1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

This is not a game...

Discussion in 'Civ4Col - General Discussions' started by Falk, Oct 2, 2008.

  1. Falk

    Falk Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    Messages:
    334
    Location:
    Mainz, Germany
    ...it's merely an algorithm.

    The basic mechanics of this "game" are all broken. You can easily win on any difficulty level buying cannons in Europe and avoiding liberty bell production until a few turns before you declare Independence. It's a guaranteed win. The really annoying thing: Anything else just makes it harder to win. Build a huge colony. Build infrastructure, such as streets or farms. Build buildings. Make soldiers. Get Founding Fathers. Trade with the other factions. Make use of the education system. Get specialists of any kind. Build ships. Diplomacy. "Civics". You dont need it. It only makes it harder for you to win.

    A well-known game designer (I think his name was Sid something, Sid Meier or something like that) once said that a good game is (among other things) a series of interesting decisions. In Col2 you only have to make one decision and you make it before the game actually starts: What basic strategy do you choose? Buy cannons or produce them yourself? All the rest happens almost automatically. Just execute your plan and you are going to win. It's an algorithm, not a game.

    What is so bad about this is that playing Col2 in a more fun way - such as building things - is a huge disadvantage. Actually, for newbies or on higher difficulty levels it is impossible or very close to impossible to beat the king without using an exploit of some sort.

    If I want a game where one can build up a nice colony in the New World, I'd rather play a Civ4:BtS Terra map.

    Colonization II is not worth 30€ and not even 30$. And since the very basic mechanics are broken, some patches wont do. Just hope that Sid Meier realizes what a shame this "game" is and makes Firaxis fix it.
     
  2. KebraNoir

    KebraNoir This is not a game!

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    Messages:
    42
    Well thank god it can be modded towards a "real" game then :)
     
  3. Falk

    Falk Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    Messages:
    334
    Location:
    Mainz, Germany
    Yeah, hopefully.

    I just realized my opening post is kind of aggressive. I probably should be more optimistic. But right now I'm angry to have spent 30€ for a non-game. :)
     
  4. trytogrowupkid

    trytogrowupkid Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Messages:
    19
    man i disagree whole heartedly, ive been really enjoying this
     
  5. 1EyedKing

    1EyedKing Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    36
    Location:
    In the land of the blind
    I'm with Falk here. The game is seriously broken.
     
  6. Shog-goth

    Shog-goth Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    16
    I respect your point of view but, really, I'd like to know how you enjoy it. Dissatisfaction bring me reinstalling the first chapter only to found again how it's remain a great game still today.

    Luckily this wasn't the SMAC remake...
     
  7. Falk

    Falk Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    Messages:
    334
    Location:
    Mainz, Germany
    I guess Col2 can be fun if you just ignore the whole Independence stuff and play it like a normal game of Civ. Found colonies, found a New World empire. One still has to deal with the awful AI, but I see how it could possibly be fun.

    However, Civ4 terra maps (play as Joao) do the same thing, just many times better.

    Oh yes! I've never played Col1, so I have no nostalgic feelings that could have been hurt, but AC still is one of my all-time favourites.
     
  8. drank

    drank Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    Messages:
    5
    After this and SM Railroads, I'm not sure I want a SMAC remake anymore!
     
  9. Shog-goth

    Shog-goth Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    16
    Well, I can't really say you're wrong...
     
  10. DarthVeda

    DarthVeda Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2002
    Messages:
    131
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    The fundamental REF growth mechanic is broken. The punishment for actually playing the game is too high, and the rewards for ignoring the mechanic too great.
     
  11. hecubus

    hecubus General Specific

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    267
    Location:
    Philly-ish
    I haven't been playing this very long, haven't even won a game yet, but I see where you're coming from. I've mostly been sandboxing and very much enjoying that part of it, but it's become clear that it's a disadvantage in terms of actually winning the game.

    I think the fact that there's only one victory condition (declare independence), and only one route to it (win a war) is the problem, especially for those of us accustomed to Civ's many paths to victory.

    There are some mechanics to the game that I like, particularly the trade and resource micromanagement, and I wouldn't mind seeing some aspects of this game make it into Civ5. I also think there is good mod and scenario potential, overall I like the game and I'm having fun playing it but I don't see it having the same longevity as Civ has had for me.
     
  12. Sorceresss

    Sorceresss Witch

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Messages:
    532
    Location:
    Montreal (Canada)
    That's my intent. I don't care much for their independence-in-300-turns objective. I do not play that type of game to « win », anyway.

    Since I'm new to this game, I have a few related questions. In a custom scenario, you can select (or not select) 1 to 3 victory objectives.

    Q1 > What does selecting the "Time" victory option do ? (I don't understand, since the 300-turn limit, at normal speed, seems to be a hard-coded limit.)

    Q2 > What happens if you do not select any of the 3 objectives ? Does the game become a totally free « sandbox » -- with no end & no victor ?
     
  13. unclethrill

    unclethrill Why am I up right now?

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,237
    Location:
    Germany
    A1> A time victory means that you have a higher score than all the AI players at the end of all the turns (300 at normal speed). If you choose independence and time as vic conditions, then you can win by score at the end so long as none of the AI win independence before the end.
     
  14. patrickkrebs

    patrickkrebs Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    188
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    I love SMs Railroads.
    I love colonization.
    I love it all.

    You guys are way to hard on this game. It's pretty awesome for what it is, and stop biting the hand the feeds you. NOBODY else is making games like these; so shut up and let them keep making them. Or you stop buying them yourselves.

    But you wont do that will you, you'll keep buying them and buying them because they're awesome.
     
  15. TechnoMule

    TechnoMule Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    Messages:
    86
    I absolutely love this game. Sure, it could be a lot better. But it will be, once the patches and mods start rolling.
    I've always played Colonization as more of a sandbox I guess. I like playing around exploring new lands and setting up supply routes of resources.
    I'm not a fan of this rush-to-independence thing either.

    patrick, I don't think we should cut them any slack for releasing an obviously unfinished product. This is the only industry where a company can give you a half finished product and then go back and fix it later on (if they want). It's like buying a car without wheels and having to wait a month for the next upgrade.
    Finish your damn product before selling it to me.
    This game can and will be awesome. It just needs to be finished.
     
  16. mastrude

    mastrude Paraclete of Kaborka

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    329
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Santa Cruz, ca
    Interesting! I'm skeptical but I see where Falk may be coming from. It's definitely true that a lot of the stuff you need to build a successful independent nation can be skipped. But you have to have enough gold, I would think, to buy the cannon. And you have to have enough exports to make the gold. And your colonists have to eat while they're making cigars. And you need as many people as possible, don't you? So which parts of colonial management are dispensible? For example, you can definitely dispense with building a dock, let alone a drydock, unless your (hopefully one) seaside community has a rich fishing square. But how 'bout roads? They're cheap and quick to build.

    If you just create export workers and buy cannons, can you dispense with attracting future professional or citizen-soldiers almost entirely?

    Also see my thread "One way to Win"
     
  17. obsolete

    obsolete Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    6,201
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    The original poster is wrong. This surely is a game. The problem is there was a mistake when the name of the game went to the presses. Originally, it was titled "De-Colonization". However, the first part seems to have been trunicated by the typesetter :p

    I'm sure Firaxis regrets any harm this little mistake may have caused.
     
  18. mastrude

    mastrude Paraclete of Kaborka

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    329
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Santa Cruz, ca
    It's true living in peace with the natives is part of the winning strategy. But what'cha mean? I catch irony, but I'm not sure where it's directed.

    I can see why someone would call the game "De-Feminization", by the way. Women are almost invisible.

    What do I have to do to become a deity like obsolete?
     
  19. Falk

    Falk Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    Messages:
    334
    Location:
    Mainz, Germany
    @mastrude
    Unfortunately you're wrong. You only need silver - this is enough to win the game. If there's no silver go for fur - there's plenty on all maps. Make clothes and sell them to Europe. You only need some random workers for that, one or two expert fur trader(s) and an expert fishermen. Sell your tools/weapons/horses (if you happen to get any) to the natives, visit their villages and the ruins. That will be absolutely enough, no need to produce anything else. That's not what I call an economy.

    Last game I won without producing a single hammer. I simply bought everything, the few buildings I wanted as well as cannons and additional settlers. I got all that gold almost entirely by selling clothes. Also got Peter Minuit (the only important Founding Father).

    On a German forum someone took this approach to the extreme. He easily won on revolutionary and
    - built exactly 0 buildings
    - bought 0 settlers/specialists (except for statesmen) and trained none in native villages
    - got 0 new ships
    - didnt use the pioneer once
    - only bought cannons and goods to trade with natives
    - built only 3 cities and gifted 2 of them to his neighbours before declaring independence
    - deleted most of his men before the WoI

    Won in 58 minutes in 1607.

    Now of course you dont have to play it like that. But the point I'm trying to get at is that every variation to this basic plan is bad for you, is a disadvantage. The "game" doesnt reward sandboxing, doesnt reward expansion, doesnt reward building an economy, doesnt reward diplomacy, hell, it doesnt even reward colonization!
     
  20. DrewBledsoe

    DrewBledsoe Veteran QB

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,634
    Location:
    Cheering For Mr Sanchez
    Just post a lot on here ;)
     

Share This Page