Fair enough, that’s basically my orders ordering (heh) as well. I just usually run out of orders for scouts by the midgame–gotta clear the barbarians off those city sites! And if I end up with tons of orders in the endgame the harvest bonus seems pretty minor by that point.
Small note about forests than might be interesting for Civ players: you shouldn’t wait till lumbermill is available to get wood. Your workers do not destroy forests and only chop a little. It’s a main source of wood early on.
I didn’t know that, thanks! i’ve been restricting myself to chopping scrub
Just don’t “double” chop (aka, clear cut)
Possible bug - can anyone replicate?
Restarting the Game of the Week results in a game that cannot be reloaded.
I was banging my head against the current game of the week (Persia, crammed between established Greece and Babylon) and decided to restart. Using the in game options menu to restart resulted in a new map, presumably otherwise under the same scenario ruleset.
This restarted game can be played normally, but any saves cannot be reloaded.
Small detail but when you reserve an unsettled city site with a unit it costs one order per turn. So an extra incentive to get the site settled asap.
Whaa? I had no idea! That’s not communicated anywhere, if so.
It displays it on your Orders tooltip.
Yes and it’s actually good game design. There was a tendency for players (and the AI) in EA to park a unit on one or more city sites and not settle it/them for many years. Especially frustrating if it was the AI doing it. This way there’s a cost.
That makes sense, sure, but I had no idea it was a thing! It’s kind of counterintuitive given that juts sitting somewhere normally doesn’t cost an order. Now I know!
I remember that from EA!
What factors go into choosing the head of a religion?
I’ll need to double check but I think Workers building improvements takes an order each turn too.
Yeah, it does, I think it was mentioned in one of the tutorials (and it is shown in the orders tooltip, which I gather the city-site-camping is as well, but I never noticed it because it’s not that common). It also makes more intuitive sense because the workers are actually “doing something”, in my mind, at least.
But so is the parked unit on a city site ‘doing something’ - he is protecting it from others and would require govt assistance to do so. That’s how I rationalize the one order per turn in gameworld terms anyway!
Yeah, I think the rationality is clear in hindsight, it’s just less obvious to players. Especially if you put them on sleep/sentry mode, that seems less “doing something” than a worker toiling away at building a mine or whatever. :)
One of the things I really like about the way orders work is that it feels like a great way to capture whether your monarch is an “effective leader”. When a leader dies and I get the heir with lower stats and no legitimacy, the whole empire slows down–roads don’t get built as fast, my armies are less effective, etc. I feel like I’m experiencing one of those sentences in the history book where they say, “Emperor Bob IV was succeeded by the ineffective Emperor Dooby II and the building projects in the capital stalled, and…”
I imagine that orders represent the churning of the bureaucratic machinery to keep troops in the field and coordinate moving large blocks of limestone to construction sites and whatnot. I just have a hard time picturing what’s going on when a unit is camping a city site, maybe because there’s no obvious analogue in real life. I guess they’re maintaining patrols over the whole range of the area and scowling really hard at anyone who comes by. (It also probably doesn’t help that I didn’t realize for a while that you were allowed to found cities anywhere other than the key “city site” tile, so I appreciate what they were actually protecting…)
Oh I’m all about the game design part of parking on city sites costing an order. I just think it’s not communicated effectively to the player, especially since it breaks the paradigm of “orders are consumed when you tell your units/people to do things.”
To keep the UX consistent, I’d consider making it a cooldown action that you have to click on. That’d make the interaction a lot clearer.
Minor complaint at best, though, really. More of an outlier in that the vast majority of the UX is so clear and consistent.
If possible, the religion head will come from the player who has the religion’s holy city. If that’s impossible, the head could be from any player that has the religion. The character is selected randomly, from a family that follows the religion if possible, and the head will be older than 25 if possible.
Thanks! Does this mean that a member of the royal family will never be a religion head if that player has a family following that religion? Or does the royal family count state religion as theirs or something?