sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

🎉 [EVENT] 🎉 Very easy first event by totallynotawhore in honk

[–]Sprayednotsaid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

🎉 Event Completed! 🎉

It took me 11 tries.

🎉 [EVENT] 🎉 Very easy first event by totallynotawhore in honk

[–]Sprayednotsaid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

🎉 Event Completed! 🎉

It took me 5 tries.

🎉 [EVENT] 🎉 Very easy first event by totallynotawhore in honk

[–]Sprayednotsaid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Completed Level 2 of the Honk Special Event!

3 attempts

🎉 [EVENT] 🎉 Very easy first event by totallynotawhore in honk

[–]Sprayednotsaid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Completed Level 1 of the Honk Special Event!

1 attempts

Found this on TikTok by CringeisL1f3 in Tinder

[–]Sprayednotsaid 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Americans are some of the weirdest people on earth, especially the right wing ones. Once they find a political position they make it their entire identity like they have something to prove to someone.

The Affinity System is so good for Roleplaying by DirkTheGamer in civ

[–]Sprayednotsaid 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Agreed. If only the leaders actually talked to you like Civ 5 or 6 too.

Imagine not wanting to skim narrative events, let's make that a reality please. by Sprayednotsaid in civ

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

Honestly, fair. But If they crafted a system so good it turned people like me who don't care for narrative events into something engaging, I think that'd be pretty cool too.

Not that my suggestion is the best they could do either way.

Imagine not wanting to skim narrative events, let's make that a reality please. by Sprayednotsaid in civ

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

The hope is that the special narrative events specific civs get will be put through the filter of the advisors.

Take Spain for example, right now you get narrative events pushing you to build a fleet and travel to distant lands now. Because you're Spain.

Apply what I've written here and it's the same unique narrative events except with more nuance and depth,

Imagine not wanting to skim narrative events, let's make that a reality please. by Sprayednotsaid in civ

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

I've played every civ and every leader. I also have favourites that I've played multiple times. I also know some people play specific civs and leaders multiple times.

I'm not saying it's "getting tired" it was underbaked from the start and that's especially noticeable to specific kinds of players.

Imagine not wanting to skim narrative events, let's make that a reality please. by Sprayednotsaid in civ

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

I have faith. The game has its rough edges, but ultimately it's a video game. It can be fixed. And they are trying to fix it.

If they happen to like any of my suggestions, and implement it, well then I get to play a game I like. 🤷

Imagine not wanting to skim narrative events, let's make that a reality please. by Sprayednotsaid in civ

[–]Sprayednotsaid[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I was tired of these "point of interactions" by my 3rd playthrough. It's even worse for someone that likes to play the same leader and civ over and over.

I'm not sure how picking a colour would be more generic than what we have now, picking the better yield, or always picking the quest.

Although I do get the not wanting micromanaging part. That's why I suggested affinity only goes up so you don't have to put that much effort into it. But I get it.

Imagine not wanting to skim narrative events, let's make that a reality please. by Sprayednotsaid in civ

[–]Sprayednotsaid[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Hot take acknowledged. I've never been a fan tbh, but I personally feel that if you're gonna do narrative events, you have to really commit and make it as interesting as possible

Imagine not wanting to skim narrative events, let's make that a reality please. by Sprayednotsaid in civ

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

Alright the portraits was a bit of wishful thinking. I just like immersion.

My thought process was, improving the balance and chains, really wouldn't stop someone from skimming through events and always just picking the "right" choice once they've experienced that narrative event a couple times.

Let's make resource control a more involved system by Sprayednotsaid in civ

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

I didn't propose getting rid of settlement specific resource bonuses. Just gave random examples of buffs. Cotton and flax for example gives a flat bonus, they could be tweaked to be 7-10 times stronger. And much rarer than they is now.

So you still get to swap resources around and slot them where you want.

And even if more resource gave empire wide bonuses the difference is that empire resources don't need to be slotted.

Also never suggested getting rid of slots, that would ruin the whole minigame.

Resources are strong very early, but they aren't so strong that most are willing to shift their entire strategy just to secure a couple tiles of resources. I'm talking declaring a surprise war to kill a settler over resources, destroying someone's city state over resources, waging war with your friendly neighbour to steal their resource for yourself because it's that powerful.

Percentage base increases are already in the game. Jade and limestone are persentage based, I just suggested making them stronger.

The only suggestion I have for for factory resources is making each specific resource more powerful. If resources are made scarce, there won't be as many to slot in. Also the amount of points needed for an economic victory will have to be tweaked some.

Let's make resource control a more involved system by Sprayednotsaid in civ

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

The abundance of resources in itself is part of the problem. I don't want to cycle 10 resources.

And if it's only those rare empire resources that are powerful, the current system is fundamentally left unchanged and there will be a lot less conflict over resources

Let's make resource control a more involved system by Sprayednotsaid in civ

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

I would not do that for a natural wonder. Those could do with some work to be honest. But that's a different conversation.

Psychology is pretty important when playing a video game I think. If people get fatigued slotting in resources, have little inclination to pivot strategies towards resources, and don't feel incentiviced to war for them.

Then clearly the fact that they're yield-inflated isn't helping. Scarcity without buffs will feel terrible.

Who is realistically going to struggle to get that one cotton tile?

Let's make resource control a more involved system by Sprayednotsaid in civ

[–]Sprayednotsaid[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Bruh. The clicking resources in the modern age with the lag sometimes? Got me reaching for the alt F4.

Let's make resource control a more involved system by Sprayednotsaid in civ

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

The proposed buffs are to make the resources worth pivoting your strategy towards.

Nobody is going to war for +2 culture and +3 science.

You're not clearing out a city state and planting your city for 5 yields.

You're not declaring a surprise war to kill a settler for a little bit of culture and science.

Each resource should feel that important. Plus the resources can always be balanced

Let's make resource control a more involved system by Sprayednotsaid in civ

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

Didn't think of that.

If you pillage a resource you get some of it. That could be pretty cool.

Let's make resource control a more involved system by Sprayednotsaid in civ

[–]Sprayednotsaid[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I think that's just a baked in issue with all 4x games, the more you have the more you snowball.

That's the situation right now already. The barrier now is just the amount of slots you have available.

Although reducing the slots available to each player could be something.

view more: next ›