Why the pacing is NOT bad

[EmperorNapoleon]

If the turns were bigger and the tech was slower, you'd be able to build all the improvements etc ala Civ3.

I had trouble getting over it too, but now I've learned to prioritize.

 

[Randle]

If the turns were bigger and the tech was slower, you'd be able to build all the improvements etc ala Civ3.

I had trouble getting over it too, but now I've learned to prioritize.

You could always play on epic.

 

[shackleton]

I don't think it's a question of the pacing being bad, per se. Fast games have their place, particularly regarding multiplayer.

Rather, it's that all the game speeds appear (to me) to be fast. The epic speed fails to provide a proper epic speed because of the effects of later eras. Possibly this is *because* you end up building many of the city improvements.

Either way, I don't think anyone's saying that the faster speeds should be removed; rather that an additional, slower speed (or epic speed which adjusts tech costs by era) should be included.

 

[mr foolhardy]

I modded in my own game speed, "super-epic", but the problem I had was that I often found myself in the position where I had nothing to build but more military units. Now I have to go in and create more different kinds of buildings to construct...this game is slowly taking over my life.

 

[Pyrion]

Play epic, and shoot for universal suffrage. I always manage to rush-build everything near the end, and then I just end up with a massive military buildup.

 

[GamesMan]

The problem is, when I tried Epic, the first 2/3rds of the game were slow and boring, the last 3rd was about right. . .

 

[Dairuka]

It feels fast to people, because they're still used to the previous Civilization games.

It's natural for humans to fear and hate change.

 

[ranathari]

I disagree with you there, Dairuka. It's just not right that you should be able to research the tech for a Rifleman and then by the time you've built one, be able to upgrade him to a Mech Inf. That's just bad game balance to me. I've used the tech-time adjusting tool (it's somewhere in the modding forum) to exponentially increase the time it takes to research as you move up the tree and the game plays so much better for me. I don't normally get to build tanks and other modern units until about 1990AD which forces me to play tactically.

 

[Chopperhead]

I disagree with you there, Dairuka. It's just not right that you should be able to research the tech for a Rifleman and then by the time you've built one, be able to upgrade him to a Mech Inf. That's just bad game balance to me. I've used the tech-time adjusting tool (it's somewhere in the modding forum) to exponentially increase the time it takes to research as you move up the tree and the game plays so much better for me. I don't normally get to build tanks and other modern units until about 1990AD which forces me to play tactically.

Maybe your just way to focused on military techs thats the only way I can see that happening. In my games I take a balanced approach and research alittle military then maybe alittle Religious or economic techs whatever the case I have never had Mech. Infantry by the time I build Rifleman. Rifleman and the Infantry last for quite some time in my games and Im not very often behind in military tech either usually more equal i will have slightly better units and by the time they can build a substantial amount of Rifleman I will have Built enough Infantry. Just enough to stay one upgrade or so ahead is fine with me.

 

[ranathari]

Maybe your just way to focused on military techs thats the only way I can see that happening.

I don't actually prioritise the military techs: I prefer to go for the cultural techs and then trade them with military-orientated civs (say hello, Aztecs) for military techs.

That's actually one of the more annoying aspects of Civ for me: the tech-tree was designed (apparently) to encourage tech-trading rather than ploughing through it alone but by trading, you accelerate up the tree too fast.

 

[Psyringe]

That's actually one of the more annoying aspects of Civ for me: the tech-tree was designed (apparently) to encourage tech-trading rather than ploughing through it alone but by trading, you accelerate up the tree too fast.

You may want to try the option "Disable tech trading" which you can check when starting a custom game.

 

[Dida]

You may want to try the option "Disable tech trading" which you can check when starting a custom game.

I have tried that several times and the effect is great. Tech pace slowed down dramatically, and I actually got to enjoy each era.

However, this removes an important diplomatic device.

 

[ranathari]

However, this removes an important diplomatic device.

Exactly: the main function of diplomacy is trading (for me, at least) and techs are an important part of that. Now that the beaker value of each tech can be displayed by mouse-over, it really brings a bartering element into it.

 

[Snuffleupagus]

it isn't that the game is too fast is that it accelerates. It starts off at a perfect pace, and I can often get a decent archer/swordsmen war going on, then a macemen/crossbow/musket war, but after that it really starts to fly. Calvary if I'm lucky, but if I'm doing well, it is SAM, machine guns and infantry and techs coming in every 3 turns.

I don't want a slower game, just an even paced game.

Personally I'm trying a mod that increases tech costs exponetially. But I was worried about being able to build everything so I also slightly increased the building costs... we will see.

so far it is working great.

 

[abbamouse]

I agree that Epic isn't epic enough. I'm playing standard map games and on Epic setting a game typically lasts around 6 hours before I win (and on Noble setting I virtually always win given the AI's reluctance to seek anything except spaceship victory). Six hours of gameplay on a standard map in Civ III barely got me through the medieval era.

This is something I'll mod, but I have about half a dozen other mod projects to develop before I get to it.

 

[Nestorius]

They made a mistake, but with the intention of speeding up the modern game. I'm sure it will be fixed in the patch. A civ only has to be a few techs ahead to have tanks while you have riflemen. Especially is you are wasting your time with 'flight', 'democracy', or 'medicine'. Its funny you can launch a rocket into space and not know 'flight'.

 

[homan1983]

it isn't that the game is too fast is that it accelerates. It starts off at a perfect pace, and I can often get a decent archer/swordsmen war going on, then a macemen/crossbow/musket war, but after that it really starts to fly. Calvary if I'm lucky, but if I'm doing well, it is SAM, machine guns and infantry and techs coming in every 3 turns.

I don't want a slower game, just an even paced game.

Personally I'm trying a mod that increases tech costs exponetially. But I was worried about being able to build everything so I also slightly increased the building costs... we will see.

so far it is working great.

I disagree with you there, Dairuka. It's just not right that you should be able to research the tech for a Rifleman and then by the time you've built one, be able to upgrade him to a Mech Inf. That's just bad game balance to me. I've used the tech-time adjusting tool (it's somewhere in the modding forum) to exponentially increase the time it takes to research as you move up the tree and the game plays so much better for me. I don't normally get to build tanks and other modern units until about 1990AD which forces me to play tactically.

THESE GUYS SPEAK THE TRUTH

Its not that the pacing is bad. Its pretty much perfect.... well at the start.

But from Industrial onwards, the tech pace is like 2-3 turns, and almost every tech gives a new unit. So we cannot use any of our units, it just becomes a race to build the spaceship.

I actually LIKE the pacing, thats why I'm here: to ask the developers who may read this to make end-game the same pace as the beginning.

 

[Pbhead]

If Civ IV gets to fast, it turns into a turn based version of RoN or EE or AoE.

The slower and bigger it is the better, the last thing we want is a game so fast its not fun. I like big empires, a thing that seems impossible with fast games. In CivIII there was a accelerate production button, can't their be an oppsite?(beyond epic game)

 

[syneris]

To slow the tech pace down, all you need is to increase maintenance costs for late game. How many of you play 80-100% science the whole game? During one game i played, i found a spot i wanted to put a city because i needed the oil. Problem was 4 other friendly civs just started thier own cities on this small island. I built 2 cities and did all decided to culture flip the others since i didn't want to war with them at the time. Built theatre, library, temples, ect quick and switched to 100% culture. After culture flipping 3 of the 4 i notice instead of roughly 10 techs ahead everyone, i'm now like 10 behind the Americans (Washington is tech crazy being financial).

 

[Clown2TheLeft]

But from Industrial onwards, the tech pace is like 2-3 turns, and almost every tech gives a new unit. So we cannot use any of our units, it just becomes a race to build the spaceship.

I actually LIKE the pacing, thats why I'm here: to ask the developers who may read this to make end-game the same pace as the beginning.

Oh... so you couldn't use any of your units thoughout the entire game, not just the end? Yeah. That makes sense.




Later!

--The Clown to the Left