I would have liked a question to the effect of "Would you prefer another expansion to Beyond Earth or Civ 6?" I'm enjoying BE, but I don't think it's yet at the place CiV is after BNW, and I'd like it to get there simply because of how different BE feels from the rest of the franchise. My main Civ-related feedback I would want to give to Firaxis/2K is "I'm not done with BE and want it more fleshed out and balanced."
I would have liked a question to the effect of "Would you prefer another expansion to Beyond Earth or Civ 6?" I'm enjoying BE, but I don't think it's yet at the place CiV is after BNW, and I'd like it to get there simply because of how different BE feels from the rest of the franchise. My main Civ-related feedback I would want to give to Firaxis/2K is "I'm not done with BE and want it more fleshed out and balanced."
This survey is not about which product you want. Firaxis is going to make the product Firaxis wants to make. This survey is for them to figure out how to sell that product to you.
These questions are almost certainly being asked by the 2K marketing team, not the Firaxis development team. I think you're barking up the wrong division.
From what I understand, Firaxis has a particular company culture. They aren't active on social media, they don't talk about a game until they have to, they don't ask for people's opinions, and they don't do public testing. They're old school, and that's not entirely a bad thing.
Crap! I completely forgot about that. I thought 2K and Firaxis are working together...I did slap 2K's faces utterly. Ouch.
But,the way you explain Firaxis that way. It makes me worry about them though. I don't know. But I think the developers could change the way they do a bit.
The only thing that really needs to be said is BRING BACK MUPT or a serious overhaul of how the game is structured (if we are talking about a potential Civ6, complete overhaul of BE, or a new TBS). Only then can you start fixing many of the underlying mechanical issues with BE, and with that balance issues can be fixed.
1UPT has proven to be a dismal failure and is a large reason why Civ5 lost many long-time fans, including myself. I know that I will NOT purchase another TBS that utilizes 1UPT, at least not without serious qualifications, which are unlikely to apply to a game like Civilization or BE.
Whoever keeps insisting 1UPT isn't broken needs to be overruled.
I see many claims here, and yet I see no support whatsoever for said claims. I would completely disagree with you here. 1upt added a tactical element to the game that makes civ V far more interesting. Is it well implemented? Hell no. Does it work well enough?yeah, it is playable. Do I want it to be improved? Definitely. This isn't good enough.
I see many claims here, and yet I see no support whatsoever for said claims. I would completely disagree with you here. 1upt added a tactical element to the game that makes civ V far more interesting. Is it well implemented? Hell no. Does it work well enough?yeah, it is playable. Do I want it to be improved? Definitely. This isn't good enough.
Just to add my own voice to this, I think 1UPT is one of the best features of Civ V. Though it's true that the AI does a poor job of playing with the 1UPT system, this is not the fatal problem of Civ V or Civ BE. 1UPT is the reason that I continue to play Civ V instead of Civ IV. There's just no going back. Even a poorly-AI directed 1UPT AI is far more entertaining (for me) than an "advanced" Civ IV stack AI. Sorry.
Not everyone feels the same, I'm sure. But the market has spoken.
The significant problems with Beyond Earth have NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the 1UPT system. If you haven't moved on from that beef, I feel really sorry for you. If you still really and truly believe that 1UPT was a failure, then I'm afraid you're on the wrong side of history.
Just to add my own voice to this, I think 1UPT is one of the best features of Civ V. Though it's true that the AI does a poor job of playing with the 1UPT system, this is not the fatal problem of Civ V or Civ BE. 1UPT is the reason that I continue to play Civ V instead of Civ IV. There's just no going back. Even a poorly-AI directed 1UPT AI is far more entertaining (for me) than an "advanced" Civ IV stack AI. Sorry.
Not everyone feels the same, I'm sure. But the market has spoken.
Just to add my own voice to this, I think 1UPT is one of the best features of Civ V. Though it's true that the AI does a poor job of playing with the 1UPT system, this is not the fatal problem of Civ V or Civ BE. 1UPT is the reason that I continue to play Civ V instead of Civ IV. There's just no going back. Even a poorly-AI directed 1UPT AI is far more entertaining (for me) than an "advanced" Civ IV stack AI. Sorry.
I've recently gone back to playing a lot of civ4 because civ5 is just too slow and games take too long even on standard. There is a lot about civ4 that I prefer over civ5: faster pace game, early rapid expansion, national borders, civics. But the stacks of doom completely ruin it. So, I do think that 1upt is the right idea but it still needs improvement.
I've recently gone back to playing a lot of civ4 because civ5 is just too slow and games take too long even on standard. There is a lot about civ4 that I prefer over civ5: faster pace game, early rapid expansion, national borders, civics. But the stacks of doom completely ruin it. So, I do think that 1upt is the right idea but it still needs improvement.
Yes, I played Pandora for a little bit. I hate Stacks of Doom. I also found the game to be too militaristic. But I did really like how Pandora does city management.
I've recently gone back to playing a lot of civ4 because civ5 is just too slow and games take too long even on standard. There is a lot about civ4 that I prefer over civ5: faster pace game, early rapid expansion, national borders, civics. But the stacks of doom completely ruin it. So, I do think that 1upt is the right idea but it still needs improvement.
I'm playing Civ Rev right now. In Civ 1, 2, 3, AC, SMAC, and Call to Power (and Civ Rev), the SoDs aren't bad because they're not actually SoDs. The most you can manage for most of the game is maybe 4 to 10 units on a tile. The resulting combat mechanic is uber simple, but it wasn't ugly and unmanageable. It's Civ IV's Draft mechanic that makes it unwieldy - because the Draft allows you to summon something like 30 units out of thin air relatively painlessly, and the rest of the game had to be rebalanced to make that not completely bonkers.
Which means that we now have upwards of 100 unit Stacks of Doom, which is just insane. The system just wasn't made for that kind of thing. In Civ Rev, you only have a few units. If you had three or more, you consolidated them into a Army because that was better, so even if you could make 30 units, you consolidated them into something like 10, which is fine.
It's not the most interesting of combat systems, but it's fine.
Civ BERT's systems allow for a far more robust combat system almost immediately. 1UPT means that anything over something like 10 conventional ground units is usually a waste unless you're really blanketing the planet in units, so that's a natural bottleneck to those proceedings. War Score is an even stronger incentive not to overdo the units. All you need to do is kill a lot of AI units and maybe capture a city or two - if you're Brasilia that's enough War Score to allow you to carve out the heart of any rival Civ in peace negotiations, after which your units are useless, so it pays not to make too many.
The idea of air units adding to the system is a thoughtful implementation here as well. Putting a hard limit on Air Units in a city or Carrier means you can't just stack them indefinitely in one spot for overwhelming firepower.
I truly think that BERT gets a really hard time from a lot of people who simply disagree with having new things - an impression repeatedly reinforced by the large and ever-repeating number of people and requests on this forum for Firaxis to just junk the new ideas and return to the old ones!
I truly think that BERT gets a really hard time from a lot of people who simply disagree with having new things - an impression repeatedly reinforced by the large and ever-repeating number of people and requests on this forum for Firaxis to just junk the new ideas and return to the old ones!
A lot of the complaining has to do with the fact that forums attract a certain kind of game player, who is probably not representative of the greater game buying/playing market base.
1UPT is the problem, or at least the cause of a lot of problems in the game. Sullla's analysis of Civ5's launch problems was spot-on, and basically none of that has changed.
The defense of 1UPT sounds an awful lot like shilling when it comes up.
In MP matches, a carpet of doom is pretty common, and brute-forcing for a win is still the order of the day. It is just an infinitely more annoying process, due to ranged unit spam and the bad-RTS mechanics dictating very limited tactics. There is no real choice to be made, just have lots of ranged units. BE does little better at this. Even with SP and sequential turns, armies are pretty much ranged spam and sometimes orbitals, due to the tactical failure that is 1UPT.
Those are still just problems caused by bad implementation, not by the general concept of 1upt. It's not an argument to just repeat "Currently it's like this and that!" when people have already told you that yes, it's not implemented in a good way, but that's all you ever do and ever have done, even in past threads after people have given you their opinions on how to make the system better.
Your posts read as if your brain is stuck on auto-repeat.
I'm sure those questions are there to help them decide if they need strong artwork for the cover of the physical copies, or if people are more interested in the system requirements anyway.
Based on the answers given the cover for Civ6 might look a lot different than the cover for Civilization 5:
Spoiler:
(Proper grammar not yet included)
As you can see, resources have been taken from the Artwork Team and put into new staff that then developed modern benchmark-software to create the most accurate system requirements that have ever been printed onto a game cover with a font size bigger than 35 ever.
And all that is needed for this to make sense is to stop thinking rationally for a few minutes or so.
Strangely I can't seem to rank "press reviews" below "how many pretty colours are in the logo" or "how many people named Steve were on the development team" as far as things I couldn't care less about on that one list. Strange those options were missing.
Seriously, !*@# press reviews, who still reads that tripe?
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.
