I’m guessing from the last screenshot in the OP’s link that they answered the stack of doom question by saying you can’t stack at all. That would explain why the units are scattered about. Could be wrong.
Sigh.
I’ll probably never play this game, and even if I do I know that it’ll probably be a Civ3 or CivRev style letdown, but I can’t help but be excited for it.
After a number of run-ins with the Securom malware, I don’t let anything with intrusive DRM onto my machine. I didn’t even play the second Colonization until it came out in the DRM-free Civilization 4: Complete package (of which I’ve just bought a second copy because the first was lost while moving house). I know that the current’s running back again to DRM, so there’s a good chance that, like Spore and Blood Bowl, I’ll never get to play this game.
And they’re planning some fundamental upgrades. That’s less than promising. Messing with the formula tends to lead to something like Civilization: Revolutions or Call to Power. Or Master of Orion 3.
But I still want it and I’m going to be reading Apolyton daily until it comes out just in case there are tiny little details. I am so Sid Meier’s bitch.
Exactly. Can we have a game where you actually build a civilization instead of a bunch of little dudes with different weapons?
nevermind
You could try FreeCiv. It’s roughly Civ 2, and let’s you change a lot of settings, including map size. “Normal” is 4000 squares, and it let’s you go as high as 29,000 squares. I’ve been running it on Linux, and I think that’s where it was developed, but there are Windows and Mac versions.
Yup. I tend to spend all my early energy researching and ensuring my cities grow as quickly as possible. I usually have a pretty decent lead in technology but it’s generally not insurmountable and once I get the techs to start building space components the entire world gangs up on me and attacks with their newly minted gunpowder units.
I think I just suck at building my cities and exploiting advantages. I usually don’t conquer any Civs in the mid-game and it’s too expensive to build enough on your own to get that massive lead. The most warlike thing I tend to do early in the game is the fabulous culture bomb.
Sounds almost like you need more cities. Spaceship components are expensive and you’d have them built out at the hammer heavy cities. If you had 1 - 3 others just geared to troop production through the game that might help. That way your key cities don’t waste turns building archers when they could be building granaries, courthouses etc.
One aspect I came across in some article somewhere (real specific, I know) is that resources are going to be limited in use. It said that, for example, a horse resource can only be used to make a single cavalry unit. If that unit dies, the resources are returned to the map. That sure sounds like the focus will be on fewer units, which will be a nice change.
It would also be good to see religion mean something other than happiness, diplomacy, and gold if you happen to get a shrine.
They could definitely stand to make the resources “depletable,” assuming they’re available in relative abundance. If I have a single unit of aluminum, maybe that shouldn’t be sufficient for an entire armada of tanks, planes, and warships. As it stands now there’s really no advantage to having multiple sources of the same resource, other than trade, but depending on the map and the size of your empire that really doesn’t provide much advantage anyway.
Well, that and denying them to your opponents, which can be huge. I know that in Civ3, if there’s an iron resource near the Persians in the early game, I’ll do whatever it takes to claim it, because it makes everything so much easier if Xerxes doesn’t have iron.
One point I’ve always found odd about the resource system is that raw materials and fuels are treated the same way. OK, it makes sense that I need iron to make swordsmen, but can keep the swordsmen after the iron runs out. But if I control a source of oil for a single turn and take advantage of it to start a tank in every one of my cities, it seems odd that those tanks keep running indefinitely after I lose the oil. Likewise for saltpeter, coal, and uranium.
Well, yeah, if they’re going to dispense with the superstack syndrome and go to one unit one hex, then making more advanced units based on limited resources makes sense (otherwise I’ll be laboriously moving 100+ units across the map, one hex at a time-hopefully there will be a “grouping” command so I can move my horde all at once).
Could be. I’d read and watched demos of players advocating the specialized city strategy and I can never seem to implement it well. Every city seems to always need improvements to keep up with population and generate revenue so it’s hard to devote one to unit production and I tend to advance techs so fast that cranking out units always seems to leave a buttload of deprecated units. Certainly by the time I have enough cities that are productive enough archers are pretty much useless. It’s tough to load up on say, Knights, using just 1 or 2 cities to make them, especially it it’s not your capital before they are nearly obsolete.
Yup, I suck. Did I mention that I have a haphazard strategy at best regarding religion, trade and diplomacy? Bad times I tell you.
So don’t worry about population or revenue in those one or two cities. I usually find that I have a city or two that’ll never amount to much, money-wise, anyway, so I might as well just build military units there. Eventually, when you have all of the improvements built in your good cities, you can switch them over to military and catch up in your previous barracks-city, if you really insist on improving them all completely, but it makes very little difference.
I’m not sure how that works. Cities grow pretty much regardless and you need population growth to maximize hammers. More pop = more hammers = more units. Disregarding population growth seems like an impossibility the way the game works unless I’m missing something. And once cities get larger you start losing workers due to unhappiness or pollution. Those cities that won’t amount to much tend to be crappy production centers in general so the unit production tends to be too slow to feed the entire empire.
Hmmmm…well I tend to play Marathon which gets rid of that whole 5 turns and knights are being plowed over by tanks feeling. Still the troop cities don’t have to be terrible just not ideal. I mean you don’t need a bunch of level 12 cities in the middle ages to produce longbows just 3 or 4 cities at levels 5-8 producing 5-10 a turn.
But ultimately, it’s a game so enjoy it whatever way you want at whatever level you want.
I want to see them bring back the video of the Military Advisor from Civ 2. Especially the Medieval one!
“No complaints, Sire!”
I want EU III-style sliders instead of discrete government types (which there are always too few of.)
I know developer money is limited but Civ fans are like no other, the mods on CivFanatics are the equal or superior of any other game DLC I can think of.
Civ 5 should be a solid core with good AI that easily modable and let the fans do the work. Cause they will and the game will be the better for it.
Then a few years for those not computer savy enough to find them release those mods and pay the amatuer designers like they did with Civ 2 Scenarios.
Science Advisor: “Umm err the science rate is a bit too low, Your Magesty-may I propose a slight…adjustment?”
Financial Advisor: “And may I propose a slight adjustment in your wits, he who would drain our economy of much needed funds.”
Yeah, they got old fairly quickly, but if we could mod them and import our own video clips into the game, that would rock. Cornholio as my Military Advisor!
Ohhhh… I like that. You’d take the tech tree and expand it (which people want anyway), then for every “Government” tech you pick up you get a slider movement point. Then go about your merry way associating other tech to other social choices.
Or just give me EU4 