(November 11th, 2016, 19:17)The Black Sword Wrote:Quote:So I enjoyed 85% of this game, but these last 25T were some of the least fun I've ever had playing Civ. Playing a kill-fest game is basically off the table in Civ6, and that's really disappointing. The combination of 1UPT, obscure movement rules, and near-useless roads makes any sort of warring a logistical nightmare. I don't see a way to fix it either, unfortunately. I don't think that completely kills Civ6 as a SP game, but as a MP game on the scale that we've played Civ4 on it probably does.
I'm hoping that when you're only playing 1 turn at a time, against competent(human) opponents, war might be fun. Hard to test the theory with the current support for MP though ...
For SP I agree with you anyway, I started a Scythia Deity game last week to see what combat was like. I'm pretty sure I've won but I've no desire to finish the game.
Yeah, and I suppose when you're playing against humans the unit numbers should be more comparable. In SP right now you have two options - play at a lower difficult level and wince at the horrible AI, or play at a higher difficulty level and deal with the hordes of free/discounted stuff the AI gets.
(November 11th, 2016, 20:39)Ruined Everything Wrote: Some thoughts:
- I noticed that you were pretty aggressive with your initial plants. This probably put you in a stronger position (the starting area was pretty shitty and there was some good stuff over by Japan and Egypt - and unlike civ4 I think there’s no distance cost.), Did you have problems with barb defense/supply chain logistics?
I had very few barb problems in this game. I noted in my report two-ish times they were sort of threatening, but they didn't bother me any other times really. That's especially strange with an isolated start. There seems to be a LOT of variance in how rough they tend to be on the pure dumb luck of their scouts.
What I did have a lot of problems with was discovering just how useless roads are in this game. It took an eternity for builders/settlers to travel across my empire which was pretty frustrating. I thought the free roads for Rome would be a big advantage, but it turned out to be pretty useless.
(November 11th, 2016, 20:39)Ruined Everything Wrote: - How many turns did it take to churn out a cav? Did you do anything other than i-zone + trade routes + policy?
They were like 3-4T units for me in my core 3-4 cities that had overlapping industrial zones. And yeah, I used the policy that gave me double production speed which is why I targeted Cavs in the first place. I actually got very little production out of trade routes because my army was so huge that I had to spend my routes on gold-producing routes or else I would have bankrupted myself. Unit upkeep is insanely expensive.
(November 11th, 2016, 20:39)Ruined Everything Wrote: - You obviously did a much more efficient job at blitzing through the AI then I did (we both started T 175ish, and you finished 20 turns ahead of me.) The one thing I did notice was that you weren’t using bombards. Any particular tactical reason for that, or were you just trying to spare yourself at that point? With free 6-move embarkment any unit can Blitzkrieg, and bombards can drop the walls in 1 shot (I found that bombard + 3-4 cavs was typically a 1 turn capital kill.)
I didn't really need the bombards. I was trying to get it over quickly, and I assumed that waiting around for bombards would have slowed me down a lot. I never actually built one, so maybe they're quicker than I realized? Cavs might not have been enough against a competent opponent, but against Spears and Warriors... Typically I would surround the capital with Cavs, and then it would fall on the following turn. Only one or two of them would even take damage, so then it was blitz right on towards the next one. I never actually lost a single Cav, and I don't think I even got close to losing one either.
