Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[10ebbor10]

It looks like it's just the Beyond the Sword expansion of 4. With hex's. Because it's an expansion for 5.

It's not an expansion. It's a separate game.

[BigD145]

It looks like it's just the Beyond the Sword expansion of 4. With hex's. Because it's an expansion for 5.

It's not an expansion. It's a separate game.

There is a such a thing as standalone expansions. It's an old concept. The trailer drools, gibbers, screams, etc "expansion".

[10ebbor10]

The trailer didn't show anything really.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Considering that they specifically talked about how they had trouble making what little in-game screenshots they've shown because they're building this game from the ground up, and had to recycle some modified Civ V assets in the meantime, I'd say that this isn't even remotely an expansion. Or at least no more than SMAC was a "standalone expansion" to Civ II.

[Rakonas]

The idea sounds good but... it looks like every other Civilization game and that really rubs me the wrong way. It's the huge unit sizes, they're ridiculous-looking and immersion-breaking. I don't get why they can't scale the map size up and the unit size down. I want to watch tiny armies marching across a vast terrain, instead of watching a stack of gigantic monoliths cross rivers and deserts and forests in the same turn.

Come on, the sprites are no big deal. Do you hate every paradox strategy game that doesn't have a counter option? It's a really minute detail and is missing out on a great game.

[Culise]

Considering that they specifically talked about how they had trouble making what little in-game screenshots they've shown because they're building this game from the ground up, and had to recycle some modified Civ V assets in the meantime, I'd say that this isn't even remotely an expansion. Or at least no more than SMAC was a "standalone expansion" to Civ II.

Or in other words, we're (probably) not getting another Colonization.  And thank heavens for that.

[scrdest]

The idea sounds good but... it looks like every other Civilization game and that really rubs me the wrong way. It's the huge unit sizes, they're ridiculous-looking and immersion-breaking. I don't get why they can't scale the map size up and the unit size down. I want to watch tiny armies marching across a vast terrain, instead of watching a stack of gigantic monoliths cross rivers and deserts and forests in the same turn.

Come on, the sprites are no big deal. Do you hate every paradox strategy game that doesn't have a counter option? It's a really minute detail and is missing out on a great game.

Besides, mods. There is a fairly popular one for V (RED Modpack) that scales the size down and the number up, and has an even smaller size option if THAT doesn't work for you.

[Shadowlord]

I think it should be there, if only because in a distinction between "functionally identical but cosmetically different" we should opt for variety. I'm glad they at least tried to do something different since the Civ mechanic of "water is commerce" wouldn't work on an empty world, and in that respect the "energy is commerce" and the resulting improvement in solar generation at higher elevations kind of makes sense (although I'm not really sure whether you actually get more sunlight 3km up compared to sea level).

Since the sun is 1.5 x 10^8 km away from the Earth, moving your solar plants 3 km closer isn't going to make them collect a (meaningfully) greater amount of sunlight from being closer.

That said, if there are less clouds at that altitude, or if 3 km up is above cloud level in general, that reduces (if less clouds) or eliminates (if no clouds) the negative effects of clouds on the light, so that would statistically give you higher energy production. If it's above the tree line, you'd also be able to get line of sight to the sun even at dawn and dusk (provided your solar collectors can angle themselves to face the sun), again giving you higher energy production.

So, provided the planet has clouds like earth (and if it doesn't it's probably not habitable), and something like a tree line, the same factors could apply.

#IAmNotAScientist

[Aqizzar]

So, provided the planet has clouds like earth (and if it doesn't it's probably not habitable), and something like a tree line, the same factors could apply.

I think the explanation in SMAC was that the higher elevations saw less cloud cover.  This doesn't make a lot of sense because the greenery or forests would grow equally well at every altitude, so there obviously wasn't a precipitation line, especially since it was almost impossible to make a mountain more than a couple kilometers tall.

[Imperial Guardsman]

Yeah, was there ANYONE in SMAC that was 100% good guy?

Foreman Domai, in my opinion.

[Delta Foxtrot]

I didn't really play the expansion factions, too wild gameplay bonuses for my taste.

Wasn't Colonel Santiago a pretty good guy? She may not have been nice, but with the likes of Zakharov, Morgan and Deidre around, I can't say I blame her.

[Imperial Guardsman]

I didn't really play the expansion factions, too wild gameplay bonuses for my taste.

Wasn't Colonel Santiago a pretty good guy? She may not have been nice, but with the likes of Zakharov, Morgan and Deidre around, I can't say I blame her.

She threatened to carve me up and called me fat for rolling wealth, and in my Believers save, she just EVICERATED Lal over a probe team.
A PROBE TEAM.

[Mr. Strange]

Santiago did nothing wrong.

[Sharp]

I think it should be there, if only because in a distinction between "functionally identical but cosmetically different" we should opt for variety. I'm glad they at least tried to do something different since the Civ mechanic of "water is commerce" wouldn't work on an empty world, and in that respect the "energy is commerce" and the resulting improvement in solar generation at higher elevations kind of makes sense (although I'm not really sure whether you actually get more sunlight 3km up compared to sea level).

Since the sun is 1.5 x 10^8 km away from the Earth, moving your solar plants 3 km closer isn't going to make them collect a (meaningfully) greater amount of sunlight from being closer.

That said, if there are less clouds at that altitude, or if 3 km up is above cloud level in general, that reduces (if less clouds) or eliminates (if no clouds) the negative effects of clouds on the light, so that would statistically give you higher energy production. If it's above the tree line, you'd also be able to get line of sight to the sun even at dawn and dusk (provided your solar collectors can angle themselves to face the sun), again giving you higher energy production.

So, provided the planet has clouds like earth (and if it doesn't it's probably not habitable), and something like a tree line, the same factors could apply.

#IAmNotAScientist

Also it's not Earth, not even the same solar system, who knows how close Planet is to the star(s) (it's a binary system as well I think, mo' sun mo' power).

That being said the cooler temperature from the higher altitude should make solar panels more efficient if not actually collecting that much more energy but still providing a substantial net energy increase, also yeah above clouds helps and seeing as how tall mountains can catch clouds to increase precipitation on one side of the mountain I'm guessing the cloud level on Planet isn't too high.

#OnlyAComputerScientist

[Delta Foxtrot]

Sure, they start with a probe team. Then it's an official audit and "inspectors". Next thing you know there's "peacekeeper" troops walking the streets and taking in "dissidents". Lal should respect the sovereignty of his neighbours.

Lal/Peacekeepers was interesting. I could never quite figure out if they were better, equal or worse than the hive. Sure they're seemingly better, but that bureaucracy can get awfully bloated. I can't honestly tell myself that a world ruled by peacekeepers would be best of the 7.