|
Post by zzZhenon on Aug 3, 2007 9:20:49 GMT -5
I like that settlers are more expensive in the later eras, but does anyone else think they are too expensive? It took me 11 turns to build one in a Ren game the other day, and at best I could get it in 8 turns in my capital.
Seems like the only option is to slave-chop it.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Aug 3, 2007 10:53:01 GMT -5
Well it is suppose to compensate for all the free buildings you get in late era starts, but we'll have to see how this effects our ladder games. The solution can always be to use the AS system to compensate for slower starts, but lets wait and see what everyones opinions are after a few more weeks of playing.\
CS
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Aug 3, 2007 13:38:14 GMT -5
How many hammers per each era for settlers and workers, I'm kinda in mexico and don't have access to game.
Hasn't slaving, buying, chopping been the only logical way to make them for the most part.
|
|
|
Post by Atomation on Aug 3, 2007 15:41:38 GMT -5
I have mixed emotions on the increase. Part of me likes it, because it keeps civ smaller and really forces a player to be very concise in their builds to not die while expanding. On the other hand, having tons of cities required quite a bit of skill to manage, so really cutting back on expanding ability also cuts back on the ability of better players to dominate over weaker players. That's really not such a good thing. We should be looking for ways to increase this divide not decrease it....
|
|
|
Post by cryptococcus on Aug 3, 2007 18:46:53 GMT -5
How many hammers per each era for settlers and workers, I'm kinda in mexico and don't have access to game. Hasn't slaving, buying, chopping been the only logical way to make them for the most part. Your either in Mexico or not noob theory.
|
|
|
Post by Atomation on Aug 3, 2007 21:52:25 GMT -5
Maybe hes straddling the border.
|
|
redphoenix
Warrior
CCCAC Representative
Posts: 253
|
Post by redphoenix on Aug 4, 2007 1:30:30 GMT -5
great addition.
simple as that.
However all the extra buildings is a really bad thing, and simplifies the game too much.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Aug 4, 2007 5:15:36 GMT -5
well, the first two settlers are free, along with a worker, an explorer and two military units so maybe not being able to get a third one out in 5 turns makes sense - we may not LIKE it, but I think it's a good thing overall
|
|
bev
Settler
Posts: 18
|
Post by bev on Aug 4, 2007 11:23:57 GMT -5
I quite like the new settler costs. You get forge and lighthouse as well granary now with them in ren era so they need to be more expensive. They can be chopped out quite quick still but it does slow down a little the start of ren games which I dont mind either.
Ive played 2 ren teamers since BTS began. Both games went for a good distance and were fun to play. The donut map seems a good choice giving balance to land and option of sea attack. It is not such a rush for cavalry either.
I can see the ren teamers making a come back with BTS.
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Aug 4, 2007 23:06:55 GMT -5
I would personally like them to be the same price as in ancient, with gran/forge/lighhouse removed.
As red says this really makes the game overly simplified. Your cites pretty much come fully loaded as soon as you plop them down, so you dont have to think about what to build. It really puts players on too much of a level footing, every game becomes the same in terms of what to build and when.
|
|
redphoenix
Warrior
CCCAC Representative
Posts: 253
|
Post by redphoenix on Aug 5, 2007 2:51:02 GMT -5
I would personally like them to be the same price as in ancient, with gran/forge/lighhouse removed. As red says this really makes the game overly simplified. Your cites pretty much come fully loaded as soon as you plop them down, so you dont have to think about what to build. It really puts players on too much of a level footing, every game becomes the same in terms of what to build and when. I'd like to keep settlers a tad more expensive, but remove the extra buildings. Or an even better alternative, start with 0 combat units, only 1 settler and 1 worker, no additional buildings. Maybe someone could make a ren mod like this. Same for all other later eras too... Would be SWEEEEEET!
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Aug 5, 2007 6:44:37 GMT -5
I was kinda thinking on the same lines.
I was thinking of hosting an advanced ren-start game with only 100 piont start.
|
|
redphoenix
Warrior
CCCAC Representative
Posts: 253
|
Post by redphoenix on Aug 5, 2007 23:37:37 GMT -5
I was kinda thinking on the same lines. I was thinking of hosting an advanced ren-start game with only 100 piont start. Still won't fix the 10 free buildings syndrome Havent tried it yet... do you start with factories in future now? Would be same thing as forge in rene. Why do they go ruin things like this, grrr... Still 100pts start might be nicer than what is now. Good idea. Still could someone make a scenario without the buildings? Though the bugs in advanced start make it less interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Atomation on Aug 6, 2007 15:06:25 GMT -5
I don't like that buildings all start in cities either, but I also don't think many buildings are even worth building, so I don't see it impacting the game that much. The real problem with free buildings lies in that some traits are significantly less useful with certain buildings being given for free - expansive / free granary, industrious/free forge, etc. In fact, industrious is almost completely useless in ren. Instead of giving cities free buildings, buildings in general should just be alot cheaper so they are actually worth building. It's very difficult to ever rationalize making something like a market or a bank (plenty of newbs do it, doesn't make it worth while) when you have a war to fight where a few units can mean the game. If there was actually time and resources to drop a bank or a market here and there, it would really up the ante on strategies of when and where to build what.
Another issue with hefty settler prices is that it really overpowers the value of imperialistic trait. You are saving an enormous amount of hammers from being imperialistic in later eras - it isn't even fair to compare to other traits. But the traits have been in despair since civ came out, and I don't know why no efforts have been made to alleviate this. But that's another rant.
Overall, I'd say right now civ just seems too simplistic entirely, and limiting expansion by hefting up settler prices is just agitating this same issue further. It's very difficult to separate the good players from the bad players and often times land, a totally random factor, plays SIGNIFICANTLY more into the outcome of the game than skill, once you reach a certain level of basic skill building (takes maybe a few weeks at tops unless you have the intelligence of a gorilla).
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Aug 6, 2007 16:13:03 GMT -5
I was kinda thinking on the same lines. I was thinking of hosting an advanced ren-start game with only 100 piont start. Still won't fix the 10 free buildings syndrome Havent tried it yet... do you start with factories in future now? Would be same thing as forge in rene. Why do they go ruin things like this, grrr... Still 100pts start might be nicer than what is now. Good idea. Still could someone make a scenario without the buildings? Though the bugs in advanced start make it less interesting. Actually the AS system should fix the free buildings, in any AS start there are no "free" anything, just a pot of gold for you to use for what you want, limit the gold and you an design a game to your liking. But please also take a look at the Furture Regicide Mod that Primax made, we are looking at making a standard and low setting for it, but if you were to use the AS system with it, you could do the same thing and get all the interesting changes in it. CS
|
|
redphoenix
Warrior
CCCAC Representative
Posts: 253
|
Post by redphoenix on Aug 6, 2007 22:54:24 GMT -5
Still won't fix the 10 free buildings syndrome Havent tried it yet... do you start with factories in future now? Would be same thing as forge in rene. Why do they go ruin things like this, grrr... Still 100pts start might be nicer than what is now. Good idea. Still could someone make a scenario without the buildings? Though the bugs in advanced start make it less interesting. Actually the AS system should fix the free buildings, in any AS start there are no "free" anything, just a pot of gold for you to use for what you want, limit the gold and you an design a game to your liking. But please also take a look at the Furture Regicide Mod that Primax made, we are looking at making a standard and low setting for it, but if you were to use the AS system with it, you could do the same thing and get all the interesting changes in it. CS so future cities you build don't have free buildings also? I didnt mean just the startup. Maybe I'll try AS sometime.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Aug 6, 2007 23:06:18 GMT -5
Actually the AS system should fix the free buildings, in any AS start there are no "free" anything, just a pot of gold for you to use for what you want, limit the gold and you an design a game to your liking. But please also take a look at the Furture Regicide Mod that Primax made, we are looking at making a standard and low setting for it, but if you were to use the AS system with it, you could do the same thing and get all the interesting changes in it. CS so future cities you build don't have free buildings also? I didnt mean just the startup. Maybe I'll try AS sometime. I'll test it out, but in an AS start, there should be no free buildings or anything else, you have to add everything you want. CS
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Aug 6, 2007 23:11:28 GMT -5
It appears I was wrong, even in a AS start you still get the free buildings in era starts(I tested a future start). Guess we will have to get Primax to make this an option in a mod.
CS
|
|
|
Post by astax on Aug 12, 2007 22:34:13 GMT -5
I think the increase in costs makes Imp more desirable in later starts, which is a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by Atomation on Aug 13, 2007 17:20:00 GMT -5
Um imperial was one of the 3 best traits (late era) before, now it's just ridiculous.
|
|