>Looks like shit
>Made by Paradox
>Releases in about a week
>No hype
It's another dead on arrival attempt at stealing Civilization's market share isn't it?
>Looks like shit. >Made by Paradox. >Releases in about a week. >No hype
>Looks like shit
>Made by Paradox
>Releases in about a week
>No hype
It's another dead on arrival attempt at stealing Civilization's market share isn't it?
>What if civ 5 looked worse and also random RNG alien attacks
WHAT ARE THEY THINKING
swedes are pretty reddit so random alien attacks are just the kind of thing they think do great
They were the source of wokeness that people seem to conveniently forget over twelve years ago
Shit man, I didn't know that Wall Street and California was located in Sweden.
Shut the frick up c**t. Shove "wokeness" up your own ass
Paradox has been souless since around 2016. They've went hard into adopting the worst game company and marketing policies
>Paradox has been souless since around 2016
CK3.
>adopting the worst game company and marketing policies
Weren't they doing it a long time before 2016?
CK3 is completely soulless compared to CK2
It's made by an American studio though
At least you can build more than 4 cities.
Civ v was not made for you. Just go back to playing literally any other civ and stop b***hing about it
is that the best response you have to pointing out how awful V is? It goes against the entire spirit of the genre by restricting you from expanding, you know, one of the 4 Xs? Five is forever crippled by the atrocious balancing of the happiness system.
Its like 4 people b***hing about V in every thread regardless of thread topic. It just lives rent free in your head. Meanwhile i will keep having fun with the game.
So you have no defense then. I accept your concession.
ITS CONCESSION ACCEPTED POSTER!
Our anuses are in mortal danger!
>It goes against the entire spirit of the genre by restricting you from expanding, you know, one of the 4 Xs? Five is forever crippled by the atrocious balancing of the happiness system.
Civ V trannies on their last rope lmao
I thought the ideology tree was something that 4 should have had but didnt.
>to playing literally
What if i don't play literally?
>RNG alien attacks
Have they finally shown off alien combat/interaction?
the demo was okay
>Releases in about a week
Literally two more weeks
Hopefully this help civilization and similar games die and this boring ass genre can stay as a cool thing from the past that peaked with civ V
>but le civ 2!
civ 2 > civ 5 and it's not close
As soon (You) and the rest of your scum generation dies off, civ will finally die because it will not be able to get money from old farts nostalgia homosexuals
Seethe more, 2gay.
>peaked with 1upt
1upt is superior if you have friends and play multiplayer with them. Unit stacking helps the CPU but in the end no civ game has good CPU and you'll always be able to dance around their lack of strategy regardless.
>make civ clone
>why bother just play civ!
>make unhinged civ-like game
>muh this isn't civ
You just have games, admit it.
What compels someone to even ironically post like this. You should be ashamed.
>>Made by Paradox
*Published by Paradox, not made by PDX
Btw, paradox has indie submission post where anyone can submit their games, but they must be complete.
Why do some people hate Paradox? They make the best games in strategy genre.
Because paradox games at release are too shallow.
They get good after they release at least 2-3 game mechanic DLCs.
Depends on the game really. But one of the big ones is that HOI brought in the chuds and then Vic 3 actively spat in their face, so now, like with everything, they will attack everything they do. The other reason is DLC creep. Once you fall behind in DLC it feels pretty futile to catch up so it's almost like the game you enjoyed for 100s of hours has been taken away from you unless you pay another 100 bucks.
>one of the big ones is that HOI brought in the chuds
>then Vic 3 actively spat in their face
Wasn't HOI even worse at launch than Vic3?
>The other reason is DLC creep
How else would you develop a game for a decade? I actually support long term game development instead of release after release each year fairly the same game.
>Once you fall behind in DLC it feels pretty futile to catch up so it's almost like the game you enjoyed for 100s of hours has been taken away from you unless you pay another 100 bucks.
They don't take what you bought away.
>Wasn't HOI even worse at launch than Vic3?
What do you mean? I'm talking about how WW2 games typically attract chuds because you can roleplay your 4th reich or these days soviet dreams. Between that release Paradox's internal politics changed a bit and you can start to see more left leaning devs working on the game and communicating with players. It's why you always see the Vic 3 spam threads here sometimes that are always the same thing. It's just an extension of that culture war nonsense you see people fighting over.
>How else would you develop a game for a decade?
I wasn't providing an alternative. I quite like that EU4 has been supported for so long. Stellaris not so much, that needs a sequel. I'm just providing you an answer to why some people hate pdx so much. I'm not one of them, but these are the reasons I see most often that I think can explain why.
TLDR: Politics and not wanting to spend money. So pretty standard reasons around here.
>more left leaning devs
True.
There's a reason why CK3 took it as a pride point that it 'didn't treat heterosexuality as the norm'.
Even though, by default, heterosexuality is the norm because homosexuality is a self-deleting behavior.
Will never forget the Norway dev diary where the person writing it couldn't contain their distain for the playerbase for wanting monarchist paths, how much of a moronic chud you must be to want to play Quisling and how based and epic the communists are
>https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/developer-diary-norway-alt-history.1596715/
If you can handle the cringe
>Its unrealistic
>Anyways here my hecking anarchist world commune
>So much for the tolerant left, baka
>If your senpai Stalin noticed you
>have fun making the world a worse place!
>I can understand why, but I still think they’re wrong
Fricking hell
>https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/developer-diary-norway-alt-history.1596715
Based, made stalinists and fascist seethe their asses off.
Why bother trying to pretend to be a neutral third party when your cult's beliefs always demand constant blatant self reporting?
>How else would you develop a game for a decade
Don't and just release one good game with a reasonable time frame instead of a bad game that needs hundreds of dollars to become good?
Would you buy a brand new HOI today for 500$?
If it had all the good features/content of previous games, was a clear upgrade to those games, was stable, and ran well then yes.
Wouldn't that be a DLC?
>Was stable
Hoi4 dlc is never stable on launch
>How else would you develop a game for a decade? I actually support long term game development instead of release after release each year fairly the same game.
How about you just release a good game that wont need to be replaced by another one every year you fricking consumer homosexual. Youre the moron that comments "just make next game" and buys it up knowing its going to be shit
>paradox is hated because politics
>not their shallow games, dlc bloat
>more buzzwords
Man, it's so obvious you're some shitskinned ESL troon with a two digit IQ.
Stay on your containment board
.
Stellaris was never good, their "games" are just shitty visual novels, that's why the mods are all some wacky tumblr tier fiction.
That's because they make the only grand strategy games, really. But most of them aren't that good, they are just the only games in town.
Thankfully, Espiocracy and Gilded Destiny should shake things up a bit.
they have been shit for years, the last good game they made was stellaris, and that was years ago at this point
Because somewhere along the line they hit a gold mine ( i think it was ck2 or EU4, cant be sure), wich allows them to create GSG titles that have quality production and whose graphics dont make you want to tear your eyes out. For a comparison in what i'am talking about, look at Dominions 6 or Conquest of Elysium, both are strategy games with creativity and mechanics that wipe the floor with anything paradox can come up with, but the games look like a turd, barely have any animations and their UI seems from the jurassic era. On the other side they are just not innovative, the market was begging for a competent competitor to the total war series but paradox seems scared shitless of doing it. Their writers seems so incompetent that their newer games are barely more than scenario generators with playable assets (see: age of wonders 4). There are also lots of problems with development model, where they will finisha game an then cut it into 45 different overpriced DLC's. They are going tthe "least effort put in for most profit" route and its gonna destroy their company, mark my words. CK3 was the canary in the coalmine, their games are selling less and less and it seems they cant figure out its because they keep pushing out piles of shit that are not enjoyable to play. Take this Millenia for example, who exactly is the target demographic for this game? How many people do they think actualy played CIV and are going to switch to their title? Its stupidity, hubris and stupidity.
Millenia isn't being developed by Paradox
You are probably right about the games they develop themselves and they might make the experience of playing some games they are a publisher of (like Millenia) worse due their DLC philosophy
but saying Millenia is going to be shit because Paradox has some shit writers and is starting to turn into a run of the mill MBA run predatory company is a bit of a stretch I think
even if they couldn't make good IP themselves or keep the old IP competent, they could still morph into a publisher, picking up good IP
idk if you see Millenia as some kind of personal affront or something but the last part of your text is pretty weird
like people can only play one game? lol
Your argument seems to be that as long as there are multiple shit games it's no big deal? What if I want 1 good game instead of 100 bad ones? Why would you want multiple shitty games?
not at all, there can be multiple good games that differ meaningfully from eachother to give experiences that make them distinct games
millenia seems ok, needs some polish and it has some mechanics that civ doesn't have
so you could in fact enjoy playing both games from time to time
There is something strange going on with paradox and has been since ck3 came out. But they aren't only once. Its same with CA. Everyone sees what they are doing wrong and what playerbase actually wants. But they cant deliver.
But that seems to be norm for gaming companies. All people want to do is give them money and they still can't deliver or even put out games
>made by paradox
what compels people to keep saying this for games that are not made by paradox? I only saw this shit repeatedly happen with paradox
they're obsessed autists with personal vendettas
Im tired of 4X games, I want Empire Earth 4 or a fricking remake
>I want Empire Earth 4
I remember EE3 and its memory leaks making it impossible to play. Fun times.
there was 2 and 3?
You smoke dung.
>DEBATE ME DEBATE ME!
no. You will never change your stance and that is okay but i enjoy civ v. There is simply no point.
>i will just keep eating shit
That's fine but please do it away from civilized people. Consider Wrong board.
>That's fine but please do it away from civilized people. Consider Wrong board.
But you are not civilized. You are toxic, looking for fights where there are none and have Ganker contrarianism.
You belong there more than anyone else does
Look moron, if you wont debate then stop bringing up your dogshit game. If you wanna circlejerk with the other boomers who like managing 4 cities then go to a civ V thread and stop shitting on the floor here.
It is ugly but I thought from the demo that it seemed actually fun. It's been like 20 years since we got a historical 4x game that was good and had some new ideas to elevate it beyond Civ IV. They could still frick it up, but I'm looking forward to it. At the very least, I'm certain it's gonna be better than Humankind.
You're right about the lack of hype though. Between this and CS2 it seems like Paradox isn't very good at publishing any more.
newbie spotted
Civ IV sucks
>post made by Call to Power Gang
You didn't play the demo or visit the thread talking about the demo, didn't you? Everyone thought the same as you until they actually played the game.
I was kinda interested when this was announced, weird I haven't seen it discussed anywhere but here. The resource chaining kinda reminds me of Sid's colonization. I actually really like the whole building your civ's bonuses from a blank slate thing but apparently Humankind tried something similar and failed miserably. I'll keep my eye out but I'll definitely wait a bit. I see they're already have a bunch of pre-order DLC bullshit.
There's a demo? What did people think?
It's graphics looks indie and the combat screen looks like a cheap mobile game. Yet the game itself is actually quite enjoyable and is probably one of the few not-civs to keep me wanting to play more.
>What did people think?
It was pretty good. Yeah the graphics aren't anything to write home about, but the gameplay is solid and the way moving from one age to the next works makes a lot more sense than the bullshit Mankind tried while still having a lot more freedome than Civ. Biggest issue with the demo is that it's too short, so it's hard to say how well the game holds up in the long run.
On the demo, if people told me it was a 20-30 dollar indie title I'd be cool with it. The fact it's a 40 dollar paradox title is...alarming.
>civ 1 - 4 are labours of love made by boomers and gen x
>civ 5 and 6 = millenial trash made by talentless cretins
Series wasn't even profitable until 5. Seethe.
Bullshit, it was a household name by 3
>none of civ 1, 2, 3, 4 were profitable but they kept making new entries anyway
>Made by Paradox
Bait thread.
Paradox board
>Millennia | Economy Tutorial with @JumboPixel
Jesus Christ, its another Civ clone just with some extra jiggerypokery to put the brakes on.
Why are game designers so creatively dead?
THis is not a civ clone, you don't complain a doom clones every time an FPS announces do you?!
That's what happens when devs limit themselves to Civ mechanics
>Soviet Farms
>Bonus to food
The USSR fed more people than any other nation in history.
UKRAINY!
I say slava, you say JYKRÄINII
SLAVA
JYKRÄINII!!!
>*ate more people
>The USSR fed more people than any other nation in history.
well that's simply not true
Unlike China and India, everyone was fed. Cheap food, sure, low quality, yes often, but almost no one had to go hungry.
Yes tovarish.
Only pig capitalists think kulaks are people.
stalin was just an autist who valued imports more than ukrainian lives (based)
they could have been fed he just chose not to
>1989
>kulaks
Yeah ok bro and the English settlers starved in Plymouth, are you just going to move the time frame arbitrarily to stay correct?
Read again what's being said you fricking moron
>someone says the USSR fed more people than any other nation in history.
>someone else posts a picture of a statistic from 1989 stating China and India have a higher population
>I say that both India and China had food supply problems during those times, while SU citizens were relatively well fed, as far as calories go
>someone replies that 60 years earlier people starved in the SU
Ok I did, what now Black person?
>this country that exited for 70 years fed everyone in such a way that nobody went hungry
>except for all these people that went hungry
>they don't count because they were all dead
Truly a moron.
Pro tip, if you have a food shortage just wait and it will resolve itself
>nobody's hungry since they all died
Pinkos are never not funny
using your logic one can say that german empire also have people starving (it had during the great war)
How about the other Superpower who has a bigger population and exports food globally and of a higher quality?
>who has a bigger population
286m < 248m?
>and exports food globally
So did the SU
>and of a higher quality
>
Are we talking about the early years USSR when it starved to death millions or the later years USSR, when it became a petrostate just to afford food imports from the US and third world? (as well as machinery from Western Europe obviously)
>higher quality?
if you mean usa then its lower quality
>everyone was fed
Funny since its not true as starvation and lack of food is one of the biggest points of not wanting to go back. Also
>Bare minimum of feeding people being seen as success
That is just ridiculous, west and capitalistic countries never had problem feeding people. On top of that once the commies collapsed and world ushered into more and more capitalism, it has correlated well with all time lows in world starvation.
While you are raving about bare minimum and being happy that commies allegedly somehow managed to feed people, everyone else was busy developing technology, wealth and prosperity.
Unironically, at one point soviets have more obese people than american in %s.
starvation isn't actually common anywhere. it's basically solved in the 21st century. we've had a few isolated famines mostly caused by food aid dependency and that's it.
Was that after or before causing the famines in the countries the soviets touched?
After, most communist famines are the result of moronation at the highest echelons of power (china) or the result of communist land reforms (ussr). They usually don't have them after the first initial “shock phase”. Major reforms in general suck when implemented, more so if you have to start everything from scratch.
Why did companies suddenly decide ripping off Civilization was the new thing, there have been several in the last few years and they are all shit.
>The USSR forged more false documents than any other nation in history
Even truer
>best games
>barely_contained_laughter.webm
Every country forges documents dipshit, it came free with your inherent corruption.
>I'll take what is the United Kingdom for 3$ Alex
Based. Liberaloids seething at the replies.
have a nice day rusty
Ussr is dead as Byzantium. No seething to be had, they're BTFO and exist only in history books.
dont try to argue with 50 years of propaganda
>fed people
>cause a famine every decade untill stoolin dies
>have to import grain and steal corn seeds from dirty capitalists
kek
USSR created ukraine
>USSR created ukraine
Wouldn't that be Germany?
Ukraine as in the Ukrainian SSR. Ukraine was a thing before the USSR came into reality.
Starved more, too, even accounting for proportions.
>The USSR fed more bullshit to more people than any other nation in history.
fixed
>The USA fed more bullshit to more people than any other nation in history.
fixed
the united states had more people than the USSR, and guess what! they never had a famine!
>Releases in a week
Predict how bad the launch will be.
They already had a playable game
>Building your civ's attributes during the game
Into the trash it goes.
They saw how "successful" Knights of Honor 2 turned out to be and decided to get in on the action.
But KoH2 is successful. It had small budget and sold fairly well.
Not every game that didn't sell trillion is a flop.
Millennia's not a civ-clone. There are buildings with resource chains - wheat>flour>bread, wood>paper>books. There are variant ages for a little excitement/differentiation in gameplay. There's six different types of mana you make from buildings/resources. Nations are basically all the same, you choose how their culture develops.
The graphics are weak and it doesn't sufficiently respect your time with the exact same age-up cinematic but it's pretty exciting.
>wheat>flour>bread
>wood>paper>books
Like Realism invictus?
don't know what realism invictus is, but not all the chains are linear like that
like for instance you can use wood to make planks too, and for instance you can make flour out of many different things
so its more like a web
you can also import and export resources from one city to another, but don't expect to make lengthy production chains using that due to the limited number of slots for export
however you can make outposts to bring specific resources from far away into your city, its mostly about making the production chain on the tiles of a specific city
there are a limited number of spaces to build production buildings, so you have to make choices what to build
you can also get generic resources like wheat from building a farm on any grassland (doesn't have to be a wheat resource on the map) and get stone from generic quarries on hills (so don't need to get marble or something)
I think the more special resources can give you more "stuff", like a plantation on rice giving gold as well as food vs a farm on normal grassland giving wheat which gets you food, but no gold
take these with a grain of salt but that is my impression after watching potatos 3h playthrough
Can bones from hunting camps be used for something?
Iron age gives art culture with bones.
idk, I only played like 30 turns of the demo and potato didn't use hunting camps at all in his playthrough
The hunter culture or whatever one that can build hunting camps on elephants and deer could turn them into some kind of points that I forget in the demo.
>The graphics are weak and it doesn't sufficiently respect your time with the exact same age-up cinematic but it's pretty exciting.
Yeah, from what I've seen this looks like an interesting test build. I'm not a graphicsgay, but it looks cheap at the moment.
>resource chain
Why is it anytime these games are made the focus almost always on the economy rather than the politics side of history? I want more pacts or scheming that goes beyond just doom stacking troops
Because it's easier, more relevant to gameplay, and you can just do politics over discord with the other players
But politics should be integral to game play on a game based on civilizations. Everything else should come second to it. Your economy, relations to other countries, future rebellions or wars, to even something as simple as expanding your borders are all based on politics in the real world. Feel like devs focus too much on the monolopy board side of it. Just look at vic 3 it's basically a glorified mid manager position where you spend the whole game worrying about your inventory. It's fricking lame
you have grand strategy for political autism
and again, that is so many levels more complexity compared to a production chain
politics usually sucks in games because making a good system is extremely difficult
Politics are an outgrowth of the economy and control systems involved.
If you were any more of a quack, you'd be swimming in a pond.
PDX should hire an artist, because right I'm tired of the fact that their games having looks of something that was made by a codemonkey mixed with AI art.
The silly part is that they have more artists than coders in the company now
Source?
Isn't it because they became a publisher instead of a developer?
How would Pdx hiring an artist help C Prompt Games develop this game? Publishers don't just give away staff to use.
what made humankind fail? I remember seeing some clips and it looked interesting, but it seems to be thought to be absolute shit
Can't speak for the audience as w ehole, but IMO:
The core gameplay was, okay but basically just a worse Civ. More importantly, their unique mechanics all turned out to be stupid and/or annoying to play with. The whole culture swapping mechanic means that your nation never has an actual identity and in the worst case scenario makes it hard to keep track of your diplomacy. For example if you're at war with China and they reach the next age, you might now be at war with Germany because nations have no easy identifier and will change their name with every era. Lategame was especially annoying with poorly implemented mechanics like pollution as well as a complete lack of victory conditions. The only victory condition the game has is a score victory and more traditional victory types like culture victory or science victory either just give you more points or make the end of the game happen sooner.
I didn't think it was a terrible game when judged on its own merits, but when you have a game where the unoriginal stuff is basically just Civ and the original stuff is poorly thought out or doesn't mesh well with the rest of the game, there just isn't much reason to keep playing. If you look at their older games like Endless Legend and Endless Space those had plenty of flaws as well but at least they made up for it by feeling relatively unique within the genre, while Mankind just felt like a mid Civ game with some annoying mechanics added.
>the audience as w ehole
as a whole*
It also had worse snowballing then Civ. Every other patch a new resource became the reason you snowballed out of control and made certain nations just absolutely useless and a detriment.
I enjoyed it personally, but I wouldn't call it good. some of the mechanics are quite annoying like the shared turn shit making it hard to micromanage when you're at war because the ai moves at the same time as you
To add to others the combat suffered from the general amplitude shit. Tedious and kinda unbalanced. It also didn't help that there was no Endless Legend level customization that could of mitigate some of the boringness.
>The whole culture swapping mechanic means that your nation never has an actual identity
From a pure gameplay perspective it was kinda interesting, because it gives a intensive to go to the next age as fast as possible to get first dibs on a good bonus. However, yeah it fricks up with book keeping and just feels weird. They could of just named it generic traits (warlike, nomadic, etc) or named it as historical events that your culture were going through but no.
Millennia vs Ara: History Untold, who wins?
we lose
2 new games look like a win.
yeah maybe if you haven't played them. I've played both and I assure you, we lose. Both are shit.
I bet you didn't and you just bad mouth these games, also you have negative disposition towards new games.
Also was Ara available for play test?!
Yes, I was in both alpha tests they've done so far. And no, I like new games, and in fact I think certain games that people consider shit, aren't that bad (like civ beyond earth). The issue with Ara and Millennia is opposite. Ara tries to do too many different things and has no focus. It's tedious and feels sloppily put together. Millennia on the other hand barely does anything different when it should have tried to learn further into the ages gimmick. Of the two games though, Millennia is much more fun.
how much did you play millenia?
multiple runs of the demo so I could try out the alt ages
That poster looks AI generated.
It is and it's outdated. It looks like this now
MILLENNI-ACK
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1268590/Millennia/
6 days left btw
I never got around to play Civlikes again after I realized that all the gameplay is useless and the only objective is earning more money to sustain a bigger army
I hope I get to see some game that's more complex than that
behead all those who insult millenia
5h full edited playthrough to eco age (whatever that is)
he posted a 3h long playthrough earlier which didn't go as far, but still probably halfway through the ages
WEFism but more ecologist and cultish.
legend of total war sponsored video, he said he has played like 90h of it and enjoyed it (supposedly he checks the games out before accepting a sponsorship, not sure how accurate that is as I don't watch much of him)
He is the only tuber I fully trust and his video actually made me interested for Millennia. Still the graphics look pretty bad and I don't know if I can pay €40 for such a game
always makes sense to wait for reviews imo
I think it looks pretty good gameplay wise, I'd play it. Needs some graphical polishing, though.
to anyone that played the demo, is it true you can't pick where you start?
It's true, looks like the first DLC is going to change that from the description by allowing you to start as nomads.
You started with the settlement already created and a couple of units if I remember correctly
how important is initial location?
Since you're building your civ, you can deal with more or less anything. It's better to start near water though. You'll soon be able to build a town to expand in some direction. I don't think it matters enough to waste time looking for a better start point when you can just pick civ traits to deal with it or eventually ship products from outposts.
1 day 7 hours until launch
>Conquering Earth with Infinite Crusades in Millenia
>Millennia - Official Release Trailer
>Releasing a game on a Tuesday at 4 in the afternoon
Why are publishers so stupid?
You mean 4am on a Wednesday morning right?
No. 4pm.
>b-but m-muh timezones!
Shut the frick up
>Steam
>US company based in washington wants games to release when they do a batch update (10am PST) + most people available for launch problems
many such cases
https://www.ign.com/articles/millennia-review
>Millennia Review - IGN: 5/10
>I felt the same way finishing up a game of Millennia as I did finishing a game of Humankind: It made me want to play Civilization 5 again. Several have tried to claim the turn-based history crown at this point, but none have done it better than Firaxis. And while things like city needs, National Spirits, and production chains allow Millennia to stand out, they don't really let it stand up under its own weight. I think Percy Shelly said it best: Round the decay of that colossal wreck, limited game set-up options, horrid late-game performance, and a cumbersome tile economy, the lone and level sands stretch far away.
>It made me want to play Civilization 5 again.
What kind of mental illness is this? I have only played the demo of Millenia, but it's so much more interesting than playing fricking Civ 5.
Honestly most of the reviews read like they got filtered, hard.
its a troony
The review is valid, but doesn't mean too much for those especially interested in the game. It's a niche title, it won't get much praise by more mainstream strategy players.
>mainstream strategy players
so civ6/5 players? this game looks like its right into their valley
I don't know if Millenia is good or bad, but this reviewer seems a little slow
he also says the production chain system is very complicated, kind of got the vibe he didn't replace/upgrade stuff too much
you can get rid of an improvement and get 25% improvement points back and if you want to keep things optimal you will have to do so (for instance you upgrade your kiln and need half of them you needed previously)
>actual literal transgender reviewer
Yeah I'm gonna need a second opinion.
>Leana has a five o'clock shadow
A stopped watch is right twice a day, but it's hard to take this person seriously.
I played the demo for this game and footage makes it look just as clunky. It really looks like it wants to be played in a highly specific way.
If you're childish enough to listen to igb reviews then you really are a lost cause.
Why do diferent countries of the same company rate a game diffrerently?
Because reviews are opinionated and you should form your own instead of relying on others.
different size of the nintendo bonus in different languages
LESS THAN AN HOUR TO GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If first israeli reviews are bad then game must be good.
Millennia has alien invasions. GOTY.
>gets mildly curious
>goes to see the screenshots
>...
delete the thread
This reminds me of the mafia mobile game ads for some reason, like i except one of the soldiers to level up and evolve into a mecha
Looks like something slitherine would make not paradox
PDX are only publishing it. Why do zoomers struggle so much to understand this? This is basic stuff, guys.
Paradox also only published city skylines 2 and sword of the stars 2 so their quality is not exactly high for published games either
And Mount & Blade Warband, Magicka, War of the Roses, Pillars of Eternity, Tyranny, City Skylines 1, Steel Division 44 etc.
The 2 you mentioned mean very little, they have just as often published a successful titles as they did not.
Most of those were pretty bad on release
eh endless space has the same trashy looking on the ground battles
You're legitimately out of your mind lol
you mixed up yours and you'res.
sasuga esl chan
Mobile game warfare
c2c mod for civ4 mogs this game
C2C unironically has a lot of kino potential but it is held back by how shit the AI is later. There's a point where you just pull way ahead of the AI in terms of technology and production, no matter the difficulty. It's also terrible at warfare, it consistently builds either no units or really shitty ones. I know they are working on it though.
>Age of visitors
>Destroys your game
based
There is also an age of singularity where an evil AI tries to take over the world.
so anybody bought it?
1. anyone buying a paradox game on release is moronic
2. a review from someone moronic is worthless
3. no cracked version of the game has been shared yet
conclusion
you will not get a meaningful review of the game as long as 3. stands
Steam reviews are not positive.
67% on metacritic too. Take that as you will.
>MUH GRAPHICS
why are zoomers like this?
The game literally has screenshots, who the frick buys a game you can clearly see gas shit graphics and them complains they're bad
they have less than 1h in the game
this is moronic
>1 hour in
>not even an hour playtime if you take into account download and game setups
No wonder gaming is dying when this is the consumer.
This.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to play Alpha Centauri again.
>graphics bad
>multiplayer not connecting
>keybindings lacking
Whatever. An hour in nobody is going to have a worthwhile opinion anyway. All you can expect is either hype or "does not launch" issues.
>11 reviews within the first hour of release
Yeah this is totally a reliable metric for the state of the game.
>all reviews complain about graphics and not working multiplayer
It seems the itself is good.
things that were well advertised before launch yet they still bought it.
curious.
>.1 hours played
they walked in, walked out and said the food was shit without even eating
this is pretty doink
There is a review with 0.3 of game time leaving a negative review another with 0.4 lmao
well we can only strap in, do something else or even play the game and check back in 8-48 hours/a week for a more final judgement.
So how is this better then civ 5 or 6 ?
its different
>civ5-6
I dunno what to tell ya, the game's a successor to Call to Power from 20+ years ago, the only thing similar to civ5-6 is the hexes and 'history'
anything that I consider that I consider better than 5/6 is gonna be so far removed that it seems dishonest or basically saying what
said
>its different
>enter thread
>ctrl+f "civ"
>53 results
At least there's two people who mentioned Call to Power, which this game is actually similar to.
Just a few things I don't like so far
>ages are far too short. No option to change game speed
>AI declares war on you for no other reason than simply being in close proximity to you
>Barbarian numbers are just ridiculous
Is this version so different from the demo?
I don't remember the barbarians being so bad, and diplomacy with the AI was kinda fine
CRACK IS UP
https://mega.nz/file/5qEw0LQa#ETewcRvnWmBV30TrRfzbmtBBK0PiatAhKpVok7s9sHg
Piracy is illegal.
So does being a homosexual in some countries. Doesnt stop you being one.
it's also on 1337
reading the reviews this game seems like a midwit filter
people are mad they actually have to learn to play the game
a lotta games recently that I like had that timeline of reviews
but there are a few valid complaints, mostly DLC related imo, paradox being the publisher fricked the game and devs in deeper ways than I can even imagine
Thank god. Then i'll give it a try.
This. I'm actually enjoying it. The graphics are kind of shit but I'm enjoying the pacing and mechanics so far. Also like that crisis ages and chaos events keep players in check from steamrolling the game early on
I haven't found it necessary to tryhard
the average person is shockingly shit at things that are new to them
the yellow line exists for a reason and even then people still frick up
You will not buy this game because it's bad.
I will not buy this game because devs refuse to suck off to my region, and didn't lowered price enough.
We are not the same.
Havent played it yet cause Im burn out on 4X but hope it does well so maybe others release better games
Early reviews kinda expose the worst traits of your average strategy gamer
>Can't fully engage with the game
>Can't experiment and learn different strategies
>Can't appreciate gameplay without pretty symbols
>Wants to go back to his decade old comfort game
I hope the game does well because its actually interesting and fun.
I didn't like watching a certain guy cause of their voice, but after seeing that he was the only one who actually parsed the game mechanics as thoroughly as they did I'm actually a slight fan of them now
couldn't do that before since they had years of experience behind their brand game, but this was a trail by fire I was impressed by
But I am also thoroughly disappointed by some people's inability to do so and exposed to me that they're only good at their games cause of experience instead of having a nack for learning, experimenting or recognizing into exploiting game mechanics
Game seems surprisingly daunting from what I've seen playing up to age 4. I don't know what I'm doing or why I should do it.
That might be because I haven't played anything similar since Civ4 and I played CtP mostly 2 back when I was in primary.
Crisis ages seem like a pretty cool "frick everyone" option. Got pissed at the neighboring AI, went raiders and dragged everyone into Age of Blood. Nice part is that I didn't have a good time, everyone else was just worse of.
Let me guess, the only one that realized how powerful local reform can be for early snowballing?
>local reform
ya caught me, the only people I can overlook is the guys who don't play civ type games, but the amount of people who overlooked it was shocking
but it seemed like they were the only person who actually tested stuff outside of their shilling hours, everyone else was just more or less riffing, it became more apparent the more late game the game got
They need to fix the multiplayer.
A different interpretation of the reviews is that nobody sane will leave a positive review for a 4X game after a few hours because that's clearly not enough time to decide whether the game is actually good. You can however totally decide after 30 minutes that the game's art style, UI, DLC policy, multiplayer stability etc is an absolute dealbreaker for you. You would be a moron to leave a negative review over the art style which you can clearly see from screenshots, but it is honestly less moronic than leaving a positive review for a game you've played for 2 hours.
I once left a bad review after I hated the menu music. didn't even play the game, shut it down after I heard it. requested a refunded and left a review. lmao
I been following Millenia for the past couple weeks as it seemed interesting, but then I remembered Old World. I actually bought it at some point last year but only played it for a few hours and then stopped for some reason. I don't think I played enough to be filtered by it, but for some reason I never played it again after that. Don't know why though as it seems like a good game and it doesn't include any gay modern times. I always found those the most boring in Civs. Anyway, I'm checking some YouTube footage right now to remind me self of it but so far it looks that once I'm done with my current ES2 run I will play Old World over Millenia.
>Age of Heroes incoming
>nope, some nerd who ignored scouting in favor of books charges ahead and we're Iron now
>Age of Monuments incoming
>nope, some nerd who ignored cool statues in favor of books charges ahead and we're Kings now
I'm sensing a pattern here
they fixed mp?
Almost every game I have played has had an age of heros.
I see it much more often then Iron, and I have never seen blood.
Kill two independent towns worth of defenders to trigger the blood age, if it's still like in the demo
The game so far is pretty good. I was a bit of a dumbfrick and got my entire army assraped by barbarians, but I managed to get to the Age of Iron alive regardless.
The resource system is very interesting, different from Civilization (for one, adjancency and raw vs. refined resources) and Humankind (basically... not being a confusing, slogging mess). I like it so far, but I worry on how it'll look come the final age.
My biggest gripe? The speed. Building and unit production is maddeningly slow, unless you committ to the bit at the expense of everything else, while you tech up very quickly if you even brush against the Council. A speed dial, one that separates building vs. research time preferably, would make this a true contender on the 4X scene.
Solve these problems with money or points.
How often do you use your mana to make units?
I don't hate the unit construction speed because I ultimately figured out ways to get around that, as
and
said, mana. To do anything you need to play Mana: The Videogame, but then it's clearly not a simulation but a glorified board game, so it's not as bad as Paradrone rejects would want you to believe.
But yeah, in terms of research the game goes way too fast, it has that issue of Civ on faster speeds where you just blow through ages and you never really see anything interesting happen until very late when the all the other mechanics catch up to how fast the research goes. The alternative Ages, especially crisis ones, tend to also just not happen because you research so fast and don't even need all research to progress, so AI tends to just beeline for the default Age unless you try really hard.
What I don't understand is how they managed to frick up the performance. It's a really graphically simple game and is more taxing than some eye candy titles. Even the fricking main menu has very low FPS. I don't remember the demo being like that.
Things I liked was that there seems to be a lot of barbarians for early game fights and because of that scouting isn't just clicking a scout in one direction for 50 turns. Shame it kind of exasperates the fast tech issue because it takes long time to actually get to do something with your army that isn't fighting barbarians.
The big negatives however are that the game feels at least partially Early Access and the only reason it's not marked as such is because they intend to sell updates as DLC. It's also like twice the reasonable price for what it is right now.
tl;dr
Not great, not terrible, certainly better than the pile of dogshit Humankind was but it's probably going to fail simply because of the absurdally overt money grabbing practices.
Some secondary thoughts - AI cheats like a b***h and I absolutely hate that combat happens in a shitty pop-up window that takes way too long to show up even if you incerase the animation speed. This is a general compliant too, they love doing this shitty showy UI shit that takes way too long, like the Age progress which shows you this Age line which I don't fricking care a single bit about, skip.
Overall the game needs more settings. Besides game setup, I'm really bothered by the lack of UI scaling too.
>two DLC announced already
>for more than half the base game price
What a shame, I was hoping Paradox just being the publisher meant a break from their absurd DLC policies.
Why don't you take a look at the dlc list for Civ 5 and 6, or Endless Legend, or....
Of course they already have a roadmap this shit has been standard in the genre for a long time.
I've had a look. Could you point out which of those was putting out 4 DLC worth more than the base game each year?
Even if you include their music or map packs that don't offer gameplay changes and are completely ignorable, they're still putting out less DLC in both dollars and quantity than this game is planning to.
>game runs like absolute shit
>paradox is involved
like pottery
>units are stupid fricking expensive and cost the same as a building
I hate this
He hates it!
Does Art XP get significantly better in later ages? For now I can't possibly see a situation where I'd rather have it over just converting the rocks into 5 hammers a pop.
When your chinese copy of Civilization has just over 4,000 players in its first days and Beyond Earth had almost 30,000 in its first days, you have done something wrong.
>get innovation
>1 motherfricking culture per each hunting camp
>get another innovation
>1 culture for your one and only palace, ever. Enjoy.
I feel like these need some balancing.
building a hunting camp means you can't build something else there, there is also an opportunity cost
with culture from palace its just free culture
I'd agree in theory if I hadn't just gotten a "reveal six tiles in some bumfrick nowhere corner of the world" innovation.
They really do need a balancing pass.
The year is 50 BC. Gaul is entirely occupied by the Romans. Well, not entirely... One small village of indomitable Gauls still holds out against the invaders.
>Mountain defense
>Palisades
>Forces a coastal war
Kino
anybody finished a game? how is the performance in late game?
It's bearable. I have a rather powerful CPU so the time it took AI to take it's turns wasn't noticeably incerased as I played but having started another game it's like a second instead of essentially instant.
You can demolish the camp though, as you probably should if the camp doesn't have some crazy innovation upgrades.
Worst part is there are some really OP units hidden behind innovations and it seems to be complete RNG what you get as long as you meet the prerequisites. There are also some pretty useless units, but I digress.
Having started another game it's curious that in this one there's frick all barbarians and this has considerably incerased the progress speed. I don't think I haven't changed any settings and the game feels noticeably easier where I can expand without any issue. I think this is the anomalous state because I recall there being quite a few barbarians in the demo, but still.
This clearly impacts the AI because it's not even AD yet and we're already in Renaissance.
I wish the ai would focus on the barbarians more instead of trying to spitroast me, there's a fricking empty half of the continent they could be filling instead of this forever war they've forced me into
This game looks worse or at best on-par with Civilization IV but runs like shit even on modern machines.
>-10% research cost when maxed
>or -50 unrest
>or -50% improvement cost
>or -80% unit upkeep
Really? I can either shave off less than a turn's worth of research when maxed out or pick a mechanic to otherwise ignore and just focus on knowledge spam instead.
I get that boosting research is bad game design but this is just underwhelming. Nevermind that I'll have to get it anyway because I shit compass mana.
Why are so many people shilling this?
>shilling
pre launch is cause they got paid
post launch, cause they like the game or it's an ongoing series from prerelease
It's over
ARA: History ubtold will finally shut you vile little runts up.
cant wait to play as literally who dyke poet Greece leader
But enough about civ7!
Having played the early versions of ARA, it's going to bomb on release
isn't that game made by trannies
yes and?
I am skeptical it will be good
I enjoyed Old World. Also i never played any CIV game, nor plans to.
I'm still mad we got Humankind instead of Endless Legend 2.
moi aussi
But Old World is good
Why he got a gaijin logo on he shirt?
has anyone bought or pirated the premium edition content? I assume the advertised nomadic start is literally just getting to pick where you found your first city rather than an additional zeroeth age with its own mechanics
sorry I genuinely have no interest in helping a petty criminal (such as yourself) out not sorry.
The nomadic start and the other thing don't exist yet. They're from a future upcoming DLC they're already selling.
The only "premium" content you get right now is two cosmetic skins for your Stone Age Warrior and Scout that turn them into furries.
It also applies to enemy units, it's literally a toggle in options. I question the idea of skins in a game where units have less than like 100 triangles on each model.
Somehow the game still runs like shit GPU-wise but oh well.
It literally says Q3 2024 as the release even on the store page, so not only is it a missing basic feature, but one that's not even in the game for months to come
Buy the early access pass chuddie
Performance is bad? How are the late-game turn times? I can live with low fps for a turn-based strategy game but turns slowing to a crawl late-game is a dealbreaker for me.
Terrible GPU optimization so FPS are low and GPU temperatures are high. No fricking idea why and how, it's at best mobile game level graphics.
CPU and turn times are actually surprisingly good.
AI cheats something fierce. The last game I've seen AI have such blatant disregrad for actual rules of the game must have been the original Empire Earth.
I tried it, but I got bored by the Iron Age. It feels like there's not much to do except play whack a mole with barbarians. Exploration is not that interesting and I can't even tell my plethora of units to stay put and not bother me every turn. I can't exactly put into words why I don't like it. Maybe I'm just a brainlet.
In four attempts of playing it, every time I met a civilization, they started threatening me and surrounding me with three times the troops that I have. Even when I went Raider and spawned armies non-stop, I was outmatched.
>turn 52
>1 region with 10 pop, 1 vassalized minor and 1 player made vassal city both 1 pop each
>1st envoy is like 30 fricking turns away
look to my neighbor
>2 10 pop cities, 1 vassalized city, an outpost
suffering from a skill issue right now
Just wait until you get into war during the later ages
>GPU reaching higher temps than when playing Dragon's Dogma 2
What the frick did the code monkeys do to make it run that bad? It doesn't even look good.
Just quit my first game, default diff.
Went Heroes -> Kings - > Intolerance -> Discovery. At that point it's pretty much gg, just entered the era and I already qualify for the religion victory age - with precisely zero opposition because somehow I've founded the only faith on the planet Earth. Can't be arsed to finish it since there's a shitload of micro going into every turn and I haven't gotten into a single war by that point.
Heroes was cute, some of the quests had outcomes with permanent buffs which was cool. I wish it had actual monsters spawn as barbarians to drive the myths-were-real point across. Reeks of low budget unfortunately.
Intolerance was a whole lot of fricking nothing.
Some first impressions which might not be entirely correct:
The game falls into the classic balance trap of allowing people to mix-and-match their own builds, which inevitably means players will either fail miserably or tear the game a new one.
Balance as a whole is iffy, the game was clearly rushed out before any proper gameplay testing. Some abilities and events are numerically dogshit, others will make you snowball.
The production chain micro is fun at first but it becomes tiresome by midgame. Four+ towns growing at 200% will drive you crazy. I did not play a vassal build, but they seemed entirely worthless without one - and considering the power of goods, I'm not sure how they'd compete if you specced for them. In any case, I'd much rather spam pioneers than build even a single vassal city without a dedicated perk set. Only good as roadblocks.
Mana is tight at the start but you'll grow to have a hard time finding practical outlets for the flood.
Culture powers are undwerhelming, Local Reform is stupidly busted to the point it's hard to justify bothering with the others, barring some special case scenarios.
Diplo is pure schizo nonsense and might as well not exist.
It sounds negative but the game's fun enough, it just badly needs QOL polish, playtesting and better presentation.
I used diplo to bribe away the more annoying barbarian stacks, not really any other reason to use it except maybe grabbing free vassals for reasons unknown.
I also had the issue of having founded the only religion and passing the age where religions can no longer be founded.
crisis ages I feel are mostly the game's tutorial. You didn't give a shit about sanitation? Here, there's an age that forces you to take care of it and gives you tools to engage with it past building improvements. You didn't give a shit about religion? Here, there's an age that forces you to take care of it and gives you tools to engage with it past building improvements. Didn't give a shit about education? Here, there's an age that forces you to take care of it and gives you tools to engage with it past building improvements.
What I dislike however is that I feel like some of those ages shouldn't be universal - why the hell do I have to be religiously intolerant just because some guy on a different continent I cannot contact yet speedran research without making his own religion?
Having played more games I think it's just unbalanced as shit. Worldgen will frick you over and then there's about five million RNG little events on everything some of which give you bonuses for the entire game or huge power spikes while others are literally detrimental while being supposedly rewards. There are also some detrimental ones that are actually positive.
This extends to stuff like governments and national spirits - some are absurdally powerful for entire game while others don't give any sort of lasting bonuses and others just weaken you.
But it's fun in a chaotic "see what ends up happening" way but game tends to be decided by Age 5-6 and after that you can just get victory for free or be forced to do boring maintenance until you reach the end.
>because somehow I've founded the only faith on the planet Earth.
This happens way too often. I think AI either has "found faith" priority very low so they never pick it over making stuff like new towns or they frick themselves by having million shitty 1 pop regions which tanks their culture into negatives. I assume it's better on harder difficulties but then AI gets so many cheats it just rolls you over with infinite military before religion even becomes an issue.
The mid to late game performance is pretty bad on a huge map with 8 civs, the turn times themselves are fine but the game lags like frick despite looking like a mobile game. The ai definitely fricking cheats too
so how do you have fun with this game, it seems like a lot of things CAN be done but should you do them
I'm trying to feel the game, but the beginning just isn't fun. It looks like it might pick up later on though.
Get your shovel production up ASAP. You want those shitty clay pits early on, you can just bulldoze them later when you have alternative sources, but the game will starve you if you can't shit out improvements at will.
>watch JumboPixel to find out how to play
>get annoyed immediately
i really dont know why i dont have the patience for these youtubers to not give me any useful tips or something that isnt already extremely fricking obvious.
>lose half my population in the capital due to unrest from expanding
how the frick are you supposed to manage unrest? I didn't see any buildings that reduce it.
Also the game is fricking unplayable because you can't tell units to shut up and leave you alone until you need them, I can see this being a massive pain in the ass the further you go in the game.
there is the "Watch" police building at the third ish age and units can also suppress unrest. there's also a button to make units "guard" or fortify which makes them not bother you
Just fricking guard your guys on cities like in any other Civ game? There's even a special cheap-ass guard unit line that starts in 2nd age that gets bonuses to reducing unrest.
It's actually kinda funny because it's usually some form of city guard that becomes riot police and the last stage is a fricking social worker because apparently gibs are the best way to deal with unrest.
My personal pet pevee with the game right now is that most of the stuff doesn't upgrade. I was left with dozens of stacks of max level raiders, barbarians and berserkers from the Blood Age but none of them ever upgrade into anything and this holds true for basically every unit that isn't mainline tech tree.
can't you just make them leaders and then retire the leaders for warfare xp when they become obsolete?
Out of those only berserkers (and there's comparatively very few of them, since raiders spawn in stacks of 2 and you get 14 of them from the national spirit alone, while berserkers need to be trained or spawned one by one through volunteers) can be made leaders but good catch, might try it with some other units in other games.
Even bow raiders which are invention unit that you have to manually train too can't be leadered either.
Raiders would be OP if they upgraded. Same with Khan's, it's just meant to be a big boost to your ability to conquer shit with a limited timeframe that prevents you from snowballing the whole map.
You can't spawn millions of Spartans as easy and you can't upgrade them as well. This also applies to many other units, raiders are just most egregious since you're most likely to have bunch leftover later on. As a side note, raiders aren't even actually good at conquering shit, they don't have morale to break down walls.
And then there's Mound Builders which give you double the pop growth speed and lets you shit out tons of sanitation and culture for burial mounds which NEVER go obsolete, in fact, they keep upgrading even in Age 8.
The price of an upgrade can also be really anything, so if it's high enough then it's not really that OP. Hell, I'd pay worth of entire new unit just so I can keep the experience. If that fails, let me upgrade them into, IDK, Somali pirates with AKs that aren't much better but at least aesthetically please my autism.
>shit out tons of sanitation and culture for burial mounds which NEVER go obsolete, in fact, they keep upgrading even in Age 8.
I feel like the game needs an obsolescence system for the societies negating their boni in later ages and allowing you to pick a variance for later ages or a different society.
Anon, you do realise paying 20 bucks mor only gives you a skin for the archers and warband right?
>I feel like the game needs an obsolescence system for the societies negating their boni in later ages
But it does! Raiders powers of incerased gold from razing and slight healing boost from combat go obsolete as soon as you get gunpowder units!
Not even remotely the same thing.
Some scale way better in the long run than others, or at all, and quite a few are something that societies had alongside others at the same time.
Allowing an upgrade/reform path would for them would not only be more flavorful but also avoid things like raiders which are simultaneously overpowered and underwhelming.
Would be a cool way to do it, perhaps even with some synergy/special unlocks if you meet multiple criteria.
>Holy frick, Millenia even has a day 1 nuke dlc.
Jesus christ is everyone on /vst/ illiterate?
Read homie, read. That shit isn't even finished developing. Sure you can complain about them already making plans for dlcs but that is indeed a logical economic decision if you wish to keep making money from a product and don't want to blow all your money on an uncertain endeavor.
>defending day 1 nuke DLC
garrison units and build the buildings that say unrest supression
build city guards and perma garrison them in the city
they also work as extra defence
this game is so bizarre as while it has some interesting ideas like the resource chains, actually innovative idea in the form of different ages, and overall so far i don't actually found anything mechanically truly wrong with it, it lacks any sort of balance and technically it's so lacking it makes me wonder whether any of the devs not just played their own game, but whether they ever played any other 4x game at all.
technically - pretty much no startup options and the few it has, it doesn't remember your previous settings so have fun changing it every time. no graphical settings besides presets. barely has any hotkeys and you can't change the few it has. UI elements are too large, obviously devs didn't research UI scaling yet either.
balance is discussed but yeah, even from the starting bonuses in game start, a choice between start with a single extra warband or some benefit that lasts literally the whole game? getting 3>4 resource increase yield globally from event lasting whole game over few domain points you get in 3 turns normally?
shit, cheating AI is expected from 4x game, the only modern 4x game that has competent AI without any need for cheating is old world (which is complete opposite of the game start customization, and UI and qol in general as well).
as a bonus, it has maybe the worst art i've seen in a game (pic related) and that's including generic RPGmaker stuff . this is why AI art can't get used soon enough as if they used dalle it would make the game look so much better despite this being relatively minor thing with no effect on gameplay.
Why does that pic look like someone copy pasted the shield from something completely different, lmao
I kinda want to try the game but it looks like it's physically impossible since I have a higher resolution monitor. The game melts your GPU which the higher resolution exacerbates and now you're telling me that there is no UI scaling either?
I think paradox probably pressured them to rush it out before they could add more features or polish it
That's what happened to Cities Skylines 2 so probably
>it has maybe the worst art i've seen in a game (pic related)
You've played some pretty games then. That's not Sword of the Stars or Shadow Empire, not even Galciv level.
All of those suffer from either bad 3D CGI or programmer art.
Millenia however just looks like a shitty mobile game with buunch of AI art.
Sword of the Stars isn't ugly, it's pure SOVL
No, it's pure shit. Don't let contrarianism make you moronic.
Enjoyed this game a bit more than I expected. Strongly hoping for (reasonably priced) DLC and modding support to just push it into the territory of what I consider good. I'd appreciate a mod that removes a few of its minor pozzed elements.
I want a mod to make the eras last longer
They start and finish too quickly
Of course this might just be me playing too much Caveman2Cosmos but even so
Based and same
Longer research and era times are direly needed, production is fine.
Just kill all my pops idgaf anymore, I'm not clicking the same fricking button on a hundred provinces just for it to all respawn the next turn.
The Age of Plague was extremely unfun, and I only had two non-vassal cities, one of which mainly ran on fish and shells. I cannot imagine how bad it would be with more interior, well developed cities.
It's not that bad if you have mana to spare or can actually get decent sanitation, just use plague doctors for big outbreaks and wipe ones in hard to reach places with improvement points. Like all other crisis ages it filters first-time players hard though.
I just gave up on baby sitting the outbreaks and shit completely killed one of my cities, went from like 12 pops to 1 and then it rebelled from unrest it generated.
What are the sources of Chaos?
I was taking in 33ish chaos per turn, but could only find 5 in the hud, when hovering over city unrest...
I assume conquering cities gives unrest for multiple turns, but I can't really see it in any hud.
Some events give you stuff l ike +10 Chaos, it's a bit counterintuitive because you might think it's one-time when in reality it's just +10 every turn until the Chaos event triggers. Same for conquering cities and bunch of other stuff. Game doesn't really give you the information so you can only really guess unless you track it yourself.
i found most of the time it's due to one of your cities lacking needs.
no difference whatsoever excluding city names.
>chaos events range from losing like, 5 food in your capital for a couple turns to having all of your 10 vassal cities declare independence simultaneously
well now I know why you can just pay them off...
I played until the renaissance and the game isn't enjoyable. The plague age is a fricking pain in the ass and it lasts forever. The supply chain mechanic is cool but it just makes me want to see it implemented in a more competent game.
I'd rather just play Old World or Civ 6, both are better games and way cheaper at the same time.
I agree, if I were to actually spend real money on this thing I would be ten times as more critical of it. 60 dollars is fricking absurd.
It's $40 but I get your point. NTA but I have similar feelings. The game feels halfbaked and they didn't do enough to make the ages really feel that different or fun.
It's 60 for the actual full game, $40 is just the early access demo without updates.
It's literally just Humankind all over again.
Humankind but made by someone much less competent
It looks like someone's fedora was on too tight.
lel, I honestly should've expected this as soon as female swordsmen was somehow a thing.
Are the civs even unique? Are there civ exclusive units and such?
NTA but I don't think so. I've played one game as Rome and I didn't see an ability to make legionaries or anything like that.
There are a couple pre made "civilizations" you can choose from but the only real differences between them are like, 1 starting modifier which could be as cosmetic as starting with an extra soldier. They're essentially the same civ with a different color on the map.
no, its basically "build your own civ" during the game
Also known as Civ 1&2
Alright I take it back, this is great.
I'll forgive the w*men warriors, I'm getting good vibes here.
There's no civilization bonus. Starting civilizations just have a distinct catalog of names for regions and cities. Aside from a paltry starting bonus before game, You flesh out your civilization with national ideas and ages over time.
Yeah, the women warriors, the black legionnaires and etc. kinda just pale to the sheer vibe crisis ages are. I actually would prefer if you could have them back to back, instead the game always forces you to have a normal one after a crisis (exception would be Age of Old Ones after Age of Heresy which is a bit of a special case, though I kinda wish all of them had a "Bad End" if you fail at the crisis)
Millennia vs Old World who wins?
GOD DAMMIT this game looks ugly.
Old World, it's not even close.
The only thing the game has going for it is the supply chain mechanic but even that is a pain in the ass in certain scenarios.
I feel moronic but I haven't even noticed the women warriors. I just didn't pay any attention to the icons whatsoever, just treated them as tooltip promptboxes.
Been playing this on and off for a few days. Am on turn 160 of my 1st campaign
honestly its very unpolished and theres alot of annoying things with the UI with battles and that sort of thing, and the ingame wiki/tooltips are pretty awful
but honestly the core gameplay itself is pretty satisfying to me. I think itll be a decent game in a year or two when theyve fixed up the UI and all that
and also I really cant wait for the autism mods, theres a lot of potential with the goods system and with the alternate ages for fun stuff. and the combat system itself I also like (even if the screen is annoying and sucks), even if its simplistic it feels way superior to civ. I like multiple units per tile and the RPS aspect
I have no idea what the modern ages are like though. I could see them fricking up the air-sea aspect. Im hoping the interactions between tile improvements get more complex later ok too.
the late game doesn't really add much. the units just get better stats and that's it, the roles stay the same. the only thing they add are planes, early bombers don't do much, didn't really get to test advanced bombers in large numbers. i've had AI bomb me with 1 or 2 lancers in one game every turn which obviously didn't do anything meaningful.
AI can absolutely not handle naval combat from what i've seen so far. you can make a stack of bombard ships (that later become battleships) take out the few actual combat ships the AI at best make, and since they have very big stats relative to regular units and there's no counter attacks against them, you just park next to any coastal city and single or at most two attacks absolutely obliterate any defenses and you can capture it with a non combat unit the same turn.
overall at least with convential ages (so far i only tested most of them only up to age 7/8), it's disappointing that the wars don't really get anymore destructive and like with newer civs it just makes me appreciate civ2 or smac a lot more as they got the things right on first try (like civ2 does global warming better than fricking civ6 dlc made specifically about that). this game has age with aliens but the game doesn't have nukes in base game and they plan that as DLC.
>the game doesn't have nukes in base game
What the actual frick that's pathetic
>https://store.steampowered.com/app/2829690/Millennia_Atomic_Ambitions/
that will be 24,99 sir :^)
>mound builders
>imperial dynasty
>daimyo
damn this is some tall shit right here
wait until you see sultans
Playing it a bit I can see enjoying it, but there will need to be a few patches. Overall I am enjoying it but they do need a couple of passes over. The gameplay loop though with the improvements is fun but I am the sort that likes little fiddly bits in my builder games.
I just hate logo with the crown. just looks so uncool. Like the cartoony, stereotypical crown on a typical skull just gives the impression of low quality. It may be AI generated and cleaned up by the artist.
It literally is, you can compare it to the original logo in the older dev diaries, 100% ai they then cleaned up
This game would be much more fun if stuff wasn't split into exclusive choices as much. Really weird that some mechanics like plagues or building wonders are unique to single age or how your nation can have only one national spirit from a list despite nations often being multiple. Especially weird with the modern ones where most nations do all of them, probably should have been something more unique if they wanted to keep up the theme.
Seems like replay bait that just ends up hurting the game as a whole.
Well this game was something
Too bad it feels like a phone game compared to the base Civilization series, and the trade mechanics seems very lackluster
The base game is solid, hopefully future updates make the experience much better.
In the end, it might actually be a great multiplayer setup since your nation is typically molded by the environment.
Too bad you can't chain crises eras because fricking over the whole lobby with another player seems like something I'd do.
Is 'Civ but different' such a huge genre that the market share is available to make this profitable?
The 4x/4x adjacent genre consists of MOO, Civ, and MoM/HOMM, aka space, land, and fantasy games. Fantasy games are the only ones with any amount of variety of choice. Half of space ones are literally MOO1/2 remakes. Civ is more or less the only land one. It's not that it's a huge genre, it's that it's a huge space waiting to be filled. It won't be filled until they throw away the ideas of nations existing unchanged in culture, flags, and genetics throughout all history, drop names altogether, and let you make whatever civs you want, but they're getting there slowly. Even better if a non-fantasy/alternate history game just focuses on a single period in time so you don't get as wild technology shifts and have wars that take 1000s of years.
They tried that with Humankind and it just resulted in schizophrenic cosplayers switching costumes every era while the entire country Michael Jacksons into another ethnicity.
Yeah because they still used real life civilizations.
Not using IRL civs won't change the fundamental problem with Humankind, moron-kun.
People are complaining in this very thread that country names are meaningless and they can't make historic units.
As
said and I meant in
you're gonna need to entirely give up the idea of any real cultures and go full Stellaris. Perhaps not even use civs at all and express players as a set of genes that spread through the world regardless of what cultures their progeny adopt.
>set of genes that spread through the world
The most moronic idea I've ever seen on /vst/
What, are you going to deny that genes have ever spread from one group to another or that groups haven't replaced other groups throughout history now? Why is it moronic?
I cannot wait to play my favourite haplogroups, J-M172 and J-M267!
>express players as a set of genes that spread through the world regardless of what cultures their progeny adopt
I doubt any modern company would touch this idea due to not wanting any association with perceived eugenics gameplay
Shame, that would be the best part. By disassociating it from any society or race and setting it on a randomly generated map, you could manipulate or genocide or perform cleansing and eugenics on any group without any real life associations.
>senile leadership
Trump is still very sharp
>environmental disasters and pathetic attempts to cover them up
Source needed
>decaying infrastructure
12 years of democrats out of the past 16 does that to ya
>losing a war in Afghanistan
Who cares, also "losing"
>economic stagnation
Lmao
>plummeting fertility rates
I'll give you that one but for very different reasons
>widespread civil disobedience
Only blacks do that
why does everyone have to make a civ clone
they're always worse than civ
variety is the flavor of life anon. I don't like or dislike this game but it suffers from the same problems then most of paradox games and the genre.
It's not made by Paradox, it's published by Paradox. And the only issue I equate with that is dogshit optimization.
For what it's worth, the game is ugly and horribly optimized but it does still run on old hardware and isn't 50GB(yet) so they did at least something correctly.
So what? That means nothing. That's like saying "Oh, Spore was just published by EA, it wasn't made by EA itself". Paradox is a big boy now. It's not some little indie dev like in the days of yore. Paradox publishing a game means it has a great deal of control over it, and enough control to insist on one key aspect: lots and lots of DLC.
Holy frick, Millenia even has a day 1 nuke dlc. They made a mechanic that was in Civ 1 right out of the gate fricking DLC so you could pay to have a fricking nuclear fallout age. "It's not made by Paradox" my ass. Paradox has its hand shoved up the ass of its puppets that you can occasionally see the fingers.
There's no Day 1 Nuke DLC. There is Day 1 promise of a Nuke DLC.
don't forget the overpriced DLC that should have been part of the base game
Meh I'd argue that two reskinned units aren't important enough to be part of the base game. Not like the graphics if he game are a selling point.
the settler and nuke ones
Need a medieval fantasy version of Stellaris.
No I do not want to mod CK2. Frick you.
how the heck would that work?
Look man I'm just an ideas guy I don't do any actual work.
Just wait for GPT-5 that will be able to generate a game with just a few prompts.
Is that Age of Wonders 4?
Here my review
>Cool gameplay
>Same microhell as other 4x in middle/late game
>A lot of good idea
>Some dumb one
>Unfinished game
game
Can't sell endless DLC otherwise. To be fair, Civ usually launches in a weirdly "empty" way until a couple of expansion packs later so Millennia isn't uniquely bad in that regard.
Not him but this game isn't empty, it's unfinished. It's normal for 4x to take several expansions to be great, but it feels like they have a lot of stuff they just didn't have time to elaborate on. Which is probably fine, it's better to have a working game that's finished later than a broken game that's barely updated outside of more dlc.
>I do hate being forced in a shitty age because the AI decided to not build enough latrines.
This is the point of the game and as a non AI, I would do the same to other players if I could.
>Combat is weird
I don't think it's weird, myself. RPS-esque system, tile defense bonuses, pretty standard srpg style battle system. I wish the battle screen was different but I don't know how. It's mostly the intro that has to play every time that bothers me. I'll be honest and say I probably wouldn't be bothered by it if it had a cute JRPG style to the characters. I don't understand why sometimes units get morale broken instead of killed when they lose though. I'm probably just misunderstanding the bars.
the fact that the battle screen is completely unskipable pisses me off, even if you skip to the end it still wastes time opening and closing
Just press escape
You can turn it autoplaying off in options.
So is the general consensus that the game has promise? Is it more or less then Humankind? Ive kinda liked what ive seen from people playing it but im wary about EA 4x games after Humankind shit the bed.
What don't you like about humankind that isn't related to autism? This game has good ideas but I don't know if it has the promise of ever fleshing the ideas out. I wish it was back in the days when formative games came out, maybe people would take inspiration from this one.
Granted this was way back at the games release so im sure they've changed things (But ive heard nobody really talk about the game so i assume its still meh) but i hated the pollution mechanic and how it just ends the game at a certain level, i didn't like how a lot of buildings in the cities didn't feel very impactful and most of the time you just queue up a bunch when you fall behind too much. There was other things that im sure are no longer issues just from time like balance issues between the cultures and things like small amount of events or rewards that felt meh. Along with how religion didn't feel very interactive.
>balance issues between the cultures and things like small amount of events or rewards that felt meh. Along with how religion didn't feel very interactive.
All true of this game, though rewards are more either crazy good or meh. It's usually useful to get a few points however.
>i didn't like how a lot of buildings in the cities didn't feel very impactful
The districts you build feel impactful, I don't know if they should have had inside the city center only buildings at all. I know they wanted to separate one per city buildings but It feels kinda eh except the special one of a nation buildings. At least you only build the last in a chain and not all the prior ones too. It's not the game's fault, but I feel Shadow Empire does it best with you able to build multiple things on tiles around cities as well as inside. I don't like how battles just destroy the center though, I also like how individual buildings in Shadow Empire have health, so you can just go can destroy a few structures instead of here where you're under siege or not under siege and the town is either functional or completely destroyed.
>most of the time you just queue up a bunch
I cannot understand why it is 2024, the future era of hover cars and robot maids, yet there are still games like this that do not have a queue and just have you build one thing and then maybe one next thing. More than the graphics or performance, someone needs to grab any game dev like this by the neck and shake them violently until they explain why you cannot queue up multiple items, not even of the same type of unit. Queues, multi turn movement orders, and way/rally points are things you can never be sure a 4x has even though old ass games have them. Imagine an RTS came out tomorrow and you had to click each barrack and queue up two units each time without even the option to have it continuously produce one type.
Combat is weird but i prefer it over the tactical autism mankind has (it all become auto after 10 battles). Performance is horrible, mostly because AI spams too many cities and troops and i'm very sure the AI get some really broken bonus. They keep shitting troops even in the brink of being massacred. I do hate being forced in a shitty age because the AI decided to not build enough latrines.
why does no one mention that the banner is very obviously AI art?
Because that's not the banner anymore. See
probably that no one really cares
pretty much my thoughts, it's currently a beta but if they stick to it for at least another year it could be a very solid game.
performance is so shitty too, games runs really well until the enlightenment from there on the game runs like shit and AI cheats like hell, you can see their city all game running into unrest level 8 but it doesn't affect them at all.
I used to think the main screen was just lagging, but now that I look closer I realize it's glitchy on purpose. The clouds, the sky, it's all a gigantic hoax. A lie.
These barbarians have some strong ass arms.
It would be an okay game if it wasn't so overpriced for what it is. If you consider that you basically need the Premium Edition to get the full experience because basic options like starting as a settler instead of a city and nuclear war are locked behind DLC, and that this edition costs $60, it's a ridiculously expensive game for what it actually offers. At $40 I'd find it worth considering it, but there are way better games that you can get for less than $60. And even if you think the cost of just the base game at $40 is accaptable, it's ludicrous to pay half the game's base cost (or even 3/4ths depending on when and how you buy the DLC) for a couple of basic features and like three new age variants.
This game isn't Civ-level and that's okay, but don't charge $60 for a game that's only half of the average Civ game.
60 bucks is really cheap now.
t. troony dev
My main beef with this game is how hard the AI cheats. Units will literally spawn out of nowhere, their cities suffer no unrest penalties, they somehow always have the latest war techeven if they're in the middle of getting their shit pushed in during war. Not to mention the unrelenting barbarian spam, makes it a bit of a chore to play
yeah, the AI cheats too much. They always have leaders, they always have points to pay for everything and they cities are always running on lvl 8 unrest with no consequences for them. I mean AI needs to cheat to be competitive but the adept one is already too much, the high ones will outpace you so fast it's not even funny
im on my 1st campaign and i felt pretty far ahead. maybe it was my build but even when the AI attacked me (which it did a couple times) and has a good advantage, after i repelled their initial attack it wasn't much trouble
maybe the cheating gets worse later, but also i put 2/7 in the level above adept
Did you play the demo? I don't doubt that the AI cheats but I'm not seeing them even keep pace with me right now. I'm about an age and a half ahead of the word, but I think this is due to me playing the demo a lot and being able to optimize so I could see all the ages.
This game seems like multiplayer would be fun but also like it would have total no-fun lobbies with NO ALTERNATE AGES mods and stuff.
I know this is a giant cringe nitpick but to me the civs completely lack character. The flags are all really boring looking and i miss the countries having those faction leaders that you sorta interact with and love or hate as you play the campaign. Just makes them all feel very samey to me.
the flags are just for flavor. I prefer this than the humankind moronic system
>Civ 6
>Leaders are far more important than nations, to the point where you choose leaders on the start screen and can't sort by nations at all
>Civ 7 is probably going to do away with nations entirely, it'll just be leaders and nothing else
>Humankind
>nations are changed like clothing
>Millenia
>it's just a flag, not even a unique unit
everytime i play civ 6 i just pick random. There's really no point picking one, it will always be the same at the end
Here's how they should do it.
>Pick your flag and emblem color.
>Pick an aesthetics for your nation.
>Pick a THEMATIC bonus that LASTS THE WHOLE GAME.
That's it. That's fricking it, how hard can it be?
Interestingly, that's exactly how Millennia does it when you use the Nation Builder option.
>Pick your flag and emblem color.
You can select any flag or symbol you want, the options are somewhat limited but that's not a huge issue IMO. You don't select emblem color on this screen but you can freely select it.
>Pick an aesthetics for your nation.
You can pick the asthetics for both cities and towns separately. No unit aesthetics though since there are no national units.
>Pick a THEMATIC bonus that LASTS THE WHOLE GAME.
That's the last option. Not all bonuses last all game but even the short-term bonuses can have snowball effects, for example starting with an extra archer makes a significant difference and means you can take on barb camps from turn one which makes early exploration and expansion easier.
I will now play your game
Let's go babyyyy
>Rule 1 Can't advance to another age until at least one nation has all the techs from current age.
>Rule 2 One national spirit for each nation no duplicates.
It's not, why do you assume that culture skins wouldn't evolve with the ages? The difference is that during the modern ages your buildings/skyscrapers will have obelisks ornaments if you chose and egyptian aesthetic and oriental dragons if you chose a chinese one.
>map seed
how do you even get the seed of the current map?
I liked the Old World system, where the leaders live and die so they advance in time just like the rest of the game. I do wish the game had a little more to it though.
It works because Old World is situated in just one age, can you imagine how many leaders would we run through the course of one civ-like game?
At the end of the day its a video game, you could do something where every age a new leader arises. Just some variation would be neat to work into a game like that.
you fascists are so funny when you don't get your nationalist fantasies
>the civs completely lack character
That's the point. It was a mistake was giving them names and real flags at all.
>Pick your flag and emblem color.
It should stop at that point.
No it shouldn't.
If you don't pick an aesthetics for your nation they all look the boring same, it's VIDEO game for a reason, go play war if you don't like it.
Bonus are also fun and they should be strong to push your gameplay into the way desired.
It's moronic to pick a single look for a nation that's being built throughout all history. Why should you be able to pick a soviet Russia aesthetic and have it persist from the stone age to the 40th century? Aesthetics should be decided by the choices you make, which itself is a problem I have with this game, that it lacks variety in its structures' aesthetics. I'm sure there will be expensive dlc for that though.
Besides, all cultures other than your own do look samey. All of Europe looks the same, all of middle east looks the same, all of North America looks the same.
AGE OF INTOLERANCE
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
Fricking AGE OF INTOLERANCE
Happy gaming post 2022 homosexuals
Age of intolerance is based because it lets you btfo people who follow the wrong religion.
I am not accepting trannie nomenclature
have a nice day
>trannies own the word "intolerance" now
You must be 18 to post on Ganker, kiddo.
>its another anon buys a paradox game despite it being extremely over valued episode
they can't keep getting away with it
>No Fascism to compliment Communism in a PDX game
What the frick? Why even bother?
>muh "Christo-fascism"
Gonna wait for the Holocaust Age DLC
It's locked behind the age of generals. Really powerful military buffs.
https://millennia.paradoxwikis.com/Government#Autocracy
?t=70
They should at least have generic authoritarianism.
Likely down the line. Aside from national spirits there's surprisingly little in the way of true militaristic governments.
these images were never funny or relatable or whatever it is they're supposed to be
Cope.
Seethe.
/vst/ has finally become Ganker lite, jump ship.
>Two factions near me locked in an eternal war
>Both try to ally me every chance they get in order to trick me into joining their war
you are lucky. In my case to factions got into an eternal alliance. Every time one declares war i have to fight both full armies. This shit is going on since bronze age.
https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1268590/view/4168718495664787162?l=english
so it was basically just rushed out probably due to paradox
this should have been released into early access and not as a finished game
>this should have been released into early access
No. Furthermore, what would early access provide over saying it's released? No one treats early access, betas, or demos like unfinished products to begin with. I think they did the right thing in releasing a fully playable game, even if they had to cut some stuff to get it out, over releasing a half finished game and working on feature creep for the next 3 years.
Yeah you're right it's much better to release a game that nobody will buy because it's clearly unfinished than ever put it in early access and guarantee a source of income while you work on the game. There have never been any successful early access games.
no one? really?
early access shows clearly the game isn't ready yet and I personally do treat them as unfinished products (because that is what they are)
>early access shows clearly the game isn't ready yet
And this is why you never pay for a game in early access. Don't tell me you're some moron that enables devs to make 10s of thousands per year on a game that will never be released.
>guarantee a source of income while you work on the game
moronic paypig.
>There have never been any successful early access games.
There have been but none of them ever released.
>that nobody will buy because it's clearly unfinished
How exactly do you determine a game that is fully released is "unfinished" before buying or pirating it? Indie games that are just proof of concepts sell. Lots of 4x games were barely worth playing before they got 2 or 3 expansions and are remembered fondly. Many games aren't even a fricking thing like they were in a fresh install 1.0 version. A number of them have shit that never, ever worked as well and were ignored or removed. This game, as barebones as it is, is at least mostly functional which is a lot to ask from a newly released game. It's barebones and unpolished, but it is still a full working game and probably better than something that would have been released in the 90s/00s alongside the well remembered games from that time.
>And this is why you never pay for a game in early access. Don't tell me you're some moron that enables devs to make 10s of thousands per year on a game that will never be released.
I've bought a bunch of games in early access that have been released and continue to be released
not all early access games are the same
just to mention a few: deep rock galactic, against the storm, risk of rain 2, slay the spire, gunfire reborn, dead cells
you just have to not be a moron about the games you buy in early access
remember to buy the supporter pack for rockpox season 3, paypiggy.
haven't bought a single DLC in any of these games
not only were all of these in early access for quite a long time, all of them have been getting updated after reaching 1.0 (where its actually polished and feature complete)
saying that early access games are bad or a scam across the board categorically is simply not true
but keep on seething
>they should've gone early access instead of releasing an unfinished game and getting a ton of bad publicity for it
>>b-but early access is bad!
>there have been plenty of successful early access games
>>b-but they were never finished!
>here's a list of some early access games that are both finished and successful
>>b-but I hate anyone who pays for video games!
DRG is a trash, unfinished, and barebones game. That you could call that an example of anything is laughable. This game is more finished now than DRG is after years.
it's seems they will finally give the ability to raze cities in the next patch. Thank god, i hate how AI sneak small cities around you kills your growth.
It's a shame the game is lacking so much basic content, since I really like the basic mechanics. if it has even close to the amount of contant and features of Civ6 but with the mechanics it has now, it would be a fantastic game. But right now it's just mid.
Im going to play Milenia with my gf.
I am trans btw 🙂
This game is just so all over the place. I'm in the Enlightenment and then suddenly when I age up I immediately discover oil? Then I dont even have a single factory but I can invent planes?
And then when I age up from that I can either go to the Moon or colonize the Ocean?
Just so bizarre. I really want to mod it but I looked at it and it doesnt seem like you can just hop in and start changing files like you can with most Paradox games.
With no mod support this game isn't going to go anywhere.
you are weird
It’s a unity game, just get any asset extractor, filter out all the text files and go from there.
If you import goods, does it actually take the good away from the foreign exporter like it does when you domestically export?
I dont know for sure but I doubt it does.
i tried a game of humankind and it's just as boring as everyone says, but amplitude makes it great looking and makes games with great UI, it's like the opposite of this.
from my playing it seemed like the importable goods are dependent on you have the technology enabling it, as as far as i remember only time i lost access to a good it was when it was obsoleted (like i was importing spears and unlocked rifles), and i never encountered issue of being only able to important limited amount of something.
some ages it actually picks decently often. it isn't always vanilla ages as i expected and experienced at first. the bigger issue is that you need a "regular" age between ages which is a shame.
I didnt do a lot of importing in my game and mostly focused on internal trade but I did notice that the 1 thing I couldnt import was Religious Texts.
Honestly founding a religion at all seems like a disadvantage unless you got a Spirit that actively works with it. I didnt so im not getting any benefits and my pops just keep wanting more and more G-d, which I cant give them
And theres only 2 other religions anyway so its not like im being flooded by foreign missionaries
>attack city state
>palisades are rebuilt midturn
Aight, I'm sitting out of this game.
They reeeeally want you to engage with Envoys.
But who would waste Envoys on this if they are necessary to establish embassy?
You need to stock on armies anyway to do any diplomacy because "muh Power Score"
>try it out by pirating
>the one leading in research dictates the ages
Lmao what a dumpster fire.
One of the appeals of 4X games is the the different ways you can play.
What's the point of adding special ages when you either need to focus mainly on research on harder difficulties or let the AI pick the standard age every time?
They really didn't think this trough.
>different ways you can play.
>on harder difficulties
L
In Endless space 2 you could easily go for any sort of victory even on the hardest difficulty.
But the main problem with that game was you picked your victory condition when you picked a race instead of based on your starting location on neighbors.
The ai doesn't pick the standard age every time, usually it will frick you over with age of plague or something
I thought anyone can lock the world into a Crisis age even if they arent the one researching it.
Only you get locked into having to choose the age if you get the conditions. If you want to decide ages, just build a few research improvements and culture improvements and spam reforms/eureka. Save eureka for when you're moving into the new age.
>Honestly founding a religion at all seems like a disadvantage unless you got a Spirit that actively works with it.
Sort of, I wish they did more with it that wasn't just overall age related. I feel like things such as the talismans and other trinkets and the sacrifice shrine from hero age should provide religion, but they do at least all produce arts xp which is used for the religious powers. Nonetheless, religion right now is too Catholic-centric.(just like the whole game is too Euro-centric) I wanna be able to make a religion where I can build little shrines everywhere or sacrifice a vassal pop every 15 turns for a bonus or something. At least religious needs should be able to be filled by folk beliefs, maybe with an age of superstition/witch hunts if you let it get too high. That's an overall problem though, you can get your pop so high you get needs before an age where they can be properly fulfilled.
>the 1 thing I couldnt import was Religious Texts.
>my pops just keep wanting more and more G-d, which I cant give them
At least when you get religion early, you can spam castles and abbeys and not worry about it. You can also import paper and just make it into books.
>I didnt so im not getting any benefits
Probably the biggest downside, it's mostly a waste of space although since religious text count as luxury goods, they can provide extra bonuses through innovation and other methods.
This game has way better unit progression logic than CIV at least, I like the way mostly everything evolves through ages.
The evolution of Spearmant to "Swordsman" was always one of the stupidiest things Firaxis put in their games.
I guess the "swordsman" was their way to emulate the evolution Hoplites to Roman Legionnaires as the main staple heavy infantry in warfare but the Legion was not defined by their short swords but rather by their shields.
Wasn't the gladius also more of a side arm and their primary weapons were the pilum that was used as both throw and spear?
No, the gladius was their main weapon, each soldier carried two pilas but they would throw both of them before engaging in meele.
At the beginning of the roman empire, the Legion was composed of three main soldiers, The Hastati, the yougest ones used spears, but then they also switched to gladius later on, because it just works better in a tight formation with the scotum (tower shield).
If anyone would be interested in doing a more historiacally-based infantry evolution from the bronze to the classical age it should looks something like this:
Light Infantry:
>low armor, shield, spears and javelins. Low defense, more mobility, less cost and upkeep, maybe a cooldown short-ranged attack (peltats, hypapist, auxilia)
Spearman:
>Heavy armored, longer spear, shield, close unit formation, bonus against cavalry, more penalites against being flanked (Hoplites, Phalangites)
Heavy Infantry:
Heavy armored, use tower shield, main weapon is the short sword, less attack than spearman, but more defense, no bonus against cavalry but no penalties against being flanked, ranged throw weapon attack on cooldown. (legionnaires)
hoplites and phalanx are the very definition of heavy infantry, Phalanx was the evolution of the hoplite and it wasn't replaced by legions, the phalanx only fell out of favor because the greek kingdoms all fell to either the romans or parthians.
The legion is not an upgrade of the phalanx, the legion did not dominate warfare because of it's fighting style, altho it was plenty effective, it dominated because of the romans far superior logistics and ability to utilize massive manpower. The phalanx is stronger than the legion in an open field, but the legion is more versatile and mobile. Phalanxes came back to dominate the later medieval and early gunpower battlefield although this time they called them pikes. Roman legions were reformed and replaced with shieldwall infantry.
I understand that Hoplites and Phalangites are the definition of heavy infantry, but so is the Roman Legion, I coul've named it "Heavy Spearman" and maybe the other "Heavy Swordsman" but like I said before, what really defines the roman legion is their choice of shield (scotum), the shortsword (gladius) is just the best way to complement it.
Also I know it wasn't replaced irl by the legion, I'm saying that in Civ games the Spearman is replaced (not directly) by the Swordsman in the classical age as main infantry, wich does not makes sense.
And the legion IS superior to the Phallanx that basically became a sitting duck for the Legions Pillas, and their shield of choice wich let them close in, more than that the Legion can sustain fight long enough with a phallanx for the Auxilias to flank it and a flanked phallanx in a dead phallanx.
In terms of gameplay I would make them like this:
Heavy Spearman (based on Hoplite)
>More base attack than the "legion"
>Less base deffense than the "legion"
>Bonus against cavalary
>Bonus attack against meele when attacked
>Harsher penalties to defense and attack when flanked
Heavy Swordsman/Heavy Shieldbearers (based on legion)
>Less base attack than the "Spearman"
>More base defense than the "Spearman" (especially against ranged attacks)
>Has a ranged attack wich debuffs defense (Pilla)
The Phallangite (Heavy Longspearman) could be an even more extreme version of the Heavy Spearman.
The reason for the names is that what I wanted is the Hoplite/Legion as templates for generic units representing them.
Phalanx came back with pike and shot as well since its a hard counter to cavalry
>Maximize my needs to grow quickly as recommended
>Punished by not being able to make structures for new needs in the current age