And because being a SMACer means never having to admit to sarcasm. ;nodI'm never gonna buy Civ 5....
Gah... its windows only. (I'm on linux right now) I'll have to try it out latter.There's good news. You can play the original StarCraft. Or age of wonders.
After having found a website full of hundreds of (well-done) drawings of elfs being raped by orcs, demons and so on, I have finally downloaded...World of Warcraft! :DI was going to ask for source, but meh.
Gah... its windows only. (I'm on linux right now) I'll have to try it out latter.There's good news. You can play the original StarCraft. Or age of wonders.
My complaints so far:
- Trading stations are under-powered compared to a normal trade route (great idea with bad implementation).
- Worker icons on the city screen are way too big. They cover the resource yields and you have to zoom in several times to be able to see them.
- No "who's who" screen. Just a faction score, so you have no idea how you stand against the others on different power stats.
- There''s no way to sticky the zoom level, so every time i change between screens my zoom level changes, which is very annoying.
... War gamers tend to be very resistant to change.;nod
Well... native life can be quite a deterrent for ICS. :o
I just tried to settle a third colony in the wild lands (first time I got sofar to get a second colony pod out), and all of a sudden my third outpost and its marine defense were attacked by hordes of drones and a manticore.
They didn't last long.
It's just another bloody deterrant to the expansion quesion that plagues Civ games. Doesn't mean you don't do it, you just do it better. A real solution would be to stop using the city-states engine. Paradox games don't have this problem.
Well... native life can be quite a deterrent for ICS. :o
I just tried to settle a third colony in the wild lands (first time I got sofar to get a second colony pod out), and all of a sudden my third outpost and its marine defense were attacked by hordes of drones and a manticore.
They didn't last long.
Not content with that, native life kept surrounding and attacking any unit trying to go beyond the ultrasonic fences.
The last couple of demo games, I tried that method to get my military units experience (to the 30 xp cap), but this demo for some reason native life was literally overabundant and, if no fences would've been present, I'd been obliterated.
Overlap kills a city's production time as you need to work tiles as much as possible. Most of the time you want to have your cities working as many different resources as possible and are best off when your cities are about 6 tiles apart. The highest density of cities you can have is at 4 tiles apart and the only reason to do that is if space is tight already.It's just another bloody deterrant to the expansion quesion that plagues Civ games. Doesn't mean you don't do it, you just do it better. A real solution would be to stop using the city-states engine. Paradox games don't have this problem.
You mean replace cities with a different system? That would do it, though it'd require completely redesigning how things work.
But I'm more interested in the question: Given X territory available after alien life, other factions, etc., one can choose a low base density (bases distanced 5-6 tiles from each other) or high base density (bases distanced 2-4 tiles from each other). Is BE more friendly to high base density than earlier civ games, or less?
Is BE more friendly to high base density than earlier civ games, or less?The emphasis on the health system would suggest less.
Overlap kills a city's production time as you need to work tiles as much as possible.which only matters if the game stagnates instead of your growth winning out.... ICS, where possible, is the fastest means of working more tiles, and thus expanding. Firaxis tries to weed the strategy out using stupid deterrants, because, I guess, people like the city-states engine, or you don't want to scare people with something different.
Overlap kills a city's production time as you need to work tiles as much as possible.
The highest density of cities you can have is at 4 tiles apart and the only reason to do that is if space is tight already.
Is BE more friendly to high base density than earlier civ games, or less?The emphasis on the health system would suggest less.
They didn't last long.
What difficulty level are you playing?
The easiest deterrent was to just not allow settlement within three tiles which they did. Also they made it so your population doesn't grow while the settler/colonist is being built. With the exception of an Industry-Prosperity KP or a every-trade-route-to-your-capital Polystralia, the game just slows down if you try to spam without trade route support. You could do it, but there are problems with it and the quality of tiles you'd have.Overlap kills a city's production time as you need to work tiles as much as possible.which only matters if the game stagnates instead of your growth winning out.... ICS, where possible, is the fastest means of working more tiles, and thus expanding. Firaxis tries to weed the strategy out using stupid deterrants, because, I guess, people like the city-states engine, or you don't want to scare people with something different.