I have my own excel formula which weighs wealth in the new world vs resources available in the old world. Wealthy New World plus Resource-heavy old world = winning map.
Huh, interesting. I mean that’s a sensible basis if you are looking for certain outcomes. Personally I might favor a different weighting, but I like that you’ve got certain map attributes that you value most.
It’s like how in Age of Empires 2 I tended to really love maps that were either very forest heavy, or islands/ archipelago. Because my favorite ways to play were either walls and towers fueled late game boom (I always loved getting the big toys at the end game), or to go a vikingr with longships or my favorite the Turtle Ship.
If you want to PM me your e-mail address I can e-mail you the excel document that has the raw data too so you could do your own formulae
Thanks for the offer, but no need. I’ve not played enough Inperialsim to have refined my preference like that (in fact I’ve only got a rather shamefully limited experience with it, missed it in the day).
Besides I play, like, 10 hours of games in a month. I suspect getting Imperialism time is a long way out.
Not to tell you what to do, but this is literally the perfect use case for Google Docs :)
Also: Strong/Early New World armies or bust! I love a development/diplomatic game. Ends up being very naval-focused, but that’s fine.
Sure. Just “Gathering Storm” is one of those cliché titles that you usually only see in parodies or satire. Monty Python’s Flying Circus was already making fun of this in the late 60s/early 70s. It’s almost as bad as a “Rise of”-kind of title. It just seems creatively bankrupt to me.
Ah, now I see what you mean. Yep, one could evoke climate change without relying on a cliche. Actually, a better title would embrace both the climate-change theme and the new World Congress and diplomatic victory. “Diplomacy and Disasters,” or something like that.
Nothing like some random, uncontrollable events to make a strategy game more strategic.
Random events can be great fun. In good games, anyway.
I’m convinced imp2 ai knew where all the resources were to remain competitive so I consider it only fair to know as well by replaying maps.
Imp2 has a setting for how much the AI gets to cheat on finding resources, because it is the best 4X ever.
I appreciate the method they’re promising in the upcoming exp. These disasters are random, but their probability of ocurring is influenced by the Civs’ actions. Even if I’m not convinced the game’s view of global warming is even remotely realistic, it makes for some fun game mechanics.
Has anyone picked this up on the Switch? I am still irrationally reluctant to pick it up since it doesn’t include the first expansion, but wondering how it is to play on the go.
We know the AI is heavily optimized for battery use at least!
So Wrath-of-God arbitrary events to guide a player’s actions? That sounds unappealing.
I think the idea is that you can pursue policies that will induce global warming, thereby raising the oceans etc., or not. Because this might create incentives for land-locked civs to try to submerge coastal civs, there are climate events that affect the heartland, too, like dust bowls. Anyway, the idea is that players influence disasters, not just the other way around.
The old Alpha Centauri “lower terrain elevation to submerge enemy city and destroy it without triggering war” exploit.
Yep, that sort of thing. I like your forum handle! It fits this discussion, lol.
Hehe…
I’m a native of Canada, I’m a hockey fanatic, and I like Mounties just fine, so I’m happy with all this. That said, none of my Canadian relatives declare war politely. :)
Gameplay-wise, this Civ sounds like my kind of thing: builders who can win a Cultural or Diplomatic victory.