Print

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

[scrdest]

Is this supposed to be a website? It seems to have failed worse than I've ever seen a site fail before, and I'm not even blocking it from running javascript. 

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Gotta say, the modern eras' artstyle shows a clear Matrix inspiration here

[DoctorMcTaalik]

The phrase "A Civ for All Players" makes me extremely uncomfortable. Still ridiculously excited, though.

[Chiefwaffles]

All they really said about that regarding new players is a better set of tutorials.

[Shadowlord]

The phrase "A Civ for All Players" makes me extremely uncomfortable. Still ridiculously excited, though.

So does it come with a FPS/TPS engine so you can experience your battles from the POV of your troops? Wait, I bet city conquest is a MOBA. </wild speculation with no basis in fact>

[BurnedToast]

They mentioned in an interview somewhere that they realized civ5 was kind of inflexable - build 3 - 4 cities every game, pick the same policies every time because they were terribly balanced, every game runs the same way with the same tech choices in the same order.... which was probably the biggest problem I had with the game.

They also said support units such as battering rams, or anti-aircraft guns won't be regular units... instead they will be more like equipment that the unit uses and can stack with them in the tile. Huge armies that covered the whole map and got tedious to move were probably my second biggest problem with the game.

So if they can fix both of those, I'm hopeful it will turn out to be decent.

I'd also like it if they can manage to program an AI that can put up some kind of a challenge without resorting to massive cheats like the civ5 AI did, but honestly I doubt they will be able to and I don't have very much hope about it.

Edit:

Wow that is one cartoony art style.

It feels a little too..... bright? I guess, but other than that I like the art style (at least from the limited screenshots I've seen)

[Neonivek]

For some reason I am completely unexcited for this game...

It might be the combination of Civ5 and Beyond Earth being mild disappointments.

While Civ6 is what I call a "Perfection Sequel" or to clarify a "Sequel that doesn't add much, but instead tries to perfect the formula of the previous installment".

But it is WAAAAY too early for me to be hyped either way. They just about only said "it exists".

[Majestic7]

Yeah, I'm not...excited. Beyond Earth was so boring compared to Alpha Centauri, I can't help but feel this will be another lackluster game. Not a bad one at any rate, but...just bland. A bit like some superhero movie you go to see... it entertains you for the hours spent in the cinema, but you forget it in a few weeks and won't have desire to see it again.

[Chiefwaffles]

It really seems like worst case scenario is that Civ VI is just "Civ 5 but a bit better".
Besides, this is apparently being designed by the same guy who did both expansions (BNW and G&K) for Civ 5, and not the same person who designed Beyond Earth.

[Antioch]

I never really got into Civ V despite playing Civ III and IV a lot.


I think I kind of felt it pushed me into a certain style of playing.

[Sergarr]

also some level of unit stacking?

Hahaha, it only took them what, several years to realize that 1UPT is a terrible idea and should have never existed to begin with in a 4x game like Civilization? What a joke.

Wow that is one cartoony art style.

I'm kinda sad to see the Civ V style probably go away. I liked the Art-Deco-y design.

I didn't, and the fact that many of the TBS games made after Civ V has copied both the engine and the art design didn't help at all.

They mentioned in an interview somewhere that they realized civ5 was kind of inflexable - build 3 - 4 cities every game, pick the same policies every time because they were terribly balanced, every game runs the same way with the same tech choices in the same order.... which was probably the biggest problem I had with the game.

Ahaha, really? I remember when they were making it, they were saying that "unlike Civ IV, which was all about rushing out cities and building death stacks, Civ V will have multiple options". They lied, yeah.

They also said support units such as battering rams, or anti-aircraft guns won't be regular units... instead they will be more like equipment that the unit uses and can stack with them in the tile. Huge armies that covered the whole map and got tedious to move were probably my second biggest problem with the game.

See and this is why 1UPT is a terrible idea. Instead of "stacks of doom", which at least are easy to move and require strategic deployment (so that they don't accidentally end up in the middle of nowhere, tying in a large portion of your army), we've got "blankets of doom", which are large, unwieldy, and by their nature, are deployed everywhere at once. And yet, it seems that they don't actually want to move away from that failure of a system? Do they even learn anything?

I mean, when a main designer of your game talks about how this mechanic (1UPT) was bad, he was wrong for including it in the Civ V, and that his next game will include unit stacking, you'd think someone would notice. But apparently not.

[ZebioLizard2]

I mean, when a main designer of your game talks about how this mechanic (1UPT) was bad, he was wrong for including it in the Civ V, and that his next game will include unit stacking, you'd think someone would notice. But apparently not.

Did you actually read what he wrote in that?

This was a model very much inspired by the old wargame Panzer General. On the whole, I would say that the combat mechanics are indeed better in Civ 5 than in any other entry in the series.

I do think that 1UPT can work in a game, but you kind of have to bend the game around IT. In Civ 5 the fit was a bit rough, and it showed, but that's not why I'm going a different direction in ATG. I just enjoy experimenting with new ideas and seeing where things end up. I'm sure my next game after ATG will go in yet another a completely different direction!

What he wrote was nothing like what you said his thoughts on 1UPT are

[Sergarr]

I mean, when a main designer of your game talks about how this mechanic (1UPT) was bad, he was wrong for including it in the Civ V, and that his next game will include unit stacking, you'd think someone would notice. But apparently not.

Did you actually read what he wrote in that?

This was a model very much inspired by the old wargame Panzer General. On the whole, I would say that the combat mechanics are indeed better in Civ 5 than in any other entry in the series.

I do think that 1UPT can work in a game, but you kind of have to bend the game around IT. In Civ 5 the fit was a bit rough, and it showed, but that's not why I'm going a different direction in ATG. I just enjoy experimenting with new ideas and seeing where things end up. I'm sure my next game after ATG will go in yet another a completely different direction!

What he wrote was nothing like what you said his thoughts on 1UPT are

Given how the developers usually defend their work in spite of everything (like Bioware with its ME3 ending clusterfuck), the very existence of criticism - and, most crucially, the fact that his next game rejects the 1UPT completely - speaks volumes about how he really feels about it.

Yes, 1UPT may work in Panzer General. But it didn't work in Civ V, and, despite anything he says, it will never work out, because you either have too little units, and then it doesn't matter at all, or too much units, and then it's blanket of doom time and a fun-drain, and there is a very small middle ground in between those two that is completely impossible to reach in a 4x game like Civ 5, thanks to the "we equally support all playstyles, from sprawling mega-empires to 3 city tall kingdoms" motto.

It's just completely, physically, impossible to do without fundamentally changing production mechanics. And then it would stop being "Civilization" at all.

[miauw62]

They mentioned in an interview somewhere that they realized civ5 was kind of inflexable - build 3 - 4 cities every game, pick the same policies every time because they were terribly balanced, every game runs the same way with the same tech choices in the same order.... which was probably the biggest problem I had with the game.

Ahaha, really? I remember when they were making it, they were saying that "unlike Civ IV, which was all about rushing out cities and building death stacks, Civ V will have multiple options". They lied, yeah.

to be honest, i found civ V's only strategy to be much more fun than civ IVs. and while 1UPT had issues, i also just find it to be more fun than doomstacks, which are also pretty flawed.

[ZebioLizard2]

Given how the developers usually defend their work in spite of everything (like Bioware with its ME3 ending clusterfuck), the very existence of criticism - and, most crucially, the fact that his next game rejects the 1UPT completely - speaks volumes about how he really feels about it.

Or because he's no longer tied to a major company that defines his paycheck he feels like he can freely speak about it and wants to talk about what they did right, and what they did wrong in an effort to speak about the knowledge he's gained as a result of working through such a system.

Not to mention that just sounds quite a bit like reading between the lines to find things to support ones argument.

[scrdest]

They mentioned in an interview somewhere that they realized civ5 was kind of inflexable - build 3 - 4 cities every game, pick the same policies every time because they were terribly balanced, every game runs the same way with the same tech choices in the same order.... which was probably the biggest problem I had with the game.

Ahaha, really? I remember when they were making it, they were saying that "unlike Civ IV, which was all about rushing out cities and building death stacks, Civ V will have multiple options". They lied, yeah.

to be honest, i found civ V's only strategy to be much more fun than civ IVs. and while 1UPT had issues, i also just find it to be more fun than doomstacks, which are also pretty flawed.

Agreed. I played IV after V, and I thanked every deity known to man that C2C included an option to limit UPT. Not 1UPT, though that was a thing, but 10UPT worked pretty good. Doomstacks were an exercise in tedium.