Sid Meier's Civilization

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
MoO1 Alkari: a tweet-y bird-y sounding theme (they look like birds instead of pterodactyls)

MoO2 Alkari: theme sounds like something outta Star Trek: The Next Generation (not bad BTW)
 
In Master of Orion 2, they introduced 3 new races, and remade the original 10 (other than the Humans). The 3 new ones are the Trilarians (aquatic and vaguely Cthulhu-looking beings who tend to be peaceful), the Gnolams (Ferengi-like folks who vaguely look like gnomes and trolls and who of course fixate on money), and then there are the Elerians.

The Elerians are a bunch of blue or grey skinned humanoids with pointy ears. Elerian males are a submissive bunch of "psionic" philosophers who can use mental ability to see the whole galaxy (more of a star cluster really), while the women are the warriors and leaders. Sorta like that TNG episode, Angel One. The Elerian symbol is just a stylized "♀" symbol. When the Elerians were reintroduced in the Master of Orion vidya from 2016, the "♀" symbol was dropped. I guess it wasn't "politically correct" to use it (lol).
 
In Master of Orion 2, they introduced 3 new races, and remade the original 10 (other than the Humans). The 3 new ones are the Trilarians (aquatic and vaguely Cthulhu-looking beings who tend to be peaceful), the Gnolams (Ferengi-like folks who vaguely look like gnomes and trolls and who of course fixate on money), and then there are the Elerians.

The Elerians are a bunch of blue or grey skinned humanoids with pointy ears. Elerian males are a submissive bunch of "psionic" philosophers who can use mental ability to see the whole galaxy (more of a star cluster really), while the women are the warriors and leaders. Sorta like that TNG episode, Angel One. The Elerian symbol is just a stylized "♀" symbol. When the Elerians were reintroduced in the Master of Orion vidya from 2016, the "♀" symbol was dropped. I guess it wasn't "politically correct" to use it (lol).
This is in response to?
 
Does it still require a microshaft account?
I think so.
I managed to put in a days worth of play and the game now runs well enough even on my old machine. The AI is also less stupid, still not amazing but it took until act 2 for me to beat them is score and tech and they are still stealing triumphs(wonders) from me. And they still settle cities like retards, playing on normal BTW. There is also a lot less micro you need to do. The game will auto upgrade your buildings with items.
 
More civ youtube shills going through cope sessions.

Honestly, even if they fixed the game I think they still screwed themselves. Alot of the hate around the game transformed into culture war and now people just hate Firaxis completely.
Civ youtubers were laughing about the "chuds" being mad, but they actually are mad and even worse they are mad on a deeper level than just hating certain mechanics.

Civ 6 had alot of progressive messaging and even a rough start, but it never transformed into a culture war debate.
 
Civ 6 had alot of progressive messaging and even a rough start, but it never transformed into a culture war debate.
No, it did. I still remember the massive backlash they got over Seondeok and Kristina and Catherine de Medici and all the other women they forced into the game. The difference was that it pulled in enough newfags who didn't care and the game was decent enough to get the people who did to put their pitchforks down after a while. I can't really think of a Civ youtuber (not that I've watched one in a decade plus) who isn't either apolitical or a progressive mouthpiece, so any cultural backlash is invariably reliant on the playerbase to maintain.
 
Honestly, even if they fixed the game I think they still screwed themselves. Alot of the hate around the game transformed into culture war and now people just hate Firaxis completely.
Civ youtubers were laughing about the "chuds" being mad, but they actually are mad and even worse they are mad on a deeper level than just hating certain mechanics.

Civ 6 had alot of progressive messaging and even a rough start, but it never transformed into a culture war debate.
No, it did. I still remember the massive backlash they got over Seondeok and Kristina and Catherine de Medici and all the other women they forced into the game. The difference was that it pulled in enough newfags who didn't care and the game was decent enough to get the people who did to put their pitchforks down after a while. I can't really think of a Civ youtuber (not that I've watched one in a decade plus) who isn't either apolitical or a progressive mouthpiece, so any cultural backlash is invariably reliant on the playerbase to maintain.
With civ 6 some were disappointed with the art style and some of the female leader choices. The game still have a lot of good qualities so some were more forgiving.

With civ 7 the culture war stuff was icing on the cake on top of the civ switch era reset system utterly breaking the game to the point it no longer feels like civ but a rip off of civ. The leaders being disconnected with the civ meant that firaxis chose even worse leaders. Just about everything about it is awful and a far step away from what people like about civ.
 
Speaking of old games. I have only ever played one Civ game (5). I'm overall pretty experienced with 4x, though. How exactly does one get into Alpha Centauri these days? Should I be aware of any noob pitfalls with getting it to run properly on win10? Is there some mod/userpatch that is a must-have due to compatibility issues?
Nowadays one can download the module from a number of places online, but back then one may have had to get it on a floppy disk or download it over dialup.
Man, I kind of miss getting my patches from gaming mag companion discs. Or installing an expansion and noticing little numerical balance changes in base game content.
The demo discs had some interesting shit on them sometimes, too. Apparently, I have played an early press build/alpha demo of Van Bueren as a teenager, for example. Kind of wish we got that instead of the Bethesda Fallouts.
The AI is also less stupid, still not amazing but it took until act 2 for me to beat them is score and tech and they are still stealing triumphs(wonders) from me.
Bummer. Cheating AI is always kind of a downer for me, especially in strategy games. Feels like I'm playing an asymmetrical single-player game or something. The AI in 5, for example, is competent, more or less, but just has huge bonuses to everything across the board to bridge the gap created by differences in minute decision-making capacity. I guess that's corpo gamedev for you. Why spend money on scripting a proper computer-controlled player when you can spend more on marketing amirite?
Are there any decent AI-improving mods for 5, btw? I want it to beat me into the ground without cheating. I want it to be smart with its units instead of pulling 10-tile carpets of infantry out of its ass every 5 turns.
 
Anyone else try Master of Orion 3? The people behind it seemed to really try to hype MoO 3, even calling it "The Ultimate Space Strategy Game", and releasing Star Lords* for free to promote MoO3. The actual vidya itself isn't that great. There are a lot of management menus and options that can make the learning curve steep. There's also a lot of emphasis on policy, like at least 2 techs on policy wording alone. There's also Galactic Senate with bills and laws. Colony ships can be directed by policy. There's taxation options. Planet surfaces are divided into DEA (Dominant Economic Activity) zones. And for all those numerical data and menus and options, visuals are lacking. One cannot see the surfaces of worlds for example. At least the aliens are really alien and there's animated videos of them communicating in various ways. Vidya sounds very "office-y", and too political: the intro video sort of shows that. I think the game wasn't well-received overall, and that it's been said that the developers only listened to the praises...

* (a prototype of the original Master of Orion)
 
Another great breakdown of why civ 7 sucks.

Screenshot_2502.webp

Screenshot_2503.webp
Screenshot_2504.webp
Screenshot_2505.webp
Screenshot_2506.webp
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_2505.webp
    Screenshot_2505.webp
    27.8 KB · Views: 22
Last edited:
So there's assigned tasks in 7? Lame. I like how in Civ I and II, it is rather open, with none of that "ages" system.
I don't mind the idea of having stuff in specific eras to do/pursue that are unique to that era, because otherwise the system only really exists to inflate certain numbers, but it shouldn't feel like tasks.
 
So there's assigned tasks in 7? Lame. I like how in Civ I and II, it is rather open, with none of that "ages" system.
In the brief period I played 7 before refunding it, that was one of the worst parts. You had a WoW style quest list in the top left corner saying build this, research that, as if building a new civilisation is a checklist of accomplishments that have to happen in a certain order.

Someone was talking earlier in the thread about how Old World handles religion. It isn't like Civ 4 where you research a specific tech and get Judaism, but it's a more natural, accidental process, and when the religion is formed by whoever, it creates a whole institution with leaders that you can befriend or piss off, or your kids might convert to it. Unlike in Civ 4 where your religion gives you a minor happiness boost or whatever and which religion you pick has no real bearing on anything beyond which logo you like best.
 
Back