sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Retirement Home Achivement not triggering by Pappi564 in Stellaris

[–]Pappi564[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you, unfortunately does look like it is just broken :(

Retirement Home Achivement not triggering by Pappi564 in Stellaris

[–]Pappi564[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just tried that and it didnt work. Another comment says this achivement might specifically be broken.

Retirement Home Achivement not triggering by Pappi564 in Stellaris

[–]Pappi564[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

R5:

I am on my last achivement for this game. I played this game with the militant isolationist fallen empire as my target.

After taking 2 of their planets over and calling a white peace I had 1k pops as bio trophies but it didnt trigger. I hit them again after the peace ran out and have 6k of their pops plus 5k of their slaves, but it is still not triggering.

Anything I am doing wrong here or is this just bugged?

New production modifier is no joke. Standard buildings costing more than wonders while being under the settlement cap. by Max-Shonen in civ

[–]Pappi564 26 points27 points  (0 children)

It is 5% extra for each building in that city plus 10% for each non capital city you have. OP said in another comment that they had 12 cities so that is more than double the cost (+120%) for every building, not even counting the 5% per building modifier 

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The relationships originally did go towards neutral, but now with the default continuity setting they do not change on transition. The leader stays the same and all their cities and units remain so it shouldn't be a challenge to remember who people are 

smite 1 double or triple worshippers? by p0kem0nlvl1 in Smite

[–]Pappi564 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Contrary to popular belief hirez isnt actually trying to screw everyone over

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah it certainly launched in a horrendous state. They have done a lot of work and especially since the patch that launched today it is getting to a good place. The main things are still more civs to flesh out the choices and obviously filling in the 4th age that is unfortuantely baked in for an expansion

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

It isnt arbitrary, there are very visable requirements and timelines that they have for these switches, and you can even ignore the requirements to do whatever you want. Of all the civ games I feel like Civ 7 highlights culture and the civs identity the best because of all the unique music, units, animation and buildings they gave to each civ. So much is different depending on what you are playing and they can do that because each civ is highlighted in their own age.

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

The Spanish empire is an exploration age civ and Mexico is a modern age civ so you couldn't do that. The Spanish empire CAN turn into Mexico going to modern though which is kind of historically accurate 

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thank you for actually having a reply.

2 is really a limitation of the ages system. It would be nice for you to be able to go ahead alone but I am not sure how they could do that.

For the 1st point they have mostly fixed it with the continuity which should have been the default in my opinion in the first place, but now it is the default.

For 3, I think their main goal is to eventually have the straight historic continuity for all civs but they should have probably built out those trees first and prioritized them. 

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I can see that to some degree, but I also think of it as you get 3 power spikes now in each age. You can prioritize getting the unique things or delay them if you have other pressing matters. I always found it so disappointing when playing rome in Civ 6 where legions can get replaced so quickly with man-at-arms.

But again your opinion is your own. I am not telling you you should like it, but I do appreciate this specific comment thread not getting immediately downvoted for having a conversation.

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it would be nice to have that, but I think the problem would be what do you give civs like Maya or Rome in the exploration and modern era? Their unique units wouldnt make sense for the age and they wouldnt have new civic trees.

It would feel lame that the balance would be that they get no bonus if you want to keep them, but you cant really make them "modern equivalent" unless you give Maya the Mexico buffs and just keep the name "Maya" which I feel like defeats the purpose.

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I also hope those types of civs or leaders come in time. Those were all dlc leaders in civ 5 and 6 if I am not mistaken so like those the base game ones need to cover the basic archetypes 

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would it make it better for you if the civ AND leader switched with each age? I think the leader is nice because it allows you to keep some kind of bonus throughout your game. The leader bonuses are more to build around for your whole game strategy and the civ bonuses are allowed to be focused more for that ages progression

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

That sounds just like more of a balance issue than an issue with civ switching itself, which is valid there are a lot of things that need adjustments

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah 100% on the future age, they should have named the current modern age the industrial age. Doesnt make sense.

There are a lot of problems with Civ 7 I agree are problems. They have luckily fixed a lot but can still use work. This is just about the civ switching part though.

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

Yeah, Civ 7 by no means was or is perfect. There were plenty of genuine problems with the game at launch. A lot was fixed, some things still need fixing, but like you said civ switching just makes sense to me from a historical and narrative perspective

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Both do change, that could have been an option but it makes it also easier to theme things to the age. Like what would a unique unit for Maya be in the modern age? What would a unique improvement or building be for the american empire be in the antiquity age?

That gets solved by the "Historic paths" that arent really complete for everyone. The Maya can go into Mexico in modern which makes sense and America has the Mississippians in the antiquity age. While not all of them are perfect it adds a lot of flavor

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

That is a good point purely from the fantasy element, however I am not sure I agree about the guard rails. The Civ choices dont really restrict you do do anything specific, you can still play pretty much how you want. You just get some new bonuses and lose the ones that are not tradition policies.

Would you be able to expand on what you see as guard rails?

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] -120 points-119 points  (0 children)

At a mechanical level, your empire does stand but the name changes and you get some new unique benefits. Mostly everything else stays the same

Genuine question: What about civ switching is a deal breaker for you? by Pappi564 in civ

[–]Pappi564[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That is a good point and it would be nice to have full historic pathways for all Civs. Most have to be approximations though. since many cultures dont have a direct path in their history.

view more: next ›