!!
i got one once, havent been able to since. just grabbing their sites without a fight seemed pretty sweet, i didn’t realize i could use their troops.
Oh… but they were moving their units on their own, generally away from my newly acquired cities. So I can move them on my turn, but they might go a different direction during their turn? Or once I move a unit, it is under my control? I don’t understand this game mechanic.
I’m halfway between you and @MrGrumpy. Initially, I really like the system at some point say turn 90 or so it becomes a bit overwhelming. For me it is a very much net positive.
Well 50 turns was a guesstimate and I guess it depends on how close the game is. By turn 90 I usually feel confident of winning (though it typically then takes 30-40 more years) and most decisions don’t seem that important any more.
I noticed there’s a “roleplaying” option in which you don’t know the gameplay effect of your event decisions. Anyone tried it? I may give it a go next game.
If you move their units, they won’t move them on their turn. (I think! This is undertested as a lot of people don’t realize it’s a feature.)
That is awesome :).
It’s hands down better than Civ V and VI. Not quite at the level of IV but considering the early access status, that is not surprising. I’m finally having fun playing a 4x again and that hasn’t happened in my case since Endless Space 2(whilst overall good, ES2 has a bad AI which hurt its longevity).
I’m finishing up the Game of the Week, locked in an extended war against a foe with better tech. For the first time, I’m really feeling the effect of tech levels. Also of family unhappiness: my units are weaker because their families are upset at me.
Question: if a unit with a general dies, does the general die too?
I haven’t figured that out yet either. I’ve had plenty of blind and crippled general, I don’t think they do but I’m not certain.
Yeah, I lost a unit with a general today and the general returned to my court blinded.
I’m pretty sure in my last campaign I lost a family member embedded as a general. I’d like to know if that is what happened because I’m not certain, but the pop up said they died I’m just not positive it was from the battle and not maybe old age or something. But I am paying a bit more attention to how I use them in battle as a result. Either I’ve put them on ranged where they are off front line or more mobile units. The way turns work though if you’re in the midst of a battle and your unit with the general in it gets damaged don’t be surprised if units from out of your line of sight (LOS) blitz them.
The last campaign I lost the Babylonians had like nearly a dozen chariots and so from nowhere in your LOS they could come at you and destroy any one unit at any time. And if you didn’t destroy the damaged chariots your turn, they disappeared out of LOS to heal and come back at you in a couple years.
This has made me seriously consider always having one unit at least with that extended LOS capability so I’ve got a better view of what’s coming at me.
Thanks for the answers on generals. Discord agrees with you guys: by default the general survives even if the unit they’re commanding kicks the bucket.
I agree, @easytarget, I think the extended-LOS capability is an important one. Even with it, it can be hard to see the AI coming.
I’ve enjoyed my latest war because it was the opposite of most of my Civ battles. In Civ, the AI will attack me, I’ll fend them off, then I counterattack and take cities. In this game, by contrast, I attacked the AI, I got to the gates of an enemy city, I attacked its defending unit a few times – and then the AI counterattacked in force, focus-firing my units, and I ended up retreating all the way home.
The two main things I find wearing me down in the later game:
- an inability to see clearly where roads already exist, especially through woods and improvements
- not knowing what buildings are already built in each city
By necessity, you get longer turns by year 80 or 100, with many more orders. But if each worker order turns into its own mini-research project, it becomes a problem.
haha, pretty sure I’ve built barracks twice in some cities for this very reason. I don’t know what’s built and a little picture pops up suggesting I build them. It would help if you could better tell what’s built and for it not to suggest you build again something that’s already built (wonder if they stack?).
Yep, it is hard to tell except where they’re built in open undeveloped tiles. Maybe make them darker?
you can build two barracks and two ranges/city and they do stack, providing an 80% bonus to your training. Put in a couple of officers and you can really crank out the military.
I think having a list of what you’ve built would be a good thing to add to the city screen.
I wonder if it would work to have a tooltip for a city to display a list of improvements built for the city with how many of each. Then if you lock the tooltip open, when you hover over an item in the list it highlights them on the map. Or maybe some type of city panel or somethig.
You guys probably know this, but if you press and hold V, you’ll see your road network (the brightest green hexes). Whenever I’m thinking about roads, I do this as a matter of course. Darker roads might help, I dunno. I’ll probably still push V even with darker roads.
I agree that a list of stuff already built would be helpful. Maybe a tooltip over the capital hex, or better yet a dedicated hotkey?
It’s not necessarily bad to build multiple barracks! I do it all the time, so that I always have someone training behind the lines, and for the bonus training output and specialists. But then I tend to have relatively small empires. Two barracks in each of a dozen cities might be overkill, heh.
Yep, know that shows the connection, but water ways count too so it’s not strictly just the roads. But it is a good call out nonetheless.
Yep, something along these lines would be helpful.
I’m trying this in current campaign, and of course getting military specialists.
Question: did we ever find out of certain nations are predisposed to a certain kind of behavior? This is my 2nd campaign in a row where Greece offered me an alliance (said no this time) and Rome is getting aggressive. So, does this just play off the way the campaign is playing out or are is there any hard wiring on behavior?
I think Rome is naturally aggressive, I thought Assyria was also, but the last few games, they’ve got of to a slow start and haven’t been much of a factor.
I’m getting better at the game. Played as Egypt, strong. Finishing up ambition 7 it is only turn 78, and I have 17 points nearest competitor only has 8. Carthage declare war why I was fighting the Synchtian (sp) put up a decent fight.
I’m going to move up a level or two, then probably take a break and give them time to roll out an update or two.
I’m a bit surprised more Civ players aren’t playing this game.
Edit: After reading @spock AAR I’ll definitely be playing the GOTW. Put first I’m going to play Rome.