Nah, PDX simply bought Triumph Studio entirely and now is using them to crank out as many 4X games as feasible, especially since AoW4 didn't turn into a complete financial disaster (which doesn't mean it's successful)
>4X
It is gonna be a halfbaked Civ clone with some tacked on barely working systems like Humankind.
>It's going to be a AoW reskin, PlanetFall style
Oh, that is wor- actually, I have never played a single AoW game, so I don't know if that is better or worse.
>I have never played a single AoW game, so I don't know if that is better or worse
Doesn't matter, that guy is just making shit up. He probably hasn't even watched the trailer because Triumph isn't developing this and it looks nothing like AoW4.
>Marvelshit
Did anyone here play that game? Was it any good? I only saw the fully covered up women and immediately chose to skip it. Capeshit needs hot girls.
The TBT gameplay is fine, not much depth but enought that you do have to think a bit on the harder encounters. Too much emphasis on social link shit, and running around HQ looking for shit with no threat or intrest until you find the shit.
Most interesting part is the (unintentional?) jab at marvel mivie writing. All the big heroes are their MCU quippy selves not taking it seriously, which then results in them underestimating the threat and underprepairing, getting their asses handed to them repeatedly, with the more serious protag being the one that pushes them to cut that shit out and actually care about the risk
Sounds decent. Surprised it flopped as hard as it did, but I guess the Marvel train is just over and no one cares about capeshit anymore. Unless its Spider-Man or Wolverine.
People have been screaming for Civ clones since 5 came out. There have been attempts but nobody liked them and Civ still hasn't been knocked off the pedestal.
Worst case. On paper the "alternative ages" sound fairly interesting. Disappointed it's back to hex tiles but as always I just hope for the best and inevitably get let down.
>DLCs to add more variant ages >DLCs to add more crisis ages >DLCs to add fan-favorite and alt-history civs >Mods to add magic/fantasy content
9 months ago
Anonymous
tbf I'd like Ages based on shit like
I always thought that alt history like this could be a cool gimmick for civ clone. That steampunk civ scenario was fun and I always wished that tech could be playable in normal game. Also C2C has alt, fantasy history like this, but that mod is too bloated to be playable.
It's not that they can't. They simply aren't trying. Civ 5 sold more copies than Civs 1-4 together. So everyone wants to get on that gravy train for past decade, and thus copying the features of the game, never mind it was trash and the success came from targetting zoomers with the marketing, so they could felt like geniuses at the age of 10 when conquering the world (and then b***h and moan about Civ 6 at the age of 16 for "cartoony looks")
>Kids who were 10-13 around the time when Civ 5 came and made lion share of the player base came aren't zoomers, because reasons
Friendly reminder that if you were born after '95 and for sure past '97, you're a zoomershit. Doesn't matter how much you deny that
9 months ago
Anonymous
>there were no fans of the Civilization series by the 5th entry except for 10-13 year olds
Nah, we don't know the details but each age has different techs and mechanics. The easiest example is the rapture age or steampunk age that lets you build underwater or floating cities. Dark and Golden ages in civ 6 give the civ that got one buffs/debuffs.
So like for example if your city is full of stinky poopoo, you could pick age of plague, then that locks it in for everyone and it probably starts spawning plagues everywhere and give you research options to deal with them. So it sort of creates a world narrative. The game will probably lose replayability once you've experienced them all I imagine. Depends how good base structure of the game is.
I guess that makes it more interesting, especially if you could strategically launch a shit age that you can deal with better or a good age that you can exploit better.
Yeah, in theory it sounds mad. In practice it probably won't be so good. Like Civ 6's global warming where in theory you could research flood walls then pump up the temperature and flood enemies. But in practice it was like 3 tiles on the map are now under water.
9 months ago
Anonymous
so a gimmick with no real effect on anything
alternate ages could be that if its just an extra tech and some modifier (like random cities getting a debuff due to plague or whatever)
>Nah, we don't know the details but each age has different techs and mechanics
Most of the different mechanics will probably be paradox DLC tier. You'll get a window where you save up hero/blood/plague/steam/ayylmao/AI mana and spend them on spells and modifiers
>It is gonna be a halfbaked Civ clone
Why do morons keep doing it? What's the last civ clone that actually was decent? Are numerous high profile failures really not enough to deter them?
>What's the last civ clone that actually was decent
CtP2 and FreeCiv - neither is perfect, both are decent.
Meaning they are older than average /vst/ poster
Eight years ago you could have said the same thing about SimCity. Now Cities Skylines is top dog in that genre. I'm cautiously optimistic. Someday, someone will come along and knock Civ's crown off Firaxis' head.
Humankind still hurts a bit. I really did have faith in Amplitude to be the next 4x developer. C-Prompt looks super green though. They say they are devs from AoE games and shit like that, but I suspect they didn't have very major rolls.
SimCity wasn't dead 8 years ago. Remember that shared-city atrocity EA shat out a couple of years before that? I was pleased when a little studio beat them at their own game. It could happen again. Civ is ripe for a fall.
The next civ game is likely to be even worse than Civ 6. I've got no hope that it will be good, so I'm cheering on every single civ clone that looks even remotely decent in the hopes that one of them will be the City Skylines of civ clones. Humankind was almost there, but it had a few bad mechanics, and just wasn't a cohesive whole. It's still better than Civ 6, but not by much. And certainly not by enough to dethrone Civ.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>Implying Civ 6 was bad >Implying Herkind was somehow better
We're reaching peak Civ 5 cope hours.
You can read the first diary here:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/millennia-announcement.1599581/
The game design leans towards alt-history with the different eras. There are 8 historical eras and each one branches into alternative eras such as Era of Blood, Era of Plague, etc which have their own features.
It also leans towards realism regarding the economy and battle even though that battle screen looks very rough much like the rest of the graphics.
Overall, I would rather play Civilization than this crap but I will read future diaries to change my mind perhaps.
some differences compared to civ 6 > 10 ages that are picked from a number of alternatives at each age, the first one to pick forces the rest of the civs to pick that one as well > for instance, the picks for third age are the "default" age of iron and then two special ones, age of heroes and age of blood which have specific requirements so a bit similar to golden and dark ages > techs are related to ages, not known if the tech selections between ages are completely mutually exclusive or if special ages have extra or some swapped out techs, so no singular tech tree > mana system (domain points) for national spirits, a bit like traditions, domain points can also be used on social fabric bonuses > more complicated needs for a city: food, sanitation, faith, housing, education, ideological needs > more complicated production chains, turn olives into oil (food and wealth) or delicacies (food and luxuries), able to import and export raw materials and processed goods between own cities but also with other nations
> tech leader gets to pick the age
that feels like it's gonna be a snowball maker. Get an early tech lead and then just pick ages that let you extend it. I'd rather it be based on game events (I.e. a lot of unit deaths and city razings lead to an age of blood)
>the first one to pick forces the rest of the civs to pick that one as well
Gay. What's the point in a system like this in a civ-clone if it doesn't let civs who took alternative tech paths interact with each other?
haha, can't wait for the science civ to force me into the sissy eras! Then in the Age of Globohomosexual warfare gets disabled and my militaristic civ is worthless!
The reception to this game has been slightly negative outside of this place. Read the threads made on Reddit, Paradox forum and Steam forum. People expected a 4X RTS, not yet another Civilization clone with some gimmick. Also the art direction is awful.
It’s mostly that all Civ clones tend to be shit, so it’s super hard to get excited abou some new releases just because they exist. Trust me, I’d love to be proven wrong here, but I’d rather keep my expectations long and be proven wrong, than get hyped up on nothing and then be disappointed.
Idk, it seems like all people do on the internet is complain and complain and complain. My recommendation, stop using social media and Ganker. Hives of negativity, very bad for you.
Games stopped innovating and are mostly copies of games that already exist, or butchered by 'UX designers' who remove almost all gameplay and replace it with buttons.
UX designers are absolutely the problem. A generation of women who were told, after their undergraduate degrees, that they were dissuaded from being in tech functions (they weren't, they just didn't want to do them) watched a Udemy course on the difference between checkboxes and radio buttons and were given were given pseudo jobs that culminated in the Victoria 3 "warfare" buttons. It's just analogies to that forever now. EU4's and Imperator's various mana, a hyper focus on culture and the unfounded but insistent value of diversity in every game...
They hyped it up as a culmination of all the grand strategy games when it's actually a budget civ clone made by a dozen people.
They advertised to a crowd that expects more than they can give, obviously that leads to disappointment
>which is often worse
Paradox has had a pretty good publishing record for the last 5-10 years. I'd argue the only failure has been Empire of Sin. PoE, Tyranny, Battletech, AoW games, Cities Skylines, Surviving Mars, Steel Division are some I can think of that I've enjoyed. It still doesn't explain why they marketed this game so hard though.
no game will ever be "better" than whatever game some anon decided to sink 1500 hours in 6 years ago so acting like everything is worse helps you feel superior to other games that may actually be better without making you feel fomo for not playing them.
alternative ages in practice will come down to some gay modifier and a special unit/building per age
I don't get why people are expecting something revolutionary.
If it's like in Call to Power it would just be animations that visualize larger battles better than Civ does, but don't allow for tactical decisions once battle is joined.
No, we don't have any agency according to people who played the game. When two armies meet, this screen pops up and we just observe the armies' health and morale going down through dice rolls or some shit. I think you can still group different units together though as you can see infantry with artillery in that screen but that's as much agency as you will get.
AI Entity video is always the first one I think of when I think back on the CtP wonder videos. So good. Wonder videos add nothing substantial to the game except heaps of SOVL. Unlikely we will ever see a company doing those again.
I always thought that alt history like this could be a cool gimmick for civ clone. That steampunk civ scenario was fun and I always wished that tech could be playable in normal game. Also C2C has alt, fantasy history like this, but that mod is too bloated to be playable.
Yeah sounds like it could be fun depending on how they implement it, not going to waste any of my emotions on following development though. We'll see how it is when it releases.
Think shit like Alien, the Terminator, Back to the Future, or other 80s-90s sci-fi with all those blocky super-computers and leather jackets. Basically all the Vaporwave/Sythwave A S T H E T I C stuff you see online
I always thought that alt history like this could be a cool gimmick for civ clone. That steampunk civ scenario was fun and I always wished that tech could be playable in normal game. Also C2C has alt, fantasy history like this, but that mod is too bloated to be playable.
>You can chose to "stay" in an era and divergent tech tree develops because of it.
Would seem like that would be hard to balance, unless each "era" had a particular advantage, but that concept sounds cool ass frick.
And then atomic age nuclear weapons wipes the floor with steampunk tanks.
the announcement makes a lot of things make sense. it looks ready to release tomorrow, which means it's been in development for a few years, which means it's been an idea for a few years more. id bet firaxis caught wind of this game early on, knew they'd never be able to keep up with paradox, and refocused to all the mini games like red death and pirates instead of trying to compete with the base game. at the same time, this explains why vicky 3 was hot garbage; they're trying to kill it off because it gamifies slavery and a generally controversial era of history, millenia is the perfect replacement. some of the worse new features like agitators felt like they belonged in a civ like game anyways. im looking forward to pirating it when all the DLCs come out.
Schizo take. The game has been in development since 2019 according to the dev blog further up. It sounds like C-prompt approached Paradox fairly recently for some extra funding and sales/marketing avenues, making it unlikely Paradox would frick up an important staple game like Vic 3 on purpose just because a no-name studio is making a 4x.
Schizo take. The game has been in development since 2019 according to the dev blog further up. It sounds like C-prompt approached Paradox fairly recently for some extra funding and sales/marketing avenues, making it unlikely Paradox would frick up an important staple game like Vic 3 on purpose just because a no-name studio is making a 4x.
Forgot to add: Considering C-prompt has never made anything of note before and has kept silent about this project until very far into development could mean they had trouble finding a publisher willing to give them a shot. I don't see how Firaxis would have been worried about that title, especially since it's highly likely they were also approached by the devs for some shekels. Now consider how Paradox was pushing the reveal hype and it becomes clear they are REALLY hoping Millenia will be an underdog surprise success.
that makes sense even more, if I was in charge of firaxis and a small developer approached me with a better looking copy of my own, id turn them away because I don't want to release competition for my own game but understand that paradox is probably going to pick it up. then id focus on differentiating my game from the copy.
[...]
Do you guys not know the difference between publishing and developing? Vic 3 was developed by Paradox. Millennia is developed by a tiny dev team. They would have gone to Paradox with a pitch and said we need this much money to make this game. It wouldn't have interfered with the development of Vic 3 at all.
That's like saying the development of Humankind interfered with the development of TW WH3. They are 2 separate devs, but both games are published by Sega.
if I was in charge of paradox publishing, and a small developer approached me with a civ killer that's going to capture the vicky market anyways, id make the paradox vicky development team transition to more useful projects and push whatever they made out the door. they are two separate devs, but ones in house. publish the civ killer and possibly buy the smaller developer depending on how their game sells.
The people at Paradox know that a 20 man team isn't able to create a civ killer. This is just a game that met Paradox's publishing standards. They also know that the Vic market and the Civ market are too separate. There's absolutely no way they took people off Vic 3, which had been requested for years by their fans, in order to publish a tiny 4x game. You're seeing conspiracies in what is a pretty standard publishing deal.
>so this isnt even a paradox game at all then
Yes. How did you not know this without me telling you?
9 months ago
Anonymous
He thought Paradox deliberately sabotaged Vic3 to push out this absolute kusoge. He's obviously moronic. Vic3 has serious issues, but it's not because Paradox was afraid of this garbage civ clone.
I wouldn't read too much into that. Most US states have some diversity quotas that while not enforced, could shield the company from lawsuits and accusations. You will read something like that on almost all job ads on job sites.
Vic 3 being half-assed because they we're focused on this would explain a lot of shit.
Do you guys not know the difference between publishing and developing? Vic 3 was developed by Paradox. Millennia is developed by a tiny dev team. They would have gone to Paradox with a pitch and said we need this much money to make this game. It wouldn't have interfered with the development of Vic 3 at all.
That's like saying the development of Humankind interfered with the development of TW WH3. They are 2 separate devs, but both games are published by Sega.
>it looks ready to release tomorrow
Are we looking at the same steam page? The shit they're showing look like early concept art thrown together to represent how the game will look. There isn't a single substantial screenshot.
I'm tentatively interested. It looks like it improves on a lot of things civ does, but I'm under the impression that there's a history of civ clones getting hyped and failing hard.
My thoughts exactly. They've set it up for failure. Not quite the level of No Man's Sky. But a similar deal. Now everyone that doesn't take 10 seconds to read about it thinks it's the next big paradox game when in reality it's a small indie strategy game.
Maybe if they make it a franchise. This first game isn't going to kill anything. All we can do is hope it gets some praise and ends up kickstarting the developer sort of like Endless Space 1. It wasn't great, but it was good enough to get them more funding, support and a bigger team to tackle bigger and better projects until they got the chance to make their own civ killer and they fricked it and will fade into obscurity again.
>PDX Sims
First time I'm hearing of it. People looks like shit in this, only slightly better than sims3 potatoes. And it's probably going to be even worth DLC fest than EA sims. At least house building looks better, but I'm not keeping my hopes up for it to shake anything.
Sims 3 looks like potatoes, because EA realized majority of their audiance are non-gamer girls, who don't play typical games and don't have powerful PC, so they can't have very graphically demanding Sim game
This argument doesn't make any sense when it was by the far the most demanding game in the series, both gpu and cpu wise. At the same time it aged like shit unlike 2 and 4.
EA killed SimCity.
EA killed the Sims.
Take-Two slightly but consistently degraded Civilization over a much longer period of time. I don't think it leaves quite the same void in the market.
The age mechanic wasn't a terrible idea, it was just implemented in a moronic way. At first glance the way Millennia is doing it sounds better since you're not flip-flopping between being Egyptian, Chinese, German, etc. at the drop of a hat. Whether it'll be implemented in a good way remains to be seen though.
Now, instead of having a defined civ and aesthetic for each age, you just have the outer trappings of particular civilizations in each age via national spirits, just without saying it.
I don't see how this changes things.
wow dude, picking the "spartans" national spirit unlocks militaristic research and has a depiction of a spartan soldier?
wtf is this fascist crap?!?
>Spartans as your "ancient, awesome warriors"
they got so thoroughly btfo by a bunch of literal homos from thebes that their reputation was instantly shattered and they immediately faded into utter irrelevancy, so he's right to be concerned
spartans proved themselves to be massively overrated as warriors, they were carried hard by their reputation which was largely romanticised by athenians who nevertheless were still disgusted by their feminism
tiny detail you missed: sparta existed for 6 centuries before their confrontation with the thebeans and continued to exist for around 2 centuries as an independent polity until the roman takeover
nations that exist for centuries tend to experience periods of weakness and decadence from time to time
>Spartans as your "ancient, awesome warriors"
they got so thoroughly btfo by a bunch of literal homos from thebes that their reputation was instantly shattered and they immediately faded into utter irrelevancy, so he's right to be concerned
spartans proved themselves to be massively overrated as warriors, they were carried hard by their reputation which was largely romanticised by athenians who nevertheless were still disgusted by their feminism
nobody claims athenians were great warriors
also athens quickly rebuilt and remained a regular fixture in greece throughout history, sparta faded away and got rebuilt in the 19th century amidst a surge of greek nationalism and exists today as a tourist town
wow dude, picking the "spartans" national spirit unlocks militaristic research and has a depiction of a spartan soldier?
wtf is this fascist crap?!?
[...]
tiny detail you missed: sparta existed for 6 centuries before their confrontation with the thebeans and continued to exist for around 2 centuries as an independent polity until the roman takeover
nations that exist for centuries tend to experience periods of weakness and decadence from time to time
Sparta’s win rate in wars and battles is literally 50/50 for their entire history. They were never impressive outside stories
>Be universally recognized as the best warriors in the Greek world for hundreds of years >Fall behind the times on tactics and technology and lose for hundreds of years >Midwits count this as mediocrity
9 months ago
Anonymous
>lose for hundreds of years
this is beyond mediocrity lol
9 months ago
Anonymous
>Gear your entire city state toward war >Can't consistently win for shit >All that's left is empty boasting about being awesome
Sounds like the definition of mediocrity >Fall behind the times on tactics and technology and lose for hundreds of years
Except they were losing even at their fricking peak.
Next time, read at least Simple English article on wikipedia, before you start posting about history, zoomie
9 months ago
Anonymous
Alright sure let's see what wikipedia says about the peak of Spartan power >Beat the Persians >Beat the Athenians >Beat the Persians plus the Athenians and all other major Greek poleis
Yep that'll do
9 months ago
Anonymous
>Beat the Persians
That's Greece banding together >Beat the Athenians
After 15 years of endless stuggle and solely because Athenians fricked themselves over with utterly moronic invasion of Sicily. In other words: "France won WW2, because the Allies did" >Repeating prior claims means my claims multiply
I don't think it works like that
From the tiny handful of battles Sparta was fighting, they have a literal sinusoid - they win, they lose, they win, they lose... where is that brilliant military superpower, when it's literally coin toss if they won or lost the battle? >m-muh technology and tactics advancing
Then why didn't they advance themselves? Neither of those things requires having big manpower, which was always their issue.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>cope >cope >cope >cope+dilation
alright
9 months ago
Anonymous
>Zoom-zoom so out of argument, he has to repeat "cope" like a mantra
Come back when you figure out an actual answer
9 months ago
Anonymous
what answer do you want?
"oh this civilization that existed for over 800 years lost some battles/wars therefore it never had an impressive military"
you are clearly some homosexual atheist redditor influenced by pop history cancer that wiped out your brain
9 months ago
Anonymous
>influenced by pop history cancer
Says the guy posting about the fricking Spartans. "Muh Sparta, muh Warriors" is peak pop history trash, like you watched 300 and Ultimate Warrior and listened to a few podcasts and now you think you're king shit.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>muh technology and tactics
One would think that a major military power would be on the forefront of military innovations. If that's the case, why the frick did they "fall behind" in the first place? Makes it sound like they had a couple good ideas then failed to capitalize on them or failed to keep innovating.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Spartan superiority relied entirely on the power of having an extremely well trained and well equipped warrior class. As weaponry and tactics developed lightly armored troops with more maneuverability that were cheaper to train became more valuable compared to the traditional heavily armored Spartan because of the rising importance of combined arms. Socially the Spartans were unable to adapt to this, as their warrior class clung hard to their well defined way of life and they were unable to adapt to the rising power of the layman. It's a lot like how the rise of crossbows and muskets each greatly reduced the viability of the heavily armored knight.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Spartans literally had 0 hoplite drills
Greeks in general didn't seem to grasp the concept of military training
Spartiates had some advantages because they did frickall but party and exercise (general exercise, 0 military drill), and were very wealthy so they could all buy good gear... But they were the elite of Spartan society and large parts of the Spartan army were poorer equipped drafted 2nd class citizens, slaves, and axillary forces. Also the gear advantage was not that significant in the first place.
Spartan military record is utterly unimpressive and their military mainly existed to terrorise their slaves.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Spartans literally had 0 hoplite drills
Greeks in general didn't seem to grasp the concept of military training
Spartiates had some advantages because they did frickall but party and exercise (general exercise, 0 military drill), and were very wealthy so they could all buy good gear... But they were the elite of Spartan society and large parts of the Spartan army were poorer equipped drafted 2nd class citizens, slaves, and axillary forces. Also the gear advantage was not that significant in the first place.
Spartan military record is utterly unimpressive and their military mainly existed to terrorise their slaves.
Well, which one is it you Ganker nerdgays
9 months ago
Anonymous
>they had a couple good ideas then failed to capitalize on them or failed to keep innovating
Pretty much. There were figures in Spartan society who tried to innovate and reform Sparta, like Lysander who defeated the Athenian fleet, but they were stopped by the spartiate elites and met mostly infamous ends.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>Makes it sound like they had a couple good ideas
They didn't. >failed to capitalize on them
You can't capitalise something that you don't have >failed to keep innovating.
Correct
Essentially, Spartans were perpetually using the Doric phalanx. Which got obsolete by the Peloponesian War, which they still won, but not due to superiority of any kind - Athenians simply bleed themselves on utterly failed and utterly ridiculous invasion of Sicily, which left them with no troops nor fleet. But even then, Spartian tactics were already painfully obsolete and 2 "steps" of progression of phalanx tactics behind the curve already.
What followed was getting two more steps behind, before Corinth utterly owned them in battle, turning Sparta into a small fry rump state for the rest of its existence. When Philip, Alex' father, showed up, they were another itteration of phalanx behind, while also being a depopulated village, rather than a proper polis.
Majority of "Sparta, frick yeah!" is their endless cope over being irrelevant for majority of their existence and how lacklustre was their military, despite putting entire fricking effort into being a military power
9 months ago
Anonymous
>Makes it sound like they had a couple good ideas
They didn't. >failed to capitalize on them
You can't capitalise something that you don't have >failed to keep innovating.
Correct
Essentially, Spartans were perpetually using the Doric phalanx. Which got obsolete by the Peloponesian War, which they still won, but not due to superiority of any kind - Athenians simply bleed themselves on utterly failed and utterly ridiculous invasion of Sicily, which left them with no troops nor fleet. But even then, Spartian tactics were already painfully obsolete and 2 "steps" of progression of phalanx tactics behind the curve already.
What followed was getting two more steps behind, before Corinth utterly owned them in battle, turning Sparta into a small fry rump state for the rest of its existence. When Philip, Alex' father, showed up, they were another itteration of phalanx behind, while also being a depopulated village, rather than a proper polis.
Majority of "Sparta, frick yeah!" is their endless cope over being irrelevant for majority of their existence and how lacklustre was their military, despite putting entire fricking effort into being a military power
And to put it into some sort of easy to grasp perspective:
Imagine a Spanish tercio that's facing against line infantry, skirmish infantry an ultimately trench warfare and crawling artillery barrages.
That's the sort of gap Sparta was eventually facing
Much bigger than that, Sparta still kept overperforming in the 2nd century BCE. It was still somehow able to consistently and singlehandedly fight off the rest of the Peloponnesus in the form of the Achean League. The Theban Wars were ultimately a draw btw and were considered as such by both sides. Later losses were mostly caused by some big kingdom coming in to wreck them and even then they overperformed considering the Homoioi were at most a couple thousand by then.
>Beat the Persians
That's Greece banding together >Beat the Athenians
After 15 years of endless stuggle and solely because Athenians fricked themselves over with utterly moronic invasion of Sicily. In other words: "France won WW2, because the Allies did" >Repeating prior claims means my claims multiply
I don't think it works like that
From the tiny handful of battles Sparta was fighting, they have a literal sinusoid - they win, they lose, they win, they lose... where is that brilliant military superpower, when it's literally coin toss if they won or lost the battle? >m-muh technology and tactics advancing
Then why didn't they advance themselves? Neither of those things requires having big manpower, which was always their issue.
>That's Greece banding together
Spartans also had pretty good results during their invasion of Persia in the 290s. You know, the one they were forced to abandon due to domestic shenanigans?
The comparison doesn't make any sense, at least make Sparta the UK or USA or even the Soviet Union or something. It was Sparta that fought them off of Sicily, it was Sparta that repeatedly beat their navy and forced them to surrender. >Then why didn't they advance themselves?
Because innovation is not a strategy game resource and generally happens due to great individuals. Why were Epaminondas' techniques invented almost 130 years after the first Persian War? Why do what retroactively seems like an obvious improvement wait so long before being applied? Why did Thebes develop it and not Athens, Argos, Corinth or some other polis? Why did Thebes immediately fell from hegemony when a single man died? Anyway the claim was never that Sparta was some unbeatable military industrial complex, it was that it had the greatest warriors, and it did. They constantly exceeded expectations that one would have simply looking at the numbers. The most famous story about them in pop culture is about a military loss, for frick's sake.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>Because innovation is not a strategy game resource and generally happens due to great individuals.
It happens because people with expertise and funding contribute their information where it'd be most useful.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Much bigger than that, Sparta still kept overperforming in the 2nd century BCE. It was still somehow able to consistently and singlehandedly fight off the rest of the Peloponnesus in the form of the Achean League.
No they didn't. The only reason why Sparta lasted as long as it did was because Greece at that time was a cluster frick of competing major powers, that the Achaens weren't able to fully concentrate their forces to crushing the Spartans.
>Spartans also had pretty good results during their invasion of Persia in the 290s. You know, the one they were forced to abandon due to domestic shenanigans?
You mean the one that's barely mentioned in the histories because of how minor and inconsequential it was?
>It was Sparta that fought them off of Sicily, it was Sparta that repeatedly beat their navy and forced them to surrender.
Sparta during the Peloponnesian Wars was a client state of the Persian Empire in all but name. They relied heavily on Persian funding to create a navy that allowed them to challenge the Athenians at sea.
>Because innovation is not a strategy game resource and generally happens due to great individuals
You got the first part right, second part wrong. Innovation is born out of necessity. The Spartans didn't innovate because like any militaristic society, the idea of change was taboo. Their hyper-conservative outlook allowed their rivals to quickly outpace them and by the time of Philip II and Alexander, Sparta was nothing more than a minor regional power.
>Anyway the claim was never that Sparta was some unbeatable military industrial complex, it was that it had the greatest warriors, and it did
They didn't have the greatest warriors. They were only great because the rest of the Greeks sucked at war and didn't take military training seriously. Soldiering was regarded as a lowly profession, until Philip II introduced the first professional army to the Hellenistic world.
Guys did you know that spartans practiced SLAVERY?!?
I can't believe they are including such an evil race of people in their game... Personally I am going to boycott it
Obviously they were. According to academia, Sparta was proto-fascist, and according to Vaush, fascism is white fragility, therefore Spartans were white.
We aren't on /misc/, tone it down with transphobic remarks. I met several transwomen and I even play HOI IV with one once a month. These are wonderful people who were born into the wrong biological body and want to be accepted as ther rightful gender, that's all. israelites? Black folk? Indians? Sure but transgenders don't deserve the hate.
>Jews? Black folk? Indians? Sure but transgenders don't deserve the hate.
im surprised people fell for this when you made it that obvious, have my (You)
>ANOTHER turn-based <clone of popular franchise with a singular unfun gimmick and 1/20th of content>
when does it end bros?
A KINGDOM FOR A GOOD, ORIGINAL, INNOVATIVE STRATEGY GAME
It's a cool idea. I like a lot of the mechanics. Domains seem like a cool way to do culture. I have no faith in paradox, even if they're just a publisher
Some video I watched (a number of content creators have had access to play some early version, but they couldn't show footage) said that the first one to get a National Spirit gets bonuses.
However, this (comment section of steam announcement post) implies that National Spirits can't be taken by more than one civ, so I guess you might run out of any good options and thus have a reason to dump into the "social fabric" thing, perhaps acting like a weaker bonus than actually taking a National Spirits.
We aren't on /misc/, tone it down with transphobic remarks. I met several transwomen and I even play HOI IV with one once a month. These are wonderful people who were born into the wrong biological body and want to be accepted as ther rightful gender, that's all. israelites? Black folk? Indians? Sure but transgenders don't deserve the hate.
I'm a straight male but anyway, you should date transwomen at least once to change your opinion. They make good tradwives. They act feminine and submissive. It's a shame about the sausage but you get used to it and as long as yours doesn't touch theirs, it's not gay
9 months ago
Anonymous
>Tradwife >Is a dude who creeps on women's bathrooms
Can't tell if it's good b8 or some homosexual from /vr/ ended up here.
9 months ago
Anonymous
definitely a troony
9 months ago
Anonymous
>as long as yours doesn't touch theirs, it's not gay
it's only gay if balls are touching
but it doesn't even matter because the balls are inert
>Literally hive mind agents
Troonies who 96% of them are literally commies and a lot of them are Pedos freaks and mass shooters Also a lot of them are censorship fricktrads and schizoid Fricks who don't wants others to enjoy things and Have opinions They don't like Also the worst snowflakes ever literally atheist nuns.
>a lot of them are Pedos freaks and mass shooters Also a lot of them are censorship fricktrads and schizoid Fricks who don't wants others to enjoy things and Have opinions They don't like Also the worst snowflakes ever
You're getting a bit confused with right-wing incels there.
8 months ago
Anonymous
you seem to misunderstand, alt-right incels and trannies are both created by the same forces. It's a horseshoe.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Ah right, and communists are a step away from national socialists too?
8 months ago
Anonymous
You joke, but isn't that how Fascism came to be?
8 months ago
Anonymous
more like weak cultures create weak people, and weakness takes many forms
8 months ago
Anonymous
How come the world hasn't been taken over by strong cultures then?
8 months ago
Anonymous
Because strong cultures only arise from hardship
8 months ago
Anonymous
Can't be very strong if they can't hold off weak cultures.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Fascism was litterally created when discontent members of socialist and communist movements decided that they weren't rootless internationalists.
Look into what policies the dudes that got long knife'd were into, and what prominent 20s, 30s and 40s fascists were up to before they funded their fascist parties/movements.
Child support was litterally something that Quisling introduced in Norway, that labour then reintroduced after the post-war unity government repealed all of Quizy V's laws.
Some video I watched (a number of content creators have had access to play some early version, but they couldn't show footage) said that the first one to get a National Spirit gets bonuses.
However, this (comment section of steam announcement post) implies that National Spirits can't be taken by more than one civ, so I guess you might run out of any good options and thus have a reason to dump into the "social fabric" thing, perhaps acting like a weaker bonus than actually taking a National Spirits.
I mean he's not wrong, grafix aren't important for a strat game, but goddamn did these guys make an ugly ass game. You look at something like Endless Legend in comparison. It came out a decade ago and looks miles better. It has a clear, cohesive and attractive artstyle that's aged pretty well. This thing looks like a civ 4 mod with low quality textures on the lowest settings.
graphics Black folk stfu you judge a strategy game by everything besides the graphics, people like yall are why we have shit lke CK3 focusing so much on graphics and it's serviceable btw
Did you even fricking read my post? Where did I judge the game? Literally all I did was talk about its graphics because that's what that conversation was about. Go box at shadows somewhere else you absolutely miserable cumrag.
you are the miserable cumrag and if u think about graphics before features u are moronic slave and i am little sus on features of game fr fr but i am sus for non-graphic reason dumbass
Again, read my post or are you unable to read English? Let's do it together. >I mean he's not wrong, grafix aren't important for a strat game, but goddamn did these guys make an ugly ass game
So here I say graphics aren't important for strategy games, but that the game is ugly. There is no judgment there on the gameplay or game as a whole. Just that the game is ugly, because that's what his post was about. You have no idea what games I play or think are good. Go back to school, actually focus in your English language class. Then mature for maybe 5 more years and come back to post here again after that. Until then, stick to Ganker.
Completely inexperienced PR person. Uses childish smileys and engages in pointless debates where he just goes "no, your opinion is wrong" while minimizing legit concerns on the basis of "trust us bro".
Yeah I'm sure the studio knows what they're doing *eye roll emoji* #diversityisourstrength
The graphics are fine, the only thing that bothers me is the UI. It looks like a cheap mobile game's UI, definitely needs work. So distracting I might not play it just for that.
I'm hopeful though. It looks like it could be very cool.
say what you will about the concept or gameplay but good god the ui looks so fricking outdated, it looks like a pc game from 2009 back when you bought them at stores instead of on steam
You're a bozo with no concept of time, it looks like nothing earlier than 2018. Honestly UI hasn't gotten much better since then, so your complaint is meaningless. It certainly looks better than Humankind, which is nothing but a good thing.
Will it have any relevant trade and diplomacy? Will it still be science > industry > everything else like every 4x ever? Will it have a solution to the road spam problem?
Considering you decide the age for everyone playing by researching it, you can bet that science > everything again. Looks like it will have some production line stuff with resources, like need trees to make paper to make whatever, etc. So the trade might be decent. Diplomacy is just your usual 4x affair though.
>Considering you decide the age for everyone playing by researching it, you can bet that science > everything again
What does age actually affect? With their names, you'd think they'd be more like AoW or Dominions global spells. I saw that there are requirements for ages so it's not just science at least.
The person that researches it gets some bonuses, but for everyone, it determines what techs you can research, events that happen and some mechanics as well. Like age of heroes seems to give you heroes, age of blood spawns loads of barbarians I think, or at least that's how I've interpreted what youtubers said about those 2 ages. So with high science you could pick something that benefits you and fricks over other people, like if you are an island nation, you could pick the underwater age to take advantage of all the sea tiles you have.
Apparently there are some cosmetic changes depending on the age like age of blood giving the world map a red tint. I guess it will be reshuffled technology and (hopefully) at least one or two unique techs.
They've mostly been light on specifics, but the example that stood out to me the most was that the Age of Blood automatically sets everyone at war with everyone else.
Age of Heroes will be awesome if it makes it so that everyone gets a hero and can only use them in war so everything is settled in hero duels. Basically anything that makes each age wildly different from each other will sell me on this game. If it's just techs and bonuses, I will sleep.
>Considering you decide the age for everyone playing by researching it, you can bet that science > everything again
The more I think about this the dumber is seems. If the age was decided based on the state of the world instead of the tech leader's choice it could be used as an anti-snowballing mechanic instead something else that contributes to snowballing. Someone getting too far ahead could trigger a crisis that tries to knock them down a little.
One of my favourite parts of Humankind was being locked out of the civ I wanted to play because someone took it first. I can just imagine that I will also love when this game forces me to play 1 way or removes agency from me as well. Truly only the greatest of 4x design.
>I can just imagine that I will also love when this game forces me to play 1 way or removes agency from me as well.
Ah yes "agency", where you press a button to decide if there's going to be a barbarian/alien invasion or not.
>Someone getting too far ahead could trigger a crisis that tries to knock them down a little.
Punishing someone for winning is gay. Just add randomness if you want worse players to have a chance.
I still think deciding for the world is dumb because why should you on some shit island with one other opponent be thrown into an age of Blood or Plague or Rogue AI just because the mainland is having a world war? How does some player isolated from you and free to grow bring your war torn position to a Utopia? Some of them I get would be world changing things but it fees like they should generally be on a per civ basis. For example, what the hell is an age of Intolerance? Every race tries to genocide each other regardless of other win conditions like in every 4x ever? Does the one reaching it declare themselves the master race and can then take other civs as slaves and debuff their science and industry gains? Does a new area spawn and it's like hungry hungry hippos trying to take the natives and land for yourself? Is everyone forced to have a caste system or what? I could understand if it was, say, age of xenophobia and some were slavers and some were isolationists, but intolerance is what? You get a breakout of rebel trannies and hippies and have to purge them?
>Just add randomness if you want worse players to have a chance.
That's what I was thinking. It should be chance based to prevent it being gameable back to "tech leader picks the next era", and you shouldn't be able to predict with certainty if there's going to be a barbarian invasion or whatever >I still think deciding for the world is dumb because why should you on some shit island with one other opponent be thrown into an age of Blood or Plague or Rogue AI just because the mainland is having a world war?
I agree that doing it as alternative branches in a techtree and letting everyone pick their own branch would be better, but if it's going to be chosen for the entire world it shouldn't be on the basis what the lead player thinks will help them snowball more
Look at that grease gun and tell me there is a god.
Actually between one grease gun having a drum mag, another having a stick mag, and that oversized as frick stick grenade, that thing is big enough to be a mace.
Think this is AI art?
Do they explain what's going on here? Is the central Knossos a capital city and a bunch of small cities are around it? Is it a city and the other things are like districts? Are the borders cucking each other out of max region size or do they join together? Wtf are the outlines supposed to be? Are the hexes made of smaller hexes because damn those units are tiny and I see them at two different areas insides Knossos.
>City has a hex shaped wall
God I hate this. At least try and make it look like a natural city. I swear if that wall is there right until the end of the game as well, gonna be so mad. The little districts or improvements around it look so much better.
I hate the ones to the lower right and upper left of the walled city with the roman villa looking centers. They remind me of the way cities radiate outwards in a 'circle' in AoW3 and such.
Also pic related make me wonder if the underwater themed age is gonna have decent sea combat.
At least it looks aesthetic and fantastical in AoW3, which makes sense. They clearly were going off fantasy art of those perfect white circular cities.
Knossos is a city, Ufa is a town and the other things within that blob are "districts" or tile improvements. To the right you can see part of the name for another city, with the towns of Samara and Mangazeya. To the left, the dashed blob is a fort or outpost. Only a few YouTubers have early access to the game, that I'm aware of, and the one who mentioned that bit seemed uncertain on which of those is the correct name but it works like what most other games call an outpost.
Good, frick anachronistic leaders.
Having "characters" is a big marketing point to allistic people.
why does this game get shilled so hard everywhere? it doesnt stand out compared to literally any civilization clone from past 10 years
Paradox is marketing it.
I think the creator of that mod entered the actual game dev world and ended up being a bit of a spastic, so that will never happen.
He made Fallen Enchantress, the reboot of Elemental. Elemental was sort of a game designer's game, every 4x since then (but most notably Civ 5 and Endless Legends) copied its best features, but it was never really fun beyond as a cool technical curiosity.
>Each age has around 7 techs >Techs are different in the 3 choices you get >Need to research around 3 to be able to research the next age for everyone
I dunno about this. I'll wait and see, but just seems annoying.
Seeing that it takes a while to go into a new era, I imagine it's a race to finish researching it first, but I feel it'd be good if it was a group thing. Like if 5 players selected an era, it'd go 5 turns per turn and if 3 selected another era it'd go 3 turn per turn and in that way it could be kind of a vote/agreement.
For me this already won the war since Ara doesn't have multiplayer. I'll get Ara and will probably enjoy it, but competing with others is what I like the most out of 4xs.
That's generally true, mostly because to my knowledge there has never been a 4X game with competent AI that didn't just resort to letting AI factions cheat in order to keep up. So if you want a honest challenge, playing against other players is typically the only option.
On the other hand, focusing exclusively on singleplayer means they don't have to worry about things like making everything balanced. Balance isn't necessarily a bad thing, but more than a few games were made objectively worse because the devs were obsessed with PvP balance at the cost of fun.
I'd be with you if it was a fantasy or sci-fi game. But historical 4x games are kind of balanced by the nature of every faction being able to do the same thing, just with some rearranged stats. I like when my asymmetrical games aren't balanced.
Wö-Men. Men of Wö. You don't like them. They're insane. Their idiocy needs to be scrubbed off this world with rubbing alcohol. Wömen need to go back to the fricking kitchen.
Civ 7 is another year off still, at least. As long as they release this before the official Civ 7 announcement, they'll be fine. Although, I anticipate Firaxis will announce Civ 7 just before this releases to try and damage this game's sales.
I guess there is a longer 5min video too from the devs, first part of five part series breaking down features
>The first installment of our five-part Millennia feature breakdown video series has arrived!Join us in this video as Ian Fischer, the creative director of Millennia, discusses the core pillars that define Millennia's distinct identity. >00:00 Intro >00:16 National Spirits >00:53 History >01:56 Economy >03:53 Combat
> Regions >At the start of the game, you control a single Region. Regions are the most vital element of the game economy – they define your borders, allow you to put your people to work, and let you build Units and Buildings. The Capital at the heart of a Region will feel pretty familiar to players comfortable with other 4X games, particularly at the start. Grow your Region’s population to work more tiles, collect more resources, and become an industrial powerhouse. >At a high level, the Region’s Population determines how many workers you can assign, while the territory controlled by the Region determines what those workers can be assigned to. Early on, many of your workers will be “foraging”, gathering from the land directly. This type of gathering is 1:1, so if you have 3 Forests, you can assign up to 3 workers to foraging in those Forests. >This is fine for getting started, but to really get your economy rolling you will want to build Improvements, such as Farms and Hunting Camps … or Oil Wells and Computer Factories when you reach the more advanced Ages. Improvements dramatically boost the value of workers in a Region, providing Goods that are worth significantly more than what foraging alone can generate (of course if you have the right National Spirit perhaps there are some alternative strategies you can find…). >Regions can also be strengthened by constructing “Capital Buildings”, which are permanent upgrades to the Region. These represent infrastructure, monuments, and other ways to improve your Region as a whole. Like Improvements, there are a huge range of these, providing additional resource income, army enhancements, and other bonuses.
> Towns >In addition to settling new Regions, you also settle new Towns. Towns are part of a Region, smaller population centers that boost the central Capital. Each Town also influences the expansion of a Region’s borders, so they present a lot of choices for defining the “shape” of a Region. Do you want to steer your Region towards some vital resources, or to claim disputed territory from another Nation? Do you try to maximize the total area your Region can control, or focus on a more compact, easily defensible setup? Each game will require you to adapt your strategic positioning differently. > Enemies may try to raid your Towns. If a Towns falls, your Region can lose territory that was controlled by the Town. Towns also contribute Militia units to the Capital, bolstering defenses there when attacked, which creates some interesting tactical choices when assaulting an enemy Region. When planning your offense, do you chip away at their Towns to weaken them, or bypass the Towns and strike for the Capital directly? > Initially, your Towns will generate more Wealth for the region based on how many Improvements you have built nearby. As your Nation’s capabilities in civil engineering improve over time, you can expand the Towns to higher levels, increasing this bonus. Towns can also specialize, they can become “mining towns”, “farming towns”, and the like. A Town’s specialization allows it to provide different resources (and require different Improvements). Cleverly using your Towns to accomplish both your strategic and economic goals is very satisfying when you can juggle all the competing interests correctly.
> Outposts > Regions and Vassals are not the only way to control territory on the map. You can also send out Pioneers and have them build Outposts. When built, Outposts immediately bring all the tiles in a 1-hex radius under your control. Because they have much looser restrictions of where they can be placed, you can even build them right up against another Nation’s territory to stake a claim. Of course, Outposts are a lot easier to take down than Capitals or even Towns, so make sure you are prepared to defend them against roaming Barbarians and other Nations alike. >The basic Outpost can also build Trade Posts within its territory, allowing you to send valuable Goods to any of your Regions. Because these Trade Posts do not require workers, they can be an extremely potent way to supercharge your economy, particularly when available workers are scarce. Later in the game, more advanced Outpost types become available such as Castles or Missions. These allow you to provide extra abilities to your outposts and can make them a larger part of your overall strategy. > Outposts are also very convenient for establishing a road network through your Nation, as each one you build will automatically connect up with other nearby Outpost, Capitals, and Towns. Of course, just the normal progress of a Region and its Towns are often enough to get you roads where you need to go, but where there is a big gap of terrain to cover, Outposts can quickly get the job done. > Outposts also provide a defensive bonus and increase the healing rate for any of your Armies stationed there. There are also many Powers which let you spawn units at a friendly settlement – which includes Outposts. Using Outposts tactically as forward bases or reinforcement hubs can give you a significant military advantage!
> Towns >In addition to settling new Regions, you also settle new Towns. Towns are part of a Region, smaller population centers that boost the central Capital. Each Town also influences the expansion of a Region’s borders, so they present a lot of choices for defining the “shape” of a Region. Do you want to steer your Region towards some vital resources, or to claim disputed territory from another Nation? Do you try to maximize the total area your Region can control, or focus on a more compact, easily defensible setup? Each game will require you to adapt your strategic positioning differently. > Enemies may try to raid your Towns. If a Towns falls, your Region can lose territory that was controlled by the Town. Towns also contribute Militia units to the Capital, bolstering defenses there when attacked, which creates some interesting tactical choices when assaulting an enemy Region. When planning your offense, do you chip away at their Towns to weaken them, or bypass the Towns and strike for the Capital directly? > Initially, your Towns will generate more Wealth for the region based on how many Improvements you have built nearby. As your Nation’s capabilities in civil engineering improve over time, you can expand the Towns to higher levels, increasing this bonus. Towns can also specialize, they can become “mining towns”, “farming towns”, and the like. A Town’s specialization allows it to provide different resources (and require different Improvements). Cleverly using your Towns to accomplish both your strategic and economic goals is very satisfying when you can juggle all the competing interests correctly.
> Outposts > Regions and Vassals are not the only way to control territory on the map. You can also send out Pioneers and have them build Outposts. When built, Outposts immediately bring all the tiles in a 1-hex radius under your control. Because they have much looser restrictions of where they can be placed, you can even build them right up against another Nation’s territory to stake a claim. Of course, Outposts are a lot easier to take down than Capitals or even Towns, so make sure you are prepared to defend them against roaming Barbarians and other Nations alike. >The basic Outpost can also build Trade Posts within its territory, allowing you to send valuable Goods to any of your Regions. Because these Trade Posts do not require workers, they can be an extremely potent way to supercharge your economy, particularly when available workers are scarce. Later in the game, more advanced Outpost types become available such as Castles or Missions. These allow you to provide extra abilities to your outposts and can make them a larger part of your overall strategy. > Outposts are also very convenient for establishing a road network through your Nation, as each one you build will automatically connect up with other nearby Outpost, Capitals, and Towns. Of course, just the normal progress of a Region and its Towns are often enough to get you roads where you need to go, but where there is a big gap of terrain to cover, Outposts can quickly get the job done. > Outposts also provide a defensive bonus and increase the healing rate for any of your Armies stationed there. There are also many Powers which let you spawn units at a friendly settlement – which includes Outposts. Using Outposts tactically as forward bases or reinforcement hubs can give you a significant military advantage!
Looks enjoyable. The most fun part of civ is expansion and exploiting your new lands. This should be fun if it works as they say.
Shorts are gaming the algo. Blame Youtube for making shorts have extremely large reach. Streamers have also abused shorts to inflate their subscriber counts by hundreds of thousands.
weird i noticed a huge fricking uptick in shorts taking up huge space on my youtube now even though i never watch them.
I checked a profile out with like 2 mil subscribers and there were 0 videos, only shorts.
>Streamers have also abused shorts to inflate their subscriber counts
Until they realize those numbers don't translate into regular viewers and stop wasting their time.
Granted, for marketing the game it make sense to use every avenue, but I doubt adhd morons have the attention span to play strategy games.
another civ clone? is firaxis dying or something?
Nah, PDX simply bought Triumph Studio entirely and now is using them to crank out as many 4X games as feasible, especially since AoW4 didn't turn into a complete financial disaster (which doesn't mean it's successful)
It's going to be a AoW reskin, PlanetFall style
>It's going to be a AoW reskin, PlanetFall style
Oh, that is wor- actually, I have never played a single AoW game, so I don't know if that is better or worse.
>I have never played a single AoW game, so I don't know if that is better or worse
Doesn't matter, that guy is just making shit up. He probably hasn't even watched the trailer because Triumph isn't developing this and it looks nothing like AoW4.
Give 2 a shot. It's fun.
What. It's not even Triumph making this, they're still pumping out AoW4 DLC.
If anything, this looks and sounds like a Humankind clone. Though I wouldn't know why anyone would want to make a Humankind clone.
Actually, Firaxis is dying. They bet on Marvelshit and it flopped hard. Should have made XCOM 3.
It will be actually a good game, but it will be plagued with a shitton of DLCs.
A shame indeed.
And a X-COM styled Marvel game had potential to be good. But when I saw what the hell was in there I cringed really hard and brutally.
>Marvelshit
Did anyone here play that game? Was it any good? I only saw the fully covered up women and immediately chose to skip it. Capeshit needs hot girls.
The TBT gameplay is fine, not much depth but enought that you do have to think a bit on the harder encounters. Too much emphasis on social link shit, and running around HQ looking for shit with no threat or intrest until you find the shit.
Most interesting part is the (unintentional?) jab at marvel mivie writing. All the big heroes are their MCU quippy selves not taking it seriously, which then results in them underestimating the threat and underprepairing, getting their asses handed to them repeatedly, with the more serious protag being the one that pushes them to cut that shit out and actually care about the risk
Sounds decent. Surprised it flopped as hard as it did, but I guess the Marvel train is just over and no one cares about capeshit anymore. Unless its Spider-Man or Wolverine.
People have been screaming for Civ clones since 5 came out. There have been attempts but nobody liked them and Civ still hasn't been knocked off the pedestal.
>4X
It is gonna be a halfbaked Civ clone with some tacked on barely working systems like Humankind.
Worst case. On paper the "alternative ages" sound fairly interesting. Disappointed it's back to hex tiles but as always I just hope for the best and inevitably get let down.
it's pretty evident now nearly all studios can't achieve that simple , fun 4x game like Civ IV
they keep trying to shove weird complex micromanaging gameplay ideas that nobody asks for
will you frick off you fricking toddler, civ 4 sucked
i have no expectations, will most likely be shit for years before DLC like usual
See the amount of dlcs civ v have, it's the perfect game for paradox
>DLCs to add more variant ages
>DLCs to add more crisis ages
>DLCs to add fan-favorite and alt-history civs
>Mods to add magic/fantasy content
tbf I'd like Ages based on shit like
Civ IV was peak. homosexual
It's not that they can't. They simply aren't trying. Civ 5 sold more copies than Civs 1-4 together. So everyone wants to get on that gravy train for past decade, and thus copying the features of the game, never mind it was trash and the success came from targetting zoomers with the marketing, so they could felt like geniuses at the age of 10 when conquering the world (and then b***h and moan about Civ 6 at the age of 16 for "cartoony looks")
>civ 5 was successful because of zoomers
? how old are you
>Kids who were 10-13 around the time when Civ 5 came and made lion share of the player base came aren't zoomers, because reasons
Friendly reminder that if you were born after '95 and for sure past '97, you're a zoomershit. Doesn't matter how much you deny that
>there were no fans of the Civilization series by the 5th entry except for 10-13 year olds
You are genuinely moronic
No, Black person, that's the best case. This shit looks like a Roblox game.
you look like a roblox game
>On paper the "alternative ages" sound fairly interesting
Isn't this pretty much a copy-paste of Civ 6 Dark/Golden age shit?
Nah, we don't know the details but each age has different techs and mechanics. The easiest example is the rapture age or steampunk age that lets you build underwater or floating cities. Dark and Golden ages in civ 6 give the civ that got one buffs/debuffs.
So like for example if your city is full of stinky poopoo, you could pick age of plague, then that locks it in for everyone and it probably starts spawning plagues everywhere and give you research options to deal with them. So it sort of creates a world narrative. The game will probably lose replayability once you've experienced them all I imagine. Depends how good base structure of the game is.
I guess that makes it more interesting, especially if you could strategically launch a shit age that you can deal with better or a good age that you can exploit better.
Yeah, in theory it sounds mad. In practice it probably won't be so good. Like Civ 6's global warming where in theory you could research flood walls then pump up the temperature and flood enemies. But in practice it was like 3 tiles on the map are now under water.
so a gimmick with no real effect on anything
alternate ages could be that if its just an extra tech and some modifier (like random cities getting a debuff due to plague or whatever)
>Nah, we don't know the details but each age has different techs and mechanics
Most of the different mechanics will probably be paradox DLC tier. You'll get a window where you save up hero/blood/plague/steam/ayylmao/AI mana and spend them on spells and modifiers
It's not developed by Paradox.
I know
>It is gonna be a halfbaked Civ clone
Why do morons keep doing it? What's the last civ clone that actually was decent? Are numerous high profile failures really not enough to deter them?
>What's the last civ clone that actually was decent
CtP2 and FreeCiv - neither is perfect, both are decent.
Meaning they are older than average /vst/ poster
CtP 1 was still better though, but I don't think that had anything to do with having the civ name licensed.
Eight years ago you could have said the same thing about SimCity. Now Cities Skylines is top dog in that genre. I'm cautiously optimistic. Someday, someone will come along and knock Civ's crown off Firaxis' head.
Humankind still hurts a bit. I really did have faith in Amplitude to be the next 4x developer. C-Prompt looks super green though. They say they are devs from AoE games and shit like that, but I suspect they didn't have very major rolls.
>that civ vi ui
>I really did have faith in Amplitude to be the next 4x developer.
Not since Endless Space 1 did I have any faith in them, they are good at everything besides the actual game design parts.
City skylines is the top dog because there is no opposition and Simcity is dead
>because there is no opposition
On that topic, did anyone play highrise city? I tried reading opinions about it but found them only in German.
SimCity wasn't dead 8 years ago. Remember that shared-city atrocity EA shat out a couple of years before that? I was pleased when a little studio beat them at their own game. It could happen again. Civ is ripe for a fall.
The next civ game is likely to be even worse than Civ 6. I've got no hope that it will be good, so I'm cheering on every single civ clone that looks even remotely decent in the hopes that one of them will be the City Skylines of civ clones. Humankind was almost there, but it had a few bad mechanics, and just wasn't a cohesive whole. It's still better than Civ 6, but not by much. And certainly not by enough to dethrone Civ.
>Implying Civ 6 was bad
>Implying Herkind was somehow better
We're reaching peak Civ 5 cope hours.
/thread
holy shit it already looks like it will be forgotten in about 2 weeks from release
>those digits
Firaxis-sisters we just keep winning.
I sleep
You can read the first diary here:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/millennia-announcement.1599581/
The game design leans towards alt-history with the different eras. There are 8 historical eras and each one branches into alternative eras such as Era of Blood, Era of Plague, etc which have their own features.
It also leans towards realism regarding the economy and battle even though that battle screen looks very rough much like the rest of the graphics.
Overall, I would rather play Civilization than this crap but I will read future diaries to change my mind perhaps.
>It also leans towards realism regarding the economy and battle
It's also a nu paradox game so no it won't be realistic in those aspects at all.
some differences compared to civ 6
> 10 ages that are picked from a number of alternatives at each age, the first one to pick forces the rest of the civs to pick that one as well
> for instance, the picks for third age are the "default" age of iron and then two special ones, age of heroes and age of blood which have specific requirements so a bit similar to golden and dark ages
> techs are related to ages, not known if the tech selections between ages are completely mutually exclusive or if special ages have extra or some swapped out techs, so no singular tech tree
> mana system (domain points) for national spirits, a bit like traditions, domain points can also be used on social fabric bonuses
> more complicated needs for a city: food, sanitation, faith, housing, education, ideological needs
> more complicated production chains, turn olives into oil (food and wealth) or delicacies (food and luxuries), able to import and export raw materials and processed goods between own cities but also with other nations
> tech leader gets to pick the age
that feels like it's gonna be a snowball maker. Get an early tech lead and then just pick ages that let you extend it. I'd rather it be based on game events (I.e. a lot of unit deaths and city razings lead to an age of blood)
I do like the concept though.
>the first one to pick forces the rest of the civs to pick that one as well
Gay. What's the point in a system like this in a civ-clone if it doesn't let civs who took alternative tech paths interact with each other?
This
Imagine rolling through Solarpunk hippies with your diselpunk armies
haha, can't wait for the science civ to force me into the sissy eras! Then in the Age of Globohomosexual warfare gets disabled and my militaristic civ is worthless!
Rate revealed ages
>Stone
>Bronze
>Iron
>Heroes
>Blood
>Kings
>Monuments
>Plague
>Renaissance
>Intolerance
>Conquest
>Alchemy
>Heresy
>Old Ones
>Harmony
>Aether
>Utopia
>Dystopia
>Information
>Ecology
>Vistors
>Colony Ship
>Transcendence
>Archangel
>Rogue AI
>Intolerance
S-tier
>Visitors (Based/10)
>Colony Ship (10/10)
I swear this shit better turn into SMAC when we get to the colony ship and visitor ages.
Lower your expectations. It's just going to be some tech differences, events and mechanics.
>Age of Conquest
uh oh
where is age of globohomo?
Information
age of """""Harmony"""""
Dystopia
> utopia and dystopia are separate things.
Someone didn't do their research.
>Saying that in Ganker. Btw that message of CA about "ending" Total War game series is 100% true , and by not any means old as shit.
Why is this place so pessimistic?
play ck3 and victoria 3, then play ck2 and vicky 2
you'd be pessimistic as well
The former are better than the latter, what's the issue?
You're a pleb
Leave
No. Frickface.
Get the frick out of my thread, dumbfrick moron
The reception to this game has been slightly negative outside of this place. Read the threads made on Reddit, Paradox forum and Steam forum. People expected a 4X RTS, not yet another Civilization clone with some gimmick. Also the art direction is awful.
>2012+11
>Anon is still expecting all the best from PDX
Can't tell if bait or just down-beaten so much that you came the other side
what makes you optimistic about paradox games in 2023?
It’s mostly that all Civ clones tend to be shit, so it’s super hard to get excited abou some new releases just because they exist. Trust me, I’d love to be proven wrong here, but I’d rather keep my expectations long and be proven wrong, than get hyped up on nothing and then be disappointed.
Idk, it seems like all people do on the internet is complain and complain and complain. My recommendation, stop using social media and Ganker. Hives of negativity, very bad for you.
experience
Because being a blind idiot that will throw money at anything is even worse.
Games stopped innovating and are mostly copies of games that already exist, or butchered by 'UX designers' who remove almost all gameplay and replace it with buttons.
UX designers are absolutely the problem. A generation of women who were told, after their undergraduate degrees, that they were dissuaded from being in tech functions (they weren't, they just didn't want to do them) watched a Udemy course on the difference between checkboxes and radio buttons and were given were given pseudo jobs that culminated in the Victoria 3 "warfare" buttons. It's just analogies to that forever now. EU4's and Imperator's various mana, a hyper focus on culture and the unfounded but insistent value of diversity in every game...
They hyped it up as a culmination of all the grand strategy games when it's actually a budget civ clone made by a dozen people.
They advertised to a crowd that expects more than they can give, obviously that leads to disappointment
Its's Paradox.
nah it's published by paradox, which is often worse.
>which is often worse
Paradox has had a pretty good publishing record for the last 5-10 years. I'd argue the only failure has been Empire of Sin. PoE, Tyranny, Battletech, AoW games, Cities Skylines, Surviving Mars, Steel Division are some I can think of that I've enjoyed. It still doesn't explain why they marketed this game so hard though.
Because of Romero, I think.
sunk cost fallacy
no game will ever be "better" than whatever game some anon decided to sink 1500 hours in 6 years ago so acting like everything is worse helps you feel superior to other games that may actually be better without making you feel fomo for not playing them.
I just feel bad for zoomers like you who missed out on actually good games and have to resort to desperate copes like this.
I knew it was a Civ clone. Not getting copied trash.
I thought it was going to be about human species vying for domanince.
>no copper to bronze age gsg
its over bros
Looks fricking kino
alternative ages in practice will come down to some gay modifier and a special unit/building per age
I don't get why people are expecting something revolutionary.
Who's expecting anything revolutionary?
Alright this looks fairly nice. Reminds me of the little fighting sprites from Call to Power when you do battle.
what is this? we get little battle animations? do we have any agency?
If it's like in Call to Power it would just be animations that visualize larger battles better than Civ does, but don't allow for tactical decisions once battle is joined.
?si=Nvf5RImUvR6EYa49&t=371
so its kind of like an simple autobattler, but you can choose when to engage perhaps
might be interesting
No, we don't have any agency according to people who played the game. When two armies meet, this screen pops up and we just observe the armies' health and morale going down through dice rolls or some shit. I think you can still group different units together though as you can see infantry with artillery in that screen but that's as much agency as you will get.
Mobile game.
Chud.
I hope wonders will also be as hype
AI Entity video is always the first one I think of when I think back on the CtP wonder videos. So good. Wonder videos add nothing substantial to the game except heaps of SOVL. Unlikely we will ever see a company doing those again.
I always thought that alt history like this could be a cool gimmick for civ clone. That steampunk civ scenario was fun and I always wished that tech could be playable in normal game. Also C2C has alt, fantasy history like this, but that mod is too bloated to be playable.
Yeah sounds like it could be fun depending on how they implement it, not going to waste any of my emotions on following development though. We'll see how it is when it releases.
So is 1990-2020 wagie-punk? salaryman-punk?
Think shit like Alien, the Terminator, Back to the Future, or other 80s-90s sci-fi with all those blocky super-computers and leather jackets. Basically all the Vaporwave/Sythwave A S T H E T I C stuff you see online
Punkisdeadpunk
1990-2010 is Corpopunk
2010-2030 is ESGpunk
globohomo-punk
>twenty years from now normies will be nostalgic for this style
That image almost seems like a backwards time universe
Dieselpunk is the most underrated.
What are some Dieselpunk media in the first place?
Mad Max, but it doesn't fit whatever description
's thinking of. Also Iron Harvest.
Crimson Skies
Madmax is "salvagepunk"
>You can chose to "stay" in an era and divergent tech tree develops because of it.
Would seem like that would be hard to balance, unless each "era" had a particular advantage, but that concept sounds cool ass frick.
And then atomic age nuclear weapons wipes the floor with steampunk tanks.
can't wait to spend $100 on DLC to make it playable
Why Paradox sucks?
>outsourcing your shitposting to chatGPT
the announcement makes a lot of things make sense. it looks ready to release tomorrow, which means it's been in development for a few years, which means it's been an idea for a few years more. id bet firaxis caught wind of this game early on, knew they'd never be able to keep up with paradox, and refocused to all the mini games like red death and pirates instead of trying to compete with the base game. at the same time, this explains why vicky 3 was hot garbage; they're trying to kill it off because it gamifies slavery and a generally controversial era of history, millenia is the perfect replacement. some of the worse new features like agitators felt like they belonged in a civ like game anyways. im looking forward to pirating it when all the DLCs come out.
Vic 3 being half-assed because they we're focused on this would explain a lot of shit.
Schizo take. The game has been in development since 2019 according to the dev blog further up. It sounds like C-prompt approached Paradox fairly recently for some extra funding and sales/marketing avenues, making it unlikely Paradox would frick up an important staple game like Vic 3 on purpose just because a no-name studio is making a 4x.
Forgot to add: Considering C-prompt has never made anything of note before and has kept silent about this project until very far into development could mean they had trouble finding a publisher willing to give them a shot. I don't see how Firaxis would have been worried about that title, especially since it's highly likely they were also approached by the devs for some shekels. Now consider how Paradox was pushing the reveal hype and it becomes clear they are REALLY hoping Millenia will be an underdog surprise success.
that makes sense even more, if I was in charge of firaxis and a small developer approached me with a better looking copy of my own, id turn them away because I don't want to release competition for my own game but understand that paradox is probably going to pick it up. then id focus on differentiating my game from the copy.
if I was in charge of paradox publishing, and a small developer approached me with a civ killer that's going to capture the vicky market anyways, id make the paradox vicky development team transition to more useful projects and push whatever they made out the door. they are two separate devs, but ones in house. publish the civ killer and possibly buy the smaller developer depending on how their game sells.
The people at Paradox know that a 20 man team isn't able to create a civ killer. This is just a game that met Paradox's publishing standards. They also know that the Vic market and the Civ market are too separate. There's absolutely no way they took people off Vic 3, which had been requested for years by their fans, in order to publish a tiny 4x game. You're seeing conspiracies in what is a pretty standard publishing deal.
so this isnt even a paradox game at all then
yawn I dont care give us eu5 already
>so this isnt even a paradox game at all then
Yes. How did you not know this without me telling you?
He thought Paradox deliberately sabotaged Vic3 to push out this absolute kusoge. He's obviously moronic. Vic3 has serious issues, but it's not because Paradox was afraid of this garbage civ clone.
>id make the paradox vicky development team transition
They already have.
>Considering C-prompt has never made anything of note before
surely this will finally boost them into relevance
they even got paradox to be their publisher!
oh boy here we go
I wouldn't read too much into that. Most US states have some diversity quotas that while not enforced, could shield the company from lawsuits and accusations. You will read something like that on almost all job ads on job sites.
Do you guys not know the difference between publishing and developing? Vic 3 was developed by Paradox. Millennia is developed by a tiny dev team. They would have gone to Paradox with a pitch and said we need this much money to make this game. It wouldn't have interfered with the development of Vic 3 at all.
That's like saying the development of Humankind interfered with the development of TW WH3. They are 2 separate devs, but both games are published by Sega.
No, most people don't know the difference between their ass and their ears. Lower your expectations.
>it looks ready to release tomorrow
Are we looking at the same steam page? The shit they're showing look like early concept art thrown together to represent how the game will look. There isn't a single substantial screenshot.
I'm tentatively interested. It looks like it improves on a lot of things civ does, but I'm under the impression that there's a history of civ clones getting hyped and failing hard.
We'll see.
i'm sure it'll be fine but they shouldn't have hyped this up so much with posts from all their gsg accounts
My thoughts exactly. They've set it up for failure. Not quite the level of No Man's Sky. But a similar deal. Now everyone that doesn't take 10 seconds to read about it thinks it's the next big paradox game when in reality it's a small indie strategy game.
yeah, should have just released it
the expectations were too high
Sweet!
Now I can know if its good or bad!
Between this and ARA, which one will be the lesser flop?
Nobody even acknowledges the existence of ARA.
Unless Paradox will go with full circus flop, like with Vic3.
Looks like absolute shit
>Cities Skylines killed SimCity
>PDX Sims will kill the Sims
>this will kill Civilization
kino, PDX will rule all
Johan wept, for there were no longer market shares to conquer.
Maybe if they make it a franchise. This first game isn't going to kill anything. All we can do is hope it gets some praise and ends up kickstarting the developer sort of like Endless Space 1. It wasn't great, but it was good enough to get them more funding, support and a bigger team to tackle bigger and better projects until they got the chance to make their own civ killer and they fricked it and will fade into obscurity again.
>PDX Sims
First time I'm hearing of it. People looks like shit in this, only slightly better than sims3 potatoes. And it's probably going to be even worth DLC fest than EA sims. At least house building looks better, but I'm not keeping my hopes up for it to shake anything.
Sims 3 looks like potatoes, because EA realized majority of their audiance are non-gamer girls, who don't play typical games and don't have powerful PC, so they can't have very graphically demanding Sim game
This argument doesn't make any sense when it was by the far the most demanding game in the series, both gpu and cpu wise. At the same time it aged like shit unlike 2 and 4.
Sims 3 runs ike shit and the potato issue is the art style, not the technical side of graphics.
A worse dlc fest than EA sims?
You are out of your mind. I am guessing you have never even seen the sims 4 and its dlc.
EA killed simcity
EA killed SimCity.
EA killed the Sims.
Take-Two slightly but consistently degraded Civilization over a much longer period of time. I don't think it leaves quite the same void in the market.
It looks about the same as every other civ 5 but with x game. Idk why they'd want to jump into that market but I wish them luck.
How did they see Humankind and fail to learn the lesson?
diversity is our strength
That's not the issue. I'm talking about the age mechanic.
Ha.
The age mechanic wasn't a terrible idea, it was just implemented in a moronic way. At first glance the way Millennia is doing it sounds better since you're not flip-flopping between being Egyptian, Chinese, German, etc. at the drop of a hat. Whether it'll be implemented in a good way remains to be seen though.
Now, instead of having a defined civ and aesthetic for each age, you just have the outer trappings of particular civilizations in each age via national spirits, just without saying it.
I don't see how this changes things.
>I don't see how this changes things.
That's a (You) problem to be honest.
A nation going through different ages and circumstances is entirely different from a nation switching its identity at the push of a button.
It's still doing that. It just does so without the artstyle change every few years.
paradox user skeptical about the game's historical authenticity because of spartan hoplites being included in the game
That's not at all what he's trying to say, you disingenuous moron.
wow dude, picking the "spartans" national spirit unlocks militaristic research and has a depiction of a spartan soldier?
wtf is this fascist crap?!?
tiny detail you missed: sparta existed for 6 centuries before their confrontation with the thebeans and continued to exist for around 2 centuries as an independent polity until the roman takeover
nations that exist for centuries tend to experience periods of weakness and decadence from time to time
Oh, you're just another dumbfrick american sperging out over your idiotic idpol rubbish. Carry on then.
I am trans btw
No wonder you love Spartans
>spartans
>famous for being the only polis that didn't build walls around their city
>bonus to capital fortifications
>Spartans as your "ancient, awesome warriors"
they got so thoroughly btfo by a bunch of literal homos from thebes that their reputation was instantly shattered and they immediately faded into utter irrelevancy, so he's right to be concerned
spartans proved themselves to be massively overrated as warriors, they were carried hard by their reputation which was largely romanticised by athenians who nevertheless were still disgusted by their feminism
Athens got destroyed long before Sparta
nobody claims athenians were great warriors
also athens quickly rebuilt and remained a regular fixture in greece throughout history, sparta faded away and got rebuilt in the 19th century amidst a surge of greek nationalism and exists today as a tourist town
Sparta’s win rate in wars and battles is literally 50/50 for their entire history. They were never impressive outside stories
Nobody gave half a shit about Sparta until 300 came out.
>Be universally recognized as the best warriors in the Greek world for hundreds of years
>Fall behind the times on tactics and technology and lose for hundreds of years
>Midwits count this as mediocrity
>lose for hundreds of years
this is beyond mediocrity lol
>Gear your entire city state toward war
>Can't consistently win for shit
>All that's left is empty boasting about being awesome
Sounds like the definition of mediocrity
>Fall behind the times on tactics and technology and lose for hundreds of years
Except they were losing even at their fricking peak.
Next time, read at least Simple English article on wikipedia, before you start posting about history, zoomie
Alright sure let's see what wikipedia says about the peak of Spartan power
>Beat the Persians
>Beat the Athenians
>Beat the Persians plus the Athenians and all other major Greek poleis
Yep that'll do
>Beat the Persians
That's Greece banding together
>Beat the Athenians
After 15 years of endless stuggle and solely because Athenians fricked themselves over with utterly moronic invasion of Sicily. In other words: "France won WW2, because the Allies did"
>Repeating prior claims means my claims multiply
I don't think it works like that
From the tiny handful of battles Sparta was fighting, they have a literal sinusoid - they win, they lose, they win, they lose... where is that brilliant military superpower, when it's literally coin toss if they won or lost the battle?
>m-muh technology and tactics advancing
Then why didn't they advance themselves? Neither of those things requires having big manpower, which was always their issue.
>cope
>cope
>cope
>cope+dilation
alright
>Zoom-zoom so out of argument, he has to repeat "cope" like a mantra
Come back when you figure out an actual answer
what answer do you want?
"oh this civilization that existed for over 800 years lost some battles/wars therefore it never had an impressive military"
you are clearly some homosexual atheist redditor influenced by pop history cancer that wiped out your brain
>influenced by pop history cancer
Says the guy posting about the fricking Spartans. "Muh Sparta, muh Warriors" is peak pop history trash, like you watched 300 and Ultimate Warrior and listened to a few podcasts and now you think you're king shit.
>muh technology and tactics
One would think that a major military power would be on the forefront of military innovations. If that's the case, why the frick did they "fall behind" in the first place? Makes it sound like they had a couple good ideas then failed to capitalize on them or failed to keep innovating.
Spartan superiority relied entirely on the power of having an extremely well trained and well equipped warrior class. As weaponry and tactics developed lightly armored troops with more maneuverability that were cheaper to train became more valuable compared to the traditional heavily armored Spartan because of the rising importance of combined arms. Socially the Spartans were unable to adapt to this, as their warrior class clung hard to their well defined way of life and they were unable to adapt to the rising power of the layman. It's a lot like how the rise of crossbows and muskets each greatly reduced the viability of the heavily armored knight.
Spartans literally had 0 hoplite drills
Greeks in general didn't seem to grasp the concept of military training
Spartiates had some advantages because they did frickall but party and exercise (general exercise, 0 military drill), and were very wealthy so they could all buy good gear... But they were the elite of Spartan society and large parts of the Spartan army were poorer equipped drafted 2nd class citizens, slaves, and axillary forces. Also the gear advantage was not that significant in the first place.
Spartan military record is utterly unimpressive and their military mainly existed to terrorise their slaves.
Well, which one is it you Ganker nerdgays
>they had a couple good ideas then failed to capitalize on them or failed to keep innovating
Pretty much. There were figures in Spartan society who tried to innovate and reform Sparta, like Lysander who defeated the Athenian fleet, but they were stopped by the spartiate elites and met mostly infamous ends.
>Makes it sound like they had a couple good ideas
They didn't.
>failed to capitalize on them
You can't capitalise something that you don't have
>failed to keep innovating.
Correct
Essentially, Spartans were perpetually using the Doric phalanx. Which got obsolete by the Peloponesian War, which they still won, but not due to superiority of any kind - Athenians simply bleed themselves on utterly failed and utterly ridiculous invasion of Sicily, which left them with no troops nor fleet. But even then, Spartian tactics were already painfully obsolete and 2 "steps" of progression of phalanx tactics behind the curve already.
What followed was getting two more steps behind, before Corinth utterly owned them in battle, turning Sparta into a small fry rump state for the rest of its existence. When Philip, Alex' father, showed up, they were another itteration of phalanx behind, while also being a depopulated village, rather than a proper polis.
Majority of "Sparta, frick yeah!" is their endless cope over being irrelevant for majority of their existence and how lacklustre was their military, despite putting entire fricking effort into being a military power
And to put it into some sort of easy to grasp perspective:
Imagine a Spanish tercio that's facing against line infantry, skirmish infantry an ultimately trench warfare and crawling artillery barrages.
That's the sort of gap Sparta was eventually facing
Much bigger than that, Sparta still kept overperforming in the 2nd century BCE. It was still somehow able to consistently and singlehandedly fight off the rest of the Peloponnesus in the form of the Achean League. The Theban Wars were ultimately a draw btw and were considered as such by both sides. Later losses were mostly caused by some big kingdom coming in to wreck them and even then they overperformed considering the Homoioi were at most a couple thousand by then.
>That's Greece banding together
Spartans also had pretty good results during their invasion of Persia in the 290s. You know, the one they were forced to abandon due to domestic shenanigans?
The comparison doesn't make any sense, at least make Sparta the UK or USA or even the Soviet Union or something. It was Sparta that fought them off of Sicily, it was Sparta that repeatedly beat their navy and forced them to surrender.
>Then why didn't they advance themselves?
Because innovation is not a strategy game resource and generally happens due to great individuals. Why were Epaminondas' techniques invented almost 130 years after the first Persian War? Why do what retroactively seems like an obvious improvement wait so long before being applied? Why did Thebes develop it and not Athens, Argos, Corinth or some other polis? Why did Thebes immediately fell from hegemony when a single man died? Anyway the claim was never that Sparta was some unbeatable military industrial complex, it was that it had the greatest warriors, and it did. They constantly exceeded expectations that one would have simply looking at the numbers. The most famous story about them in pop culture is about a military loss, for frick's sake.
>Because innovation is not a strategy game resource and generally happens due to great individuals.
It happens because people with expertise and funding contribute their information where it'd be most useful.
>Much bigger than that, Sparta still kept overperforming in the 2nd century BCE. It was still somehow able to consistently and singlehandedly fight off the rest of the Peloponnesus in the form of the Achean League.
No they didn't. The only reason why Sparta lasted as long as it did was because Greece at that time was a cluster frick of competing major powers, that the Achaens weren't able to fully concentrate their forces to crushing the Spartans.
>Spartans also had pretty good results during their invasion of Persia in the 290s. You know, the one they were forced to abandon due to domestic shenanigans?
You mean the one that's barely mentioned in the histories because of how minor and inconsequential it was?
>It was Sparta that fought them off of Sicily, it was Sparta that repeatedly beat their navy and forced them to surrender.
Sparta during the Peloponnesian Wars was a client state of the Persian Empire in all but name. They relied heavily on Persian funding to create a navy that allowed them to challenge the Athenians at sea.
>Because innovation is not a strategy game resource and generally happens due to great individuals
You got the first part right, second part wrong. Innovation is born out of necessity. The Spartans didn't innovate because like any militaristic society, the idea of change was taboo. Their hyper-conservative outlook allowed their rivals to quickly outpace them and by the time of Philip II and Alexander, Sparta was nothing more than a minor regional power.
>Anyway the claim was never that Sparta was some unbeatable military industrial complex, it was that it had the greatest warriors, and it did
They didn't have the greatest warriors. They were only great because the rest of the Greeks sucked at war and didn't take military training seriously. Soldiering was regarded as a lowly profession, until Philip II introduced the first professional army to the Hellenistic world.
Guys did you know that spartans practiced SLAVERY?!?
I can't believe they are including such an evil race of people in their game... Personally I am going to boycott it
trolling is a art
No, it wasn’t race based so it magically makes it a-ok
it's a-ok because spartans weren't white
Obviously they were. According to academia, Sparta was proto-fascist, and according to Vaush, fascism is white fragility, therefore Spartans were white.
>according to vaush
jesus can this fat frick fall any lower?
kek
>Jews? Black folk? Indians? Sure but transgenders don't deserve the hate.
im surprised people fell for this when you made it that obvious, have my (You)
You have to go back, chugger.
Well as long as Paradox are the publishers and not developers there is a tiny speck of hope.
>ANOTHER turn-based <clone of popular franchise with a singular unfun gimmick and 1/20th of content>
when does it end bros?
A KINGDOM FOR A GOOD, ORIGINAL, INNOVATIVE STRATEGY GAME
>A SHIB! A SHIB! MY KINGDOM FOR A SHIB!
It's a cool idea. I like a lot of the mechanics. Domains seem like a cool way to do culture. I have no faith in paradox, even if they're just a publisher
As far as publishers go, Pdx is pretty good at it.
What did he mean by this? Coming early next year? Coming to early access?
>right around the corner
>can't confirm 2023 or 2024
lol, lmao
>><3
>>^^
Do people unironically type like this
I wouldn't call trannies people.
It's a Swede, I don't think I have ever seen anyone type like that here
We aren't on /misc/, tone it down with transphobic remarks. I met several transwomen and I even play HOI IV with one once a month. These are wonderful people who were born into the wrong biological body and want to be accepted as ther rightful gender, that's all. israelites? Black folk? Indians? Sure but transgenders don't deserve the hate.
sounds like something a troony would say
I'm a straight male but anyway, you should date transwomen at least once to change your opinion. They make good tradwives. They act feminine and submissive. It's a shame about the sausage but you get used to it and as long as yours doesn't touch theirs, it's not gay
>Tradwife
>Is a dude who creeps on women's bathrooms
Can't tell if it's good b8 or some homosexual from /vr/ ended up here.
definitely a troony
>as long as yours doesn't touch theirs, it's not gay
it's only gay if balls are touching
but it doesn't even matter because the balls are inert
>These are wonderful people who were born into the wrong biological body and want to be accepted as ther rightful gender
>Black folk?
>jews?
>poojeets?
>sure they deserve the hate
>but us trannies, WE ARE COOL PEOPLE TO HANG OUT WITH!!!
lol
this has to be a bait
it isnt, people like him sadly exist
>Literally hive mind agents
Troonies who 96% of them are literally commies and a lot of them are Pedos freaks and mass shooters Also a lot of them are censorship fricktrads and schizoid Fricks who don't wants others to enjoy things and Have opinions They don't like Also the worst snowflakes ever literally atheist nuns.
>a lot of them are Pedos freaks and mass shooters Also a lot of them are censorship fricktrads and schizoid Fricks who don't wants others to enjoy things and Have opinions They don't like Also the worst snowflakes ever
You're getting a bit confused with right-wing incels there.
you seem to misunderstand, alt-right incels and trannies are both created by the same forces. It's a horseshoe.
Ah right, and communists are a step away from national socialists too?
You joke, but isn't that how Fascism came to be?
more like weak cultures create weak people, and weakness takes many forms
How come the world hasn't been taken over by strong cultures then?
Because strong cultures only arise from hardship
Can't be very strong if they can't hold off weak cultures.
Fascism was litterally created when discontent members of socialist and communist movements decided that they weren't rootless internationalists.
Look into what policies the dudes that got long knife'd were into, and what prominent 20s, 30s and 40s fascists were up to before they funded their fascist parties/movements.
Child support was litterally something that Quisling introduced in Norway, that labour then reintroduced after the post-war unity government repealed all of Quizy V's laws.
Germans do that shit all the time for some reason.
probably a woman or a troony
Some video I watched (a number of content creators have had access to play some early version, but they couldn't show footage) said that the first one to get a National Spirit gets bonuses.
However, this (comment section of steam announcement post) implies that National Spirits can't be taken by more than one civ, so I guess you might run out of any good options and thus have a reason to dump into the "social fabric" thing, perhaps acting like a weaker bonus than actually taking a National Spirits.
https://steamcommunity.com/app/1268590/discussions/0/3874840863853991333/
> No I'm 29. I have wife, 4 kids and a career.
my condolences homie
CK 2 and EU IV had good graphics at the time whereas their game looks outdated already.
I mean he's not wrong, grafix aren't important for a strat game, but goddamn did these guys make an ugly ass game. You look at something like Endless Legend in comparison. It came out a decade ago and looks miles better. It has a clear, cohesive and attractive artstyle that's aged pretty well. This thing looks like a civ 4 mod with low quality textures on the lowest settings.
graphics Black folk stfu you judge a strategy game by everything besides the graphics, people like yall are why we have shit lke CK3 focusing so much on graphics and it's serviceable btw
Did you even fricking read my post? Where did I judge the game? Literally all I did was talk about its graphics because that's what that conversation was about. Go box at shadows somewhere else you absolutely miserable cumrag.
you are the miserable cumrag and if u think about graphics before features u are moronic slave and i am little sus on features of game fr fr but i am sus for non-graphic reason dumbass
Again, read my post or are you unable to read English? Let's do it together.
>I mean he's not wrong, grafix aren't important for a strat game, but goddamn did these guys make an ugly ass game
So here I say graphics aren't important for strategy games, but that the game is ugly. There is no judgment there on the gameplay or game as a whole. Just that the game is ugly, because that's what his post was about. You have no idea what games I play or think are good. Go back to school, actually focus in your English language class. Then mature for maybe 5 more years and come back to post here again after that. Until then, stick to Ganker.
what games do you play or think are good i wonder
Hello kitty on the PS2 now frick off Black person
>are you planning 2024?
>can't tell
We're looking at 2026 here.
Completely inexperienced PR person. Uses childish smileys and engages in pointless debates where he just goes "no, your opinion is wrong" while minimizing legit concerns on the basis of "trust us bro".
Yeah I'm sure the studio knows what they're doing *eye roll emoji* #diversityisourstrength
how much do they pay you to say its gonna be 'shit'
good ironic masking
i wonder which ages will be no fun and people and AI will rush just to grief
The graphics are fine, the only thing that bothers me is the UI. It looks like a cheap mobile game's UI, definitely needs work. So distracting I might not play it just for that.
I'm hopeful though. It looks like it could be very cool.
say what you will about the concept or gameplay but good god the ui looks so fricking outdated, it looks like a pc game from 2009 back when you bought them at stores instead of on steam
just looks like civ6 to me. I fricking wish we got 2009 era gui instead of the modern troony flat ux shit.
i dont care about ugly UI if its shows everything i need to know and has readable font its good enough.
God civ 4 was ugly.
cause this is ss i found on the internet and is modded to look like civ6, normally it looks better and has everything i need in city screen info UI
No no, I stand by what I said. Civ 4 is ugly as shit. Part of why I think Millennia looks ugly is because it looks like civ 4 to me.
nobody asked, also civ5 and 6 look terrible too, it was never focus of the game
Nobody asked, but yeah you are right.
At least Civ 4 has a (mostly) well-designed UI that gives you all the info you need where you need it. If you have that, the visuals are easy to fix.
You're a bozo with no concept of time, it looks like nothing earlier than 2018. Honestly UI hasn't gotten much better since then, so your complaint is meaningless. It certainly looks better than Humankind, which is nothing but a good thing.
>2023
>hex-tiles
Come on, even ARA has dropped that outdated shit.
>That artwork
You can't tell me that wasn't generated by AI.
so how did we go from talking about a new 4x game to troony accusations?
Like with every game that has nothing to show but "Get HYPE and Preorder!"
Topic runs out quickly and accusing others of self-mutilation is more fun.
Will it have any relevant trade and diplomacy? Will it still be science > industry > everything else like every 4x ever? Will it have a solution to the road spam problem?
Considering you decide the age for everyone playing by researching it, you can bet that science > everything again. Looks like it will have some production line stuff with resources, like need trees to make paper to make whatever, etc. So the trade might be decent. Diplomacy is just your usual 4x affair though.
>Considering you decide the age for everyone playing by researching it, you can bet that science > everything again
What does age actually affect? With their names, you'd think they'd be more like AoW or Dominions global spells. I saw that there are requirements for ages so it's not just science at least.
>What does age actually affect?
This image alone should tell you what to expect from straying off the beaten path.
Zeppelins become more popular?
The person that researches it gets some bonuses, but for everyone, it determines what techs you can research, events that happen and some mechanics as well. Like age of heroes seems to give you heroes, age of blood spawns loads of barbarians I think, or at least that's how I've interpreted what youtubers said about those 2 ages. So with high science you could pick something that benefits you and fricks over other people, like if you are an island nation, you could pick the underwater age to take advantage of all the sea tiles you have.
Apparently there are some cosmetic changes depending on the age like age of blood giving the world map a red tint. I guess it will be reshuffled technology and (hopefully) at least one or two unique techs.
They've mostly been light on specifics, but the example that stood out to me the most was that the Age of Blood automatically sets everyone at war with everyone else.
Also makes the map red. That's cool.
Age of Heroes will be awesome if it makes it so that everyone gets a hero and can only use them in war so everything is settled in hero duels. Basically anything that makes each age wildly different from each other will sell me on this game. If it's just techs and bonuses, I will sleep.
>Considering you decide the age for everyone playing by researching it, you can bet that science > everything again
The more I think about this the dumber is seems. If the age was decided based on the state of the world instead of the tech leader's choice it could be used as an anti-snowballing mechanic instead something else that contributes to snowballing. Someone getting too far ahead could trigger a crisis that tries to knock them down a little.
One of my favourite parts of Humankind was being locked out of the civ I wanted to play because someone took it first. I can just imagine that I will also love when this game forces me to play 1 way or removes agency from me as well. Truly only the greatest of 4x design.
>I can just imagine that I will also love when this game forces me to play 1 way or removes agency from me as well.
Ah yes "agency", where you press a button to decide if there's going to be a barbarian/alien invasion or not.
I'm not sure you understood my post. That's understandable because I wasn't really being clear.
>Someone getting too far ahead could trigger a crisis that tries to knock them down a little.
Punishing someone for winning is gay. Just add randomness if you want worse players to have a chance.
I still think deciding for the world is dumb because why should you on some shit island with one other opponent be thrown into an age of Blood or Plague or Rogue AI just because the mainland is having a world war? How does some player isolated from you and free to grow bring your war torn position to a Utopia? Some of them I get would be world changing things but it fees like they should generally be on a per civ basis. For example, what the hell is an age of Intolerance? Every race tries to genocide each other regardless of other win conditions like in every 4x ever? Does the one reaching it declare themselves the master race and can then take other civs as slaves and debuff their science and industry gains? Does a new area spawn and it's like hungry hungry hippos trying to take the natives and land for yourself? Is everyone forced to have a caste system or what? I could understand if it was, say, age of xenophobia and some were slavers and some were isolationists, but intolerance is what? You get a breakout of rebel trannies and hippies and have to purge them?
>Just add randomness if you want worse players to have a chance.
That's what I was thinking. It should be chance based to prevent it being gameable back to "tech leader picks the next era", and you shouldn't be able to predict with certainty if there's going to be a barbarian invasion or whatever
>I still think deciding for the world is dumb because why should you on some shit island with one other opponent be thrown into an age of Blood or Plague or Rogue AI just because the mainland is having a world war?
I agree that doing it as alternative branches in a techtree and letting everyone pick their own branch would be better, but if it's going to be chosen for the entire world it shouldn't be on the basis what the lead player thinks will help them snowball more
What tank? It looks like a Sherman and a Tiger had a baby.
Because it is. The infantry are also a combination of US and Germany. It's just nondescript conquering nation.
Foxhole lookin ass vehicle.
Look at that grease gun and tell me there is a god.
Actually between one grease gun having a drum mag, another having a stick mag, and that oversized as frick stick grenade, that thing is big enough to be a mace.
Think this is AI art?
AI art is actually infamous when it comes to guns, they would look way way more fricked up. Think AI hands kind of fricked up.
I can't fathom why else the stick grenade would be the size of the mans arm.
AI didn't invent bad art.
Could be a rushed inpainting job.
>Paradox
>clone game
Not wasting my bandwidth.
Which age lets you build and command giant robots?
Probably an end one.
Personally, I would have prefered hearts of flint, Uruk Universalis, etc.
But it could be worse.
Do they explain what's going on here? Is the central Knossos a capital city and a bunch of small cities are around it? Is it a city and the other things are like districts? Are the borders cucking each other out of max region size or do they join together? Wtf are the outlines supposed to be? Are the hexes made of smaller hexes because damn those units are tiny and I see them at two different areas insides Knossos.
>City has a hex shaped wall
God I hate this. At least try and make it look like a natural city. I swear if that wall is there right until the end of the game as well, gonna be so mad. The little districts or improvements around it look so much better.
I hate the ones to the lower right and upper left of the walled city with the roman villa looking centers. They remind me of the way cities radiate outwards in a 'circle' in AoW3 and such.
Also pic related make me wonder if the underwater themed age is gonna have decent sea combat.
At least it looks aesthetic and fantastical in AoW3, which makes sense. They clearly were going off fantasy art of those perfect white circular cities.
>City radius hexes have smooth edges
>City walls have sharp edges
Just why
This doesn't look any different than Civ VI with the V terrain mod.
Knossos is a city, Ufa is a town and the other things within that blob are "districts" or tile improvements. To the right you can see part of the name for another city, with the towns of Samara and Mangazeya. To the left, the dashed blob is a fort or outpost. Only a few YouTubers have early access to the game, that I'm aware of, and the one who mentioned that bit seemed uncertain on which of those is the correct name but it works like what most other games call an outpost.
Having "characters" is a big marketing point to allistic people.
Paradox is marketing it.
He made Fallen Enchantress, the reboot of Elemental. Elemental was sort of a game designer's game, every 4x since then (but most notably Civ 5 and Endless Legends) copied its best features, but it was never really fun beyond as a cool technical curiosity.
>He made Fallen Enchantress
Yes I know. And look at what he did after that.
I have no idea what he did after that. I stopped following Stardock around then.
>I have no idea what he did after that
Exactly. He vanished.
https://twitter.com/MillenniaGame/status/1706321641716715875
this dude has had early access
>Each age has around 7 techs
>Techs are different in the 3 choices you get
>Need to research around 3 to be able to research the next age for everyone
I dunno about this. I'll wait and see, but just seems annoying.
Also
>No leader art/models at all
Good, frick anachronistic leaders.
Seeing that it takes a while to go into a new era, I imagine it's a race to finish researching it first, but I feel it'd be good if it was a group thing. Like if 5 players selected an era, it'd go 5 turns per turn and if 3 selected another era it'd go 3 turn per turn and in that way it could be kind of a vote/agreement.
why does this game get shilled so hard everywhere? it doesnt stand out compared to literally any civilization clone from past 10 years
Because it was announced a few days ago and featured as a new Paradox game, kinda like whatever space thing Bethesda made recently.
because game companies decided they'd rather hire the entire nation of india to shill than make a good game
Because we haven't had a good civ since 6 and firaxis wont put out 7 for at least 2 more years. People want this to be good.
Does it? I don't see it anywhere except this thread here that gets like 6 posts a day max.
>one slow thread about a newly announced game
>WOW THIS IS GETTING SHILLED SO HARD GUYS
Brain rot.
Just make an actual 4x game out of Fall from Heaven mod for Civ4.
I think the creator of that mod entered the actual game dev world and ended up being a bit of a spastic, so that will never happen.
I'm keen for a bit of console wars between this and Ara. So far Ara is pulling ahead though because it has QT Jeanne d'Arc and Millennia has nothing.
Why is her hair not black? What's the deal with all the artistic licence Jannus in media?
For me this already won the war since Ara doesn't have multiplayer. I'll get Ara and will probably enjoy it, but competing with others is what I like the most out of 4xs.
>Ara doesn't have multiplayer
That's an interesting choice. I don't really play 4x MP, but even I know that's where the genre shines.
That's generally true, mostly because to my knowledge there has never been a 4X game with competent AI that didn't just resort to letting AI factions cheat in order to keep up. So if you want a honest challenge, playing against other players is typically the only option.
On the other hand, focusing exclusively on singleplayer means they don't have to worry about things like making everything balanced. Balance isn't necessarily a bad thing, but more than a few games were made objectively worse because the devs were obsessed with PvP balance at the cost of fun.
>So if you want a honest challenge
single or multi, whoever gets the most land and/or science production first wins.
I'd be with you if it was a fantasy or sci-fi game. But historical 4x games are kind of balanced by the nature of every faction being able to do the same thing, just with some rearranged stats. I like when my asymmetrical games aren't balanced.
This game looks ugly as shit, which makes me cautiously optimistic that the gameplay will be good.
im pissed there is not a single asian made civ game. aesthetic hot waifus-husbandos and no sjw or woke crap in the games would be peak
Well it's not quite civ games but you have Sengoku Rance and Eiyuu Senki.
Wö-Men. Men of Wö. You don't like them. They're insane. Their idiocy needs to be scrubbed off this world with rubbing alcohol. Wömen need to go back to the fricking kitchen.
>civ clone
>civ7 is around the corner
Are they moronic?
Civ 7 is another year off still, at least. As long as they release this before the official Civ 7 announcement, they'll be fine. Although, I anticipate Firaxis will announce Civ 7 just before this releases to try and damage this game's sales.
>around the corner
We've seen and heard nothing. It's late 2024 at the earliest. I expect 2025.
New video out, about the economy
I guess there is a longer 5min video too from the devs, first part of five part series breaking down features
>The first installment of our five-part Millennia feature breakdown video series has arrived!Join us in this video as Ian Fischer, the creative director of Millennia, discusses the core pillars that define Millennia's distinct identity.
>00:00 Intro
>00:16 National Spirits
>00:53 History
>01:56 Economy
>03:53 Combat
all that shit reminds me of other civ like clone which got 0 attention
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1183470/Imperiums_Greek_Wars
Except one is a narrow game confined to historical greece, while the other covers all humanity and has alternate history.
So completely dissimilar.
>tfw no tribal naturalist gf
>Tyrian Purple
>X REQ<CR_ChosenAGE ANY,3>
>Spring ritual
>grow target region's population
>immediately
>America
>Hollywood is a nation
https://twitter.com/MillenniaGame/status/1709191697886740510
New dev diary out
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/developer-diary-world-map.1600764/
> Regions
>At the start of the game, you control a single Region. Regions are the most vital element of the game economy – they define your borders, allow you to put your people to work, and let you build Units and Buildings. The Capital at the heart of a Region will feel pretty familiar to players comfortable with other 4X games, particularly at the start. Grow your Region’s population to work more tiles, collect more resources, and become an industrial powerhouse.
>At a high level, the Region’s Population determines how many workers you can assign, while the territory controlled by the Region determines what those workers can be assigned to. Early on, many of your workers will be “foraging”, gathering from the land directly. This type of gathering is 1:1, so if you have 3 Forests, you can assign up to 3 workers to foraging in those Forests.
>This is fine for getting started, but to really get your economy rolling you will want to build Improvements, such as Farms and Hunting Camps … or Oil Wells and Computer Factories when you reach the more advanced Ages. Improvements dramatically boost the value of workers in a Region, providing Goods that are worth significantly more than what foraging alone can generate (of course if you have the right National Spirit perhaps there are some alternative strategies you can find…).
>Regions can also be strengthened by constructing “Capital Buildings”, which are permanent upgrades to the Region. These represent infrastructure, monuments, and other ways to improve your Region as a whole. Like Improvements, there are a huge range of these, providing additional resource income, army enhancements, and other bonuses.
https://forumcontent.paradoxplaza.com/public/1015783/Screenshot%20-%20Towns%20Affect%20Borders.png
> Towns
>In addition to settling new Regions, you also settle new Towns. Towns are part of a Region, smaller population centers that boost the central Capital. Each Town also influences the expansion of a Region’s borders, so they present a lot of choices for defining the “shape” of a Region. Do you want to steer your Region towards some vital resources, or to claim disputed territory from another Nation? Do you try to maximize the total area your Region can control, or focus on a more compact, easily defensible setup? Each game will require you to adapt your strategic positioning differently.
> Enemies may try to raid your Towns. If a Towns falls, your Region can lose territory that was controlled by the Town. Towns also contribute Militia units to the Capital, bolstering defenses there when attacked, which creates some interesting tactical choices when assaulting an enemy Region. When planning your offense, do you chip away at their Towns to weaken them, or bypass the Towns and strike for the Capital directly?
> Initially, your Towns will generate more Wealth for the region based on how many Improvements you have built nearby. As your Nation’s capabilities in civil engineering improve over time, you can expand the Towns to higher levels, increasing this bonus. Towns can also specialize, they can become “mining towns”, “farming towns”, and the like. A Town’s specialization allows it to provide different resources (and require different Improvements). Cleverly using your Towns to accomplish both your strategic and economic goals is very satisfying when you can juggle all the competing interests correctly.
> Outposts
> Regions and Vassals are not the only way to control territory on the map. You can also send out Pioneers and have them build Outposts. When built, Outposts immediately bring all the tiles in a 1-hex radius under your control. Because they have much looser restrictions of where they can be placed, you can even build them right up against another Nation’s territory to stake a claim. Of course, Outposts are a lot easier to take down than Capitals or even Towns, so make sure you are prepared to defend them against roaming Barbarians and other Nations alike.
>The basic Outpost can also build Trade Posts within its territory, allowing you to send valuable Goods to any of your Regions. Because these Trade Posts do not require workers, they can be an extremely potent way to supercharge your economy, particularly when available workers are scarce. Later in the game, more advanced Outpost types become available such as Castles or Missions. These allow you to provide extra abilities to your outposts and can make them a larger part of your overall strategy.
> Outposts are also very convenient for establishing a road network through your Nation, as each one you build will automatically connect up with other nearby Outpost, Capitals, and Towns. Of course, just the normal progress of a Region and its Towns are often enough to get you roads where you need to go, but where there is a big gap of terrain to cover, Outposts can quickly get the job done.
> Outposts also provide a defensive bonus and increase the healing rate for any of your Armies stationed there. There are also many Powers which let you spawn units at a friendly settlement – which includes Outposts. Using Outposts tactically as forward bases or reinforcement hubs can give you a significant military advantage!
Genuinely looks like it will be a great game. I've got higher hopes for this one than I did for Humankind.
Looks enjoyable. The most fun part of civ is expansion and exploiting your new lands. This should be fun if it works as they say.
the cover looks like AI art
Who the frick cares?
No thanks, I'll stick to ARA as my preferred civkiller
Honestly I've already stopped caring about this
What's it like being in the TikTok generation, and unable to focus on anything for more than 5 seconds?
I couldn't tell you, I've been busy focusing on CS2 constantly since it was announced
Introduction to Combat | Millennia
Introduction to National Spirits | Millennia
why the frick are they marketing a supposedly complex 4x game with fricking 1 minute vertical phone videos
im disgusted
Shorts are gaming the algo. Blame Youtube for making shorts have extremely large reach. Streamers have also abused shorts to inflate their subscriber counts by hundreds of thousands.
weird i noticed a huge fricking uptick in shorts taking up huge space on my youtube now even though i never watch them.
I checked a profile out with like 2 mil subscribers and there were 0 videos, only shorts.
Youtube wants to compete with Tiktok so they massively boost shorts to encourage their production.
It's the zoomers. Shorts are similar to tik-tok video in length so they can grasp their tiny attention spans.
>Streamers have also abused shorts to inflate their subscriber counts
Until they realize those numbers don't translate into regular viewers and stop wasting their time.
Granted, for marketing the game it make sense to use every avenue, but I doubt adhd morons have the attention span to play strategy games.
more shorts lol
this is so moronic
Dev Diary recap, Nations | Millennia
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vLLm6U6iqjc