- Joined
- Mar 5, 2017
- Messages
- 4,111
On the note of natural disasters, I quite like floods and volcanoes since they create some interesting risk/reward decision making. One can argue about Liang's damage negation promotion or dams and whether or not they make negating the risk too easy, but that's for another time.
Tornadoes, droughts, blizzards, and hurricanes on the other hand add very little to the game. I mean, if you're playing as Hojo and get incredibly lucky you can maaaaaybe get some use out of a hurricane? They're passive and random with no potential for benefit. The game just decides- "these units are going to die" or "these tiles are going to suck for X amount of turns" and you have to play with it. There's no decision making there. Luck in games (especially ones like Civ where everything should be influenced by the player) is really only permissible in my eyes if it makes people excited for a potential benefit. Then the worst you feel is disappointment.
If the emotions tied to the luck-based event are relief or fear, then I don't think it should be in the game.
Forest fires are meh. They're actually interactive (in the sense that the decision to chop or keep forests impacts them) but in most cases the optimal decision is really obvious.
All of the storms except tornados grant yield bonuses to tiles. Just wanted to clarify this because your post suggests that none of them do.
As for myself, I welcome the return of all natural disasters, even if they were only harmful. They make the map feel alive and more engaging.