the time period interesting at all. I want to play history, not current times.
So where is the problem? If they make a 4th age dlc, save your money. I think it will be a good addition after 1-2 years. Something new to play around, new mechanics, new civs, etc.
So where is the problem? If they make a 4th age dlc, save your money. I think it will be a good addition after 1-2 years. Something new to play around, new mechanics, new civs, etc.
Well, then more and more mechanics will rely on such an age, and there is of course the inherent opportunity cost that all the time and money spent on that 4th age could’ve been spent on the other content that I enjoy. Of course I’d rather the developers focus their efforts on things I would enjoy more.
Well, then more and more mechanics will rely on such an age, and there is of course the inherent opportunity cost that all the time and money spent on that 4th age could’ve been spent on the other content that I enjoy. Of course I’d rather the developers focus their efforts on things I would enjoy more.
The fanbase for Civ is very large and diverse. You may not enjoy it, but others will. I for one would enjoy a 4th age very much (especially since it won't just be tacked onto a very lengthy, tedious end game, but could be a customized, self-contained age). I don't enjoy conquering the world, but I'm not going to whine about how the developers are investing too much time and money on military when it isn't something I enjoy.
The fanbase for Civ is very large and diverse. You may not enjoy it, but others will. I for one would enjoy a 4th age very much (especially since it won't just be tacked onto a very lengthy, tedious end game, but could be a customized, self-contained age). I don't enjoy conquering the world, but I'm not going to whine about how the developers are investing too much time and money on military when it isn't something I enjoy.
I’m not “whining.” I’m explaining my rational preference that time, money, and effort spent developing the game focus on the things I myself want.
Of course the game means many things to many people, and satisfying this big tent audience is part of the challenge that Firaxis has. I will never begrudge people the features they want, and I hope the same courtesy is extended to me.
How is that “whining?”
I didn’t say “Hard pass. Canceling preorder. This game is ruined. Firaxis crossed a line. I’m a fan of decades and I hate the series now.”
I didn’t complain. I just responded to a question someone posed about my preference. I hope the game satisfies everyone at the end of the day.
I’m not “whining.” I’m explaining my rational preference that time, money, and effort spent developing the game focus on the things I myself want.
Of course the game means many things to many people, and satisfying this big tent audience is part of the challenge that Firaxis has. I will never begrudge people the features they want, and I hope the same courtesy is extended to me.
How is that “whining?”
I didn’t say “Hard pass. Canceling preorder. This game is ruined. Firaxis crossed a line. I’m a fan of decades and I hate the series now.”
I didn’t complain. I just responded to a question someone posed about my preference. I hope the game satisfies everyone at the end of the day.
The age structure may make that work well if a 4th age DLC also has new civs and mechanics for previous ages, you could still get it and play age 1-3 games with the updated age 1-3 mechanics and civs. (although you would probably want to wait for it to be on sale because it is not as valuable for you)
The age structure may make that work well if a 4th age DLC also has new civs and mechanics for previous ages, you could still get it and play age 1-3 games with the updated age 1-3 mechanics and civs. (although you would probably want to wait for it to be on sale because it is not as valuable for you)
I understand the structure of the game. I was just saying I’d like different content added to it rather than stuff following the modern era. I’ll be happy and play the game regardless though. Even though it’s not my first choice, if there’s a “4th age” it could end up being really great and fun.
I was surprised that at the start of the Modern Age there was still lots of area hidden in the fog and large tracts of uncontrolled land (now populated with new Independents).
It seems crazy to me that you wouldn't finish exploring the entire map in the Exploration Age . . . and as for leaving lands unclaimed? Perhaps the Settlement limits will lead to this result but I'll have to see how that plays out.
If all the land gets claimed in the Exploration Age does Modern no longer get Independents? Or are some nations actually losing cities during the age transition to 'free up space'. There were some hints that cities (or towns) could be lost during the transitions but I don't think we have any clear information.
I was surprised that at the start of the Modern Age there was still lots of area hidden in the fog and large tracts of uncontrolled land (now populated with new Independents).
It seems crazy to me that you wouldn't finish exploring the entire map in the Exploration Age . . . and as for leaving lands unclaimed? Perhaps the Settlement limits will lead to this result but I'll have to see how that plays out.
If all the land gets claimed in the Exploration Age does Modern no longer get Independents? Or are some nations actually losing cities during the age transition to 'free up space'. There were some hints that cities (or towns) could be lost during the transitions but I don't think we have any clear information.
Unexplored tiles are a result of player choice. The player didn't bother to reveal them previously.
The open space is likely the result of Exploration Age city-states disappearing during the transition to be replaced with Modern Independent People villages.
This is right up there with my lack of interest in current events for why I don't want a 4th age. While the grittier bits of history can definitely be found there, Civ as a franchise has always had a generally optimistic, upbeat take on history (except during Civ5's dreadfully serious goth phase). History has been decreasingly optimistic since Hiroshima, and I've watched optimism pretty much die over the course of the last few decades. I really don't want postmodern cynicism dragged into Civ.
I hear you and I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm sure many peoples at many points in history had such a view, but here we are. I can look at a regular civ game and tell myself we live in a hopeless, war filled genocidal world and let that affect me but I don't because I chose another perspective. Like you said, and I agree, Civ has generally had an upbeat take on history. I don't see them departing from that, even in a 4th age. It doesn't need to be all doom and gloom. My 2c.
Bombshells? Probably only Harriet Tubman as a leader.
Also of interest. Game ends around 1950 our-world (but with "content" beyond that date eventually). Every victory condition involves a project. Railroads allow 20-hexes of movement.
Nothing too crazy. Ideology is back, and each Ideology gets its own little Civic Tree. Archeology is back, but not very complicated. Railroads can teleport units. Aircraft carriers are a type of plane Commander. The thing that caused the most ruckus is the announcement of Harriet Tubman as an available leader.
Ideology!!! Ideology is back!!! I'm so happy. The other stuff sounds run of the mill. I don't see why Harriet Tubman is particularly controversial. I've read more comments about this idea that the game ends before Computers and Internet than about Harriet Tubman.
For the record I do think it's slightly sketchy for them to slate the Information / Future era so they can reserve it for a DLC.
I always found the 'now' times to be a neat bow to tie your game in, as we approach recognisable times, we start to look retrospectively, you know?
I'm also just skeptical they could make a good DLC out of it. What would the countries be? The same as modern or different? What would the mechanics be? Social media mechanic? Delving deep into international diplomacy and corporate stuff as we see nowadays? Cyberpunk? Global Warming again? I'm really not sure, and I'm curious to know what they plan exactly.
Ideology!!! Ideology is back!!! I'm so happy. The other stuff sounds run of the mill. I don't see why Harriet Tubman is particularly controversial. I've read more comments about this idea that the game ends before Computers and Internet than about Harriet Tubman.
For the record I do think it's slightly sketchy for them to slate the Information / Future era so they can reserve it for a DLC.
I always found the 'now' times to be a neat bow to tie your game in, as we approach recognisable times, we start to look retrospectively, you know?
I'm also just skeptical they could make a good DLC out of it. What would the countries be? The same as modern or different? What would the mechanics be? Social media mechanic? Delving deep into international diplomacy and corporate stuff as we see nowadays? Cyberpunk? Global Warming again? I'm really not sure, and I'm curious to know what they plan exactly.
The safer idea is that FXS just excluded the contemporary things because they don't really fit well within the Modern Age which cover the long period started from early industrialization. Yes, we can put all the internet, missile cruisers, GDR and XCOM like how the previous Civ games did, but I think the single Age from Cuirassiers to stealth aircrafts is generally too wide and can lose its focus. Especially when FXS want to describe the hopeful atmosphere which lasted until the 19c (mainly limited only within the Western world tho), the World Wars and the early Cold War can be the best narrative finale of the Modern Age as the total end of that atmosphere. In this case, the whole Cold War and the chaotic nowadays will be no more than just dull extension which already ruined. So I will say the last part of Modern may have to be removed or be the completely new Age at last.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.