/civ4xg/ - Civilization, Stellaris, Endless Legend and 4X Games General

...

THEY'RE NOT OPINIONS, STOP HURTING MY FEELINGS

B-but... You get to execute an incompetent commander!

I agree with your facts, user. Don't let them bully you.

I'd say Norway can be bumped up to Viking tier (above Top below Rome) on Island maps, their ability to launch unchaseable instant raids is pretty broken.

I´ve played enough Dawn of War to make something likefeel really common
Also its probably totaly underwhelming

They're obviously going to be god tier in ocean heavy maps, but in something like a standard continents map they won't be all that amazing

True but I'm basing this off of their uniqueness in that they gain an absolutely massive boost to their ability in one or two map types when they're mediocre elsewhere, I think it merits a mention that they're just that specialized.
Also if we use a Europe or World map, you also have to consider that their starting position basically means there's exactly one (two, on World maps) ways to access them without taking to the sea and both of those ways are land chokepoints, they can essentially launch raids with impunity because they hold naval superiority and you just can't push through on land.

>be Congo
>1500 AD
>on way to science victory
>discovery new continent
>entire New World has one major religion
>not long after you realize the other civ on your continent is almost half way converted to th New World religion
What do?

>America
>getting a significant combat bonus early game for comat on own continent
>great fast UU late game
>bad

Okay doesn't equal bad

There's got to be a bad. It's all relative.

Compare it to China, Greece or Rome and you'll see why.
They're 'okay', but look at the people above 'okay' tier and you'll realize they're literally Poland-tier broken from the perspective of previous games

Scythia gets an early game rush that makes the Huns look like fucking Regigigas.
China gets what would basically translate to 33% more hammers for builders and can essentially build miniature Great Engineers to hurry wonders.
Greece gets a permanent new slot for bonuses from game start.
Rome is FREE FUCKING SHIT the civilization and is good at literally everything.

Well unlike Civ5 there doesn't seem to be any outright bad or mediocre civs so far, every one of them seems to be good or specialized for something

Ha, the Cossacks 2 anthology is on GoG for 4€.

How good is it? I heard it just adds morale, but that the rest is shit.

You are underestimating the continental combat bonus. Basically you own your home continent no matter who occupies it, and you can take it early.

youtube.com/watch?v=Ff0gQJRy1Jw

SUMERIA
U
M
E
R
I
A

I don't think I'm underestimating it, I just think it isn't actually as strong as you make it out to be. Someone like Scythia can kill anyone who's connected to them by land early game except for Greece and maybe Rome and China because of their fortspam and Great Wall respectively.

A U O
U
O

Its shit
All it is is campaign (map is risk style) or historical battles
There is no real skirmish like in the other titles
Its just the same as the battles you do in the campaign

Ha. Okay.
I'll just keep playing Cossacks 3, then.

>I just think it isn't actually as strong as you make it out to be.
It is a bonus that is easy to underestimate because it's just that, a bonus, not a unique unit or improvement.

GILGAMESH/SUMERIA ADDED TO CIV6 CHANNEL

The Great Wall can be good but cavalry should be able to avoid it fairly well early in the game where you're unlikely to have it large enough to truly protect your empire. I'd honestly rather bank on America's always-on combat boost plus spearmen to stop a cavalry rush.

Here's my problem. I forget how they've defined 'continent' but I'm assuming that it's all land with in X tiles of a land unit's movement, so a strait might block off large sections of land as the calculation 'loops' around the body or water.
Now this'll make it very easy to dominate your own continent, but it doesn't help you at all outside your continent. Compared to Scythia and Rome or China's economic boom potential with their wonder spam and better builders, they might easily seize more than just their own continent. It basically means you're good at holding and conquering land close to you but drops off further from you where it actually matters on bigger maps since most civilizations don't even spawn near you.

Play on pangaea

OH SHIT SON WEDNESDAY CAME EARLY

That's why I'm assuming 'continent' doesn't literally mean 'every landmass that's connected'.
I still think Rome is superior.

Pangaea maps aren't actually one continent. They are multiple continents, like Europe and Asia.

No female this time? Ehhhh kind of sexist.....

It doesn't, we've already been shown that a single landmass can be broken into multiple continents

And yes America's home continent bonus might not be strong if they happen to found their civ on a continental divide but that seems like a fairly rare case, especially early on when it's still small

Hngggg.

Fucking hell he's built like a greek statue

They are having problems with their gilgaMesh.

When will the next dev diary be out for stellaris?

Sumeria looks fun to snowball with. A ton of your units will have promotions because you will want to go out and fight barbarian camps. Also no tech reqs for their UB and UA mean getting tons of science and culture quickly from ziggurats. It also means having a strong mobile cavalry army(with promotions like I said before) right away that doesn't have to fear anti-cavalry units.

>tfw gilgamesh will never ram his finger up my boipucci

why even live

inb4 niggers say he wuz black n' shiet

Also tons of bonuses from the barbarians will help get a quick start to various techs, civics, population, and military units.

I preferred the former Gilgamesh with his magnificient beard.

>barbarians give truckloads of bonuses
>cav that isn't countered by spears
Sumeria has to be top tier at least right

His beard is still pretty Epic

Now his pecs are magnificent

>goodie hut bonuses from barb camps
>improvement that grants science available right away
>chariot that gives no fucks about spearmen
>extra benefits from joint wars

Sounds pretty fucking good to me, especially if raging barbarians is still going to be a thing

Going by what we've seen, barb camps are usually guarded by spearmen, so the war cart is going to be very useful for clearing those camps.

Sumeria is gonna be fun in co-op online matches. Wonder who it would go well with?

Didn't they say raging barbs aren't a thing
Also
>build workers on turn 1
>ziggurats fucking everywhere

And his smile sponsored by Pepsodent.

Scythia or Rome, Scythia is ideal for slinging with Sumeria's good tech and stuff and Rome goes well with everyone

Jesus shit how is it even possible for one man to be so manly
No wonder he could fuck every bride, the girls were probably overjoyed.

No raging barbarians, presumably because the AI can't deal with it without collapsing into a quivery puddle of jelly.

Fucking retarded just make a note that it's really unbalanced
When the hell will they add in Barbarian World and Barbarian Civilizations from the Revolutions Civ IV mod already

>gets ancient ruins every time you take a barbarian encampment
>shares pillage rewards and xp with allies

I wonder if that means he shares ancient ruins plunders and barb encampment rewards, or they just mean like the healing and gold from pillaging tile improvements.

Barbarians are supposed to be the anti-civilization, a barbarian civ wouldn't be barbarian by definition

People always ask for this and it's just as dumb each time

>When the hell will they add in Barbarian Civilizations
They already have.

>barbarians are supposed to be anti-civilization
If you can name a single "barbarian" I dare you to, they're simply civilizations-in-making the same way the Franks were barbarians but became Charlemagne.
It's only sensible that barbarian tribes that make it to a certain level of power and size would start forming their own aspirations of empire, you might argue that the great civilizations we see in game were once the same shit as barbarians.

He doesn't share barb camps/ancient ruins, he shares any benefits like gold,faith,science, or culture from pillage rewards and also gives xp to any allied unit during a joint war. This includes his own units as I understand it.

Can't wait to go on historic adventures with muh boy, Enkidu.

Does that mean he can get ridiculous 20 promotion units handily?

>didn't show Ishtar

>tells goddesses that want to marry him to fuck off since he just wants to chill out with his best mate Enkidu

what a lad

You speak from a historical perspective, I speak from a design perspective. Barbarians serve a certain role in the game in that they do not rise to the status of "civilization". They are always hostile, they are always uncivilized, because that's their fucking point.

Civilization isn't supposed to be dynamic in the sense of rising civilizations that pop out out of nowhere and it's not meant to accurately represent history, it's a computerized strategic board game. It uses the trappings of real-world history to create a setting, but ultimately the gameplay experience comes first.

>marry
No, Isthar was a whore and wanted to fuck him
All her fuck toys ended death too, including the God of Death

Seeing how popular Revolutions was I must fucking disagree and accuse you of being the same guy who attacked 'more features' because it conflicts with the 'design philosophy' and uses 'realism is not a valid argument' as a defense.
So what if that's their role? They can continue the role of being hostile civilization destroyers, but this makes it far more dynamic and interesting than random '''''barbarian encampments'''' that spawn out of fucking nowhere. Most barbarian cities will never become civilizations. Even in Revolutions it's incredibly rare unless you purposely leave them alone as it's pretty beneficial to wipe out barbarian cities before they hit the relatively high threshold needed to grow to civilizations. It's an interesting little nugget, not everything has to be super serious min-maxing faggotry adhering to '''design principles'.

You mean two parts god, one part man?
>deleted

The gods made him 2 parts god and one part man. That was their mistake :^)

then why not have the game just be a bunch of dots on a map and rename everything to stupid shit like "policy that gives you 10 science per green dot" or "technology that makes your gray dots more powerful"

What's a good power for a random event fleet in stellaris so that it's still very threatening, but not overpowering?

I'm trying to make an event where you can scan a planet and trigger robots who take their 'protect aliens who built us from harm' hard code way too literally. They build a fleet that goes around exterminating aliens and don't stop until you find and destroy their planet.

Because that would make a shitty game. It's probably the reason why people make movies instead of selling the script

And adding in barbarians evolving into civilizations as an option takes away nothing and adds much.
>but muh focused games and focused design philosophy
More options is never a bad thing.

Slippery slope does not an argument make.

Don't really know what you're talking about, I'm definitely not that guy. Revolutions was popular for entirely different reasons other than "barbarian civs" and you very well know that. I have no objections to adding features to the game as long as they work well. And hell, maybe they could design a Civ rising out of barbarians to work well, it just doesn't seem to be where they're going with barbarians right now, it doesn't seem worth the design space.

But it's this kind of design philosophy that got us the horrid random events from IV: Beyond the Sword, and the junky features that plagued both IV expansions. Civ IV is a great game but most of the features the expansion packs added were awful, and why? Because they weren't planned out very well, disrupted strategic play and only really served some slavish need for more "historical" concepts in the game and role-playing nonsense.

This is opposed to V's expansions.

lmao how is that a slippery slope? If you don't wanna add historical shit because "muh gameplay" you might as well make the game a more complex version of pong.

>It uses the trappings of real-world history to create a setting, but ultimately the gameplay experience comes first.
Gameplay-first isn't the same as ALL GAMEPLAY NO SETTING.

>weren't planned out very well
You could make the argument that Total War games are a failure because Rome 2 wasn't planned out very well. Just because it WASN'T done well doesn't mean it CAN'T be.

>disrupted strategical play
Having the option pre-game to have barbarian encampments evolve into actual civilizations is somehow disruptive to strategical play? Being able to run into the New World populated by Barbarian civilizations behind on technology disrupts strategical play?

>more "historical" concepts
>historical = bad
Wew
>role-playing nonsense
Go back to whatever minmaxing shithole you came from. Powergamers in strategy games are fucking cancer, especially when playing the games in singleplayer.

if it wasn't for RPing i would've stopped playing Civ years ago tb.h

>being this much of a tryhard
Pshhhh, go away, some of us actually want to have fun.

Are you the type who strives for '''balance''' in grand strategy games instead of roleplaying

>jungle errywhere
>turn 62 on epic
>backstab war me with japan

is there a sexual term used for jaguars and razing?

lol yeah fuck those players who play strategy games for strategy amirite

You misrepresent the argument, again. Historical isn't bad. Adding a feature because it loosely represents a historical concept with disregard to how it affects gameplay is bad. Barbarians fill a certain role, for them to have this feature, that role would need to be re-examined. It doesn't fit into the current model, and I think it's a bad idea, but as I mentioned in the parts of the post you ignored, it could possibly work if they put the thought and effort into making it work right.

It's certainly possible to go the other way. Civ V's warmonger penalties, for example, were clearly added just for gameplay reasons but were still poorly designed and very little to do with history.

No, I enjoy CK2 but it's for entirely different reasons than Civ. CK2 has no win condition, it's a sandbox, it's meant for roleplaying. It doesn't need to have a strict adherence to balance because it's not intended to be balanced in the first place.

Civ is not that game. It has a win condition, and there can only be one winner. That alone makes it a very different experience than your typical GSG.

>fuck those players who play strategy games for strategy amirite
Yes, fuck you. You don't play it for strategy. You play it for some minmaxing bullshit where all the variables are known and you just have to bask in the glory of beating a defective AI. You want to purge all the features you personally think are unnecessary winding down the game to bare fucking bones that can be plugged into a calculator.

>not worth the design space
What 'design space'? You mean budget? Add it in a goddamn expansion then - you're attacking the very feature itself, your original post was that "People always ask for this and it's just as dumb each time". Now you've backpedaled into the more reasonable and less extremist "well it could work if they do it well" which applies to literally every feature under the sky so you may as well have said nothing at all.

>typical GSG
Well I should've said most Paradox-style GSGs but whatever, I think you get the idea. Civ isn't a GSG and the logic that works for those games doesn't work for Civ.

Is Dido hot or have I played this for too long?

Still though, Enkidu and Gilgamesh are JoJo tier bros.

>jif

not only that, but enkidu was created to be the only thing that could stop gilgamesh without the gods directly interfering, but when gilgamesh met enkidu they became best friends and went questing together and when enkidu died he literally sat and cried for him for 7 days on end. If you didnt know that there is no point in me giving a spoiler warning to a fucking 5000 year old story

Seven days must be a big deal for the ancients seeing as that temple prostitute rode Enkidu's dick for that long too

>spoiling Gilgamesh's Epic
REPORTED

SPOILERS DUDE! WTF!

Reminder Enkidu was nothing but an animal when she did that

All of the things you have said here are false. You're making some incredibly idiotic leaps of logic here. Part of the fun in strategy is testing different strategies under different conditions and pushing the limits to make them optimal. And even if it isn't strictly optimal, it can still be fun. Frankly I don't think you even know what strategy is, based on this post.

Which is largely a tangent to the fact that barbarians are the anti-civilization in Civilization. If they could be a civilization, they'd no longer be that. I think that's a dumb idea. It wouldn't ruin the game in and of itself, but it would fundamentally change their role and need careful thought.

>design space
Civ hasn't really come to the point where it has too many features, but it has in the past had some features that don't really fit into the game in a way that adds to the experience. IE, vanilla Civ V's maritime city-states. The reason they were so shitty is because they obsoleted food tile yields

Was under the impression he was a clay doll.

>be prostitute
>wild animal walks in
>looks up at you and says he wants the full service for 7 days
>plops down a bag of gold
What do?

I mean, if he can talk and has the gold, does it matter?