EPTCivilization V + DLC's, G&K, BNW - Page 80
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
| ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/vSB1bjq.jpg) | ||
|
Scip
Czech Republic11293 Posts
| ||
|
Noizhende
Austria328 Posts
On January 29 2013 01:47 Scip wrote: whoooooow.. Maybe the rule for setting cities is nullified when settling across water? I know it is nullified in civ4 (or maybe just the Earth scenario? I know it's disabled across the water there, because London and Paris are only 1 tile apart) yes, i think i stumbled across that in some patchnotes a while ago edit: found it: http://forums.2kgames.com/showthread.php?89117-Patch-Notes&p=1367870#post1367870 under 1.0.1.217 -> balance changes -> game rules: "Cities must now have three or more tiles in between them (1 more tile than before), unless separated by a sea/coast tile." When the game came out you could found cities with only 2 tiles in between them. | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 28 2013 13:13 xDaunt wrote: I think it might be when the holder has dynamite. I definitely am still dealing with the movement penalty as of that screenshot. From what I know it actually doesn't go away and has been a known issue in Civ 5 since release. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On January 29 2013 05:27 Trotske wrote: From what I know it actually doesn't go away and has been a known issue in Civ 5 since release. It went away in my current game once Hiawatha researched dynamite. However, I seem to recall playing other games where it never went away. This was a while ago, though. Until recently, I hadn't played since this past summer. | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 29 2013 05:41 xDaunt wrote: It went away in my current game once Hiawatha researched dynamite. However, I seem to recall playing other games where it never went away. This was a while ago, though. Until recently, I hadn't played since this past summer. I was playing a multiplayer game with some friends and it never went away and one of them said it was a known issue. Maybe it's just multiplayer? | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On January 29 2013 06:04 Trotske wrote: I was playing a multiplayer game with some friends and it never went away and one of them said it was a known issue. Maybe it's just multiplayer? Could be. Or it could just be inconsistency. The game still has some problems. One bug that I have noticed very frequently occurs when I conquer cities. Sometimes, I'm not given the choice to puppet, raze, or annex. The city is just automatically annexed. The weird part is that the city does not count against the happy cap at first. However, if I save the game, quit, and reload, then it does. I had one game where this happened and I suddenly had -40 happiness (big time WTF). | ||
|
Durak
Canada3685 Posts
Edit: Like, if I want to go for a science victory do I have to read and understand this as well as figure out all of the changes to it in G&K? | ||
|
Cel.erity
United States4890 Posts
On January 29 2013 06:34 Durak wrote: I've read a half dozen guides on civfanatics and tried to focus on a strategy (military, culture, science) but I always end up doing everything/generalizing. The crazy amount of learning that the game requires before it seems playable, and the super long length of the games, deters me from giving it a shot. Any suggestions on a way to get progressively better through playing rather than just reading a million guides? Maybe I just need a guide on tall vs. wide empires... Edit: Like, if I want to go for a science victory do I have to read and understand this as well as figure out all of the changes to it in G&K? What difficulty are you playing on? That makes a huge difference. You don't really need anything besides a basic understanding of strategy games to win at ~King or below, but if you're trying to win a science victory on Deity, you need a very strict build order. Overall, if you don't want to read guides, just play the game on a comfortable difficulty and figure things out for yourself. It doesn't take long before you figure out what works and what doesn't. Also, sticking with one civ and one strategy at a time can be useful for learning, similarly to sticking to one race in Starcraft. When you use the same build on multiple difficulties, you start to notice where the flaws are. | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 29 2013 06:34 Durak wrote: I've read a half dozen guides on civfanatics and tried to focus on a strategy (military, culture, science) but I always end up doing everything/generalizing. The crazy amount of learning that the game requires before it seems playable, and the super long length of the games, deters me from giving it a shot. Any suggestions on a way to get progressively better through playing rather than just reading a million guides? Maybe I just need a guide on tall vs. wide empires... Edit: Like, if I want to go for a science victory do I have to read and understand this as well as figure out all of the changes to it in G&K? You might want to see if someone would play a multiplayer game with you. My friend got me into Civ 5 and basicly I would consult with him every time I wanted to do something major and he would tell me why that was a bad idea until I started figuring out how the game actually worked. Also helps make that learning curve less of a cliff. They can Also explain all the win conditions. What I would say about guides is sometimes you can't really go by them because a lot of tech and such are situational and involve certain resources you might or might not have. Personally I like to go in a game not deciding how I will try to win and just figure out the best way after I have seen my spawn. + Show Spoiler + no idea if that is good advice I am not some gosu player I pretty much play on immortal | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
IMO it's not that useful for scientific victory (if you are behind, RA makes you even more behind; if you are ahead, it's too expensive and you don't need to be even further ahead). For diplomatic victory it is absolutely required that you do this though (chances are, you will have tons of gold lying around anyway). | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On January 29 2013 06:34 Durak wrote: I've read a half dozen guides on civfanatics and tried to focus on a strategy (military, culture, science) but I always end up doing everything/generalizing. The crazy amount of learning that the game requires before it seems playable, and the super long length of the games, deters me from giving it a shot. Any suggestions on a way to get progressively better through playing rather than just reading a million guides? Maybe I just need a guide on tall vs. wide empires... Edit: Like, if I want to go for a science victory do I have to read and understand this as well as figure out all of the changes to it in G&K? I think that the key to getting better at Civ V is understanding the fundamentals of empire development. If you don't know where to place cities, how to develop cities, and when to build what in cities, then you're always going to be kinda gimped. To learn these fundamentals, I strongly recommend that you focus on science and spaceship victories for a while. Forget warfare, culture battles, and religion for the time being. Focus on strong vertical development, maximizing research output, and managing basic diplomatic affairs with other civs. Why do I recommend this? Simple: when you commit to other victory types, you are generally making a calculated decision to fore-go other opportunities -- generally increased research output and domestic development in the near term -- to attain either immediate victory or greater research output and domestic development in the future. For example, when you commit to build an army to war upon other civs, you are sacrificing short term domestic development and increased research output to enlarge your empire (hopefully), thereby giving you the opportunity to have greater development and research output in the future. Of course, that opportunity isn't going to be worth anything if you don't know how to exploit it. This is why learning how to grow vertically is so important. You have to do it eventually, regardless of what strategy that you use. Additionally, as you learn the tech tree and the vertical growth game, you will see where the timings are for creating and exploiting a decisive military advantage (like rushing artillery or bombers). Probably the best build to learn for this approach is the 100-turn 4-city+national college build that opens with completing the tradition tree. From there, learn to target the key population growth and research output techs (civil service, education, fertilizer, the tech that gives public schools, etc). This kind of strategy thrives on solid fundamental play. Once you understand how this works, then you will also understand its limitations, and why you will need to learn to create and exploit other advantages to counter other civs. But again, it all starts with understanding the basics. | ||
|
Durak
Canada3685 Posts
| ||
|
Cel.erity
United States4890 Posts
On January 29 2013 09:22 Sufficiency wrote: The thing about RA to keep in mind is that the amount of beakers granted equals half the median of cost of technologies that you can research. So you should research some cheap techs before your RA is about to be finished to shift your median up. Alternatively, having some expensive techs also shift your median up. IMO it's not that useful for scientific victory (if you are behind, RA makes you even more behind; if you are ahead, it's too expensive and you don't need to be even further ahead). For diplomatic victory it is absolutely required that you do this though (chances are, you will have tons of gold lying around anyway). Your advice is way off here. RA's don't work like that anymore, they give something like 6 turns worth of beakers based on the average science output of both civs in the RA. Also, when they did work the way you described, they were the ONLY important part of a scientific/cultural victory. Actual research didn't matter. That's why they nerf to RA's was implemented, but even now, having RA's up with everybody is crucial if you want to win on science at higher difficulties. | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
God Tier (borderline broken, extremely powerful and versatile): Ethiopia (Steles OP), Maya (Pyramids OP), Arabia (Trade Routes gold bonus, Camel Archers do more damage than Knights and they are ranged), China (Cho-ko-nu attacks twice, 30% Great General Bonus instead of 15%) 1st Tier (depends slightly on starting location and other various random factors, but they are in general fairly strong): Dutch (Polders OP), Russia (double strategic resources to fight people or sell for $$$), Huns (Battle Ram is broken and Horse Archer does not require horses; +1 production from patures is very strong... if you spawn near a lot of them), Siam (UA is OP) 2nd Tier (fairly decent, but they are arguably not as good as the 1st Tier ones): Aztec, France, Egypt, Rome, Persia, Songhai, Iroquois, India, Greece, Mongol 3rd Tier (these civs are not that bad, but they are somewhat situational or depends greatly on RNG): America, Spain, Germany 4th Tier (these civs are fairly weak and underwhelming): Byzantine (good luck getting what you want for your religion), Celts (just play Ethiopia), Sweden (good luck keeping all your friends happy and not backstabbing you), Japan (UA almost useless beyong the first 50 turns, UUs are underwhelming). | ||
| ||
