If this is a serious question, note that units on a square-grid based system move a lot faster along diagonals than they do horizontally or vertically.
A hex system removes this effect.
tgb123
6202
Has anyone else played the steampunk scenario? Starting it this morning gave me the opportunity to play around with the new espionage system, which I am finding pretty blah. I like the way the victory condition is handled, but when does the League of Industry start awarding titles?
Check the tech tree. It’s used to gate when the victory conditions apply.
-Tom
KevinC
6204
The problem is you have to move each unit as an individual now, not as a stack. This greatly slows things down.
You didn’t explain why it would be better that going in each direction is the same relative distance with hexes. It can’t be because it’s more realistic, because movement on the map is already abstract with terrain costs and all, not to mention the ridiculous time frame at certain points.
One might guess because it’s easier for the AI to figure, but that doesn’t seem to have borne any fruit here… Otherwise, squares seemed to work pretty well for Civ IV.
It has nothing to do with the AI. Optimal pathing is optimal pathing.
When a² + b² != c², you can have a visually jarring experience. You may not care about it because you’re used to dealing with squares, but it bothers the heck out of a lot of people. For many, a square field represents one extra abstraction that detracts from immersion. Usually in games, most people find more immersion is better. I mean heck, why don’t we just play games with ASCII symbols?*
edit -
Peace on both of you, but I believe I’ll stick with “I am not sure I know why hexes are better than squares”.
I love how they switched out the regular calendar date with the weird looking Mayan calendar date when you play as Maya. :D
I first saw that and thought my game had messed up or something. It’s a nice touch!
Teiman
6211
Reading Kotaku’s review posted earlier in the thread this point struck me:
more than ever, with Gods and Kings I felt like I was reliant on the seed of a map, my location and the unique qualities of my people combining to set my path for the next six thousand years or so.
Does any else feel this is a major flaw in the game. Usually (about 2/3 in) I realize I’m not going to catch the Cultural or Scoring leader and my destiny has been decided. ie, it can be very difficult to make up for decisions you make early on, leaving you in a hole later.
KevinC
6213
I can see where they’re coming from but I don’t see it as a major flaw, no, at least not specifically to the game… it’s pretty common throughout the genre as a whole.
You may have chosen culture-related religion/culture bonuses, but that doesn’t stop you from rolling into the Culture leader’s capital and razing it to the ground to give you a leg up if you find yourself lagging behind. :)
I don’t get it? It’s a cool piece of art, but how does it relate?
Giaddon
6215
It’s inspired by the Civilization 2 game that dude played for 10 years.
Ah. Even knowing that story I didn’t make the connection. Thanks!
The number of armies isn’t an issue–I’m also a long time hex wargaming veteran, though I don’t play them that much anymore–but the interaction of the game system, the maps, and the units that is sometimes iffy. It’s very hard to attack some cities due to geography, which makes it nearly impossible to mass enough force–a nice challenge sometimes for us, but it renders the city impenetrable to the AI. So something to concentrate force isn’t a bad idea I don’t think. And I didn’t mind the Civ 3 implementation that much I guess.
The thing that gets me is that Civ V is almost aggressively about the multi-era experience.
Without exception, all of the previous versions of the title contained expansions that provided fully self-contained scenarios, complete with dozens of new units, technologies, factions, & etc.
Gods & Kings seems to have been designed merely to complement the main game, not offer diversions or off-shoots. Although I haven’t yet tried the Steampunk scenario, the rest are essentially the main game, played out at different times in history. The Invasion of Korea scenario introduces no unique units of which I am aware. The Fall of Rome offers one unique unit for each faction, but otherwise no additional revisions to the main game.
There also seems to be a substantially smaller mod community for Civ V, or at least fewer offerings, as compared to Civ III and Civ IV. Or has the use of an in-game mod interface meant that people post scenarios mostly online, rather than discuss them at places like CivFanatics?
The full SDK hasn’t ever been released, which is a big part of what the mod folks need to really get in there and work.
