Steam installieren
Anmelden
|
Sprache
简体中文 (Vereinfachtes Chinesisch)
繁體中文 (Traditionelles Chinesisch)
日本語 (Japanisch)
한국어 (Koreanisch)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarisch)
Čeština (Tschechisch)
Dansk (Dänisch)
English (Englisch)
Español – España (Spanisch – Spanien)
Español – Latinoamérica (Lateinamerikanisches Spanisch)
Ελληνικά (Griechisch)
Français (Französisch)
Italiano (Italienisch)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesisch)
Magyar (Ungarisch)
Nederlands (Niederländisch)
Norsk (Norwegisch)
Polski (Polnisch)
Português – Portugal (Portugiesisch – Portugal)
Português – Brasil (Portugiesisch – Brasilien)
Română (Rumänisch)
Русский (Russisch)
Suomi (Finnisch)
Svenska (Schwedisch)
Türkçe (Türkisch)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamesisch)
Українська (Ukrainisch)
Ein Übersetzungsproblem melden
Diskussionsregeln
Diesen Beitrag melden
Don't worry, I read the negative reviews, most of them are complaining about the simultaneous turns lol. So no matter what people say here, there's more people in the review section saying otherwise.
It really is, you often need to outrace the AI to either catch its forces or escape yourself. They should have give the option to play either modes but no. Another bad decision choice in a long series concerning this alas, flawed gem.
Or you actually learn how to catch the AI forces to your advantage without turning it into a race to do so, and since combat cannot be forced on you, and thus being forced to fight at disadvantage, this is a non starter as a complaint. Particularly from players playing other games designed to use simultaneous turns and not complaining about them.
If thats correct, then you must also be able to link us to that in the negative reviews then, so can you?.
Hey, I own Civ Vi and all the DLCs, and still play it sometimes. It's a good game. Humankind is just ALSO a good game. Plays more fast-paced, and the AI is waaaay smarter.
80% off bro, give it a try!
What proves you have bo idea of Old World combat...
1) unit don’t get damaged during attack
2) to cross sea you literally have to put there ship and run over sea
3) in the game about ancient era no any effective formation (even in civ there are some basic formations, like archers behind, melee first). In last session after i dropped old world, enemy just send unit from front of my army to its back and killed all archers just cause units fly like rockets in this game
Now you will say as all ow players smth about action points and etc, but really any formation in that game doesn’t make sense, how could it possibly be good tactic mechanic
Btw, HK has best battle system in all such games, deep and interesting
Except that they can, so that not a valid criticism of combat.
Thats sea movement so that not a valid criticism of combat, so that not a valid criticism.
except the missile troops can fire over melee units in the front of the missile troops, so that not a valid criticism as the melee units zoc lock the enemy and protect the rear missile troops from melee combat
So wrong in every respect.
: (
I think it's disingenuous to pretend that simultaneous turns don't affect the way the game is played, but it's even sillier to pretend this magically transmutes the game into an RTS. There is a delay before the AI acts at the beginning of a turn, and that does give players a window of opportunity, as long as you (using the explicitly turn-based nature of the game) prepare to use it.
For example, If you want to prevent an enemy unit from fleeing, you have to position a unit next to it to ensure it's within zone of influence before you hit the End Turn button. If you can't manage that, and the AI moves before you, you end up in a chase. You can queue movement to mitigate this, and spam the button after End Turn to hit "complete movements", but certain notifications or animations can get in the way of you doing that unless you disable them.
Moreover, certain actions, like merging units, declaring an attack, or beginning a siege, don't happen off the back of the "complete movements" queue, leaving you vulnerable to sorties or first strikes by an enemy AI. This is compounded when you are trying to fight war(s) on more than one front: at what point on the map should you point the camera before hitting "End Turn" to give yourself the best chance of seizing the initiative? Should you try to ensure your assault on the enemy city goes off before the AI can sortie, or would it be better to prevent the enemy getting a naval first strike on the other front, since you both have ironclads that can eviscerate each other if given first-mover advantage to deploy properly near the shore?
Personally, I find these choices tense and engaging, but I do find myself waging war very conservatively. I acknowledge that the AI has a leverageable advantage over me on certain turns, which I am forced to play around. On particularly game-defining turns, I even find myself saving before I hit "End Turn" so I can modify my queued actions or camera placement to avoid an undesirable failure state. I use the unfair advantages I have as a player to mitigate the unfair advantages held by the AI.
Am I annoyed by this when it happens? Unequivocally. Does it ruin the game? Absolutely not. There is counterplay both within and outside the game mechanics, and besides, forcing the AI to move only once I have done everything leads to similar problems! What if I put down an outpost, and the AI - now mandated to take its turn after me - responds by running down my infantry with its own cavalry, which was previously hidden in a forest? If the AI had been able to move simultaneously, it might have attacked me before I put the outpost down, but now I've been cornered afterwards, so I lose the same units and suffer a Ransack! Is that less annoying than the current state of things?
Literally every time I hear something new about the mechanic it just sounds worse and worse. I'm not trying to chase AI in real time. And I shouldn't have to rush through popups that I'm supposed to be reading. Just all sounds stupid.
This could all be fixed if the devs made 1 little change and let you play turn-based, but they refuse to. Literally half or more of the negative reviews are about this one specific thing, and ALL youtube reviews are paid by devs to be positive and not mention it. NOT A SINGLE POSITIVE VIDEO REVIEW MENTIONS IT. Why? If it's "such a good thing".
I don't mind waiting 5 seconds at the end of each turn for the AI to do their turn. If you do then that's on you, you go ahead and keep playing Humankind. I'll be playing Civ VI and Old World and Age of Wonders 4 and Civ V.
You dont have to.
You dont have to.
None of that is supported by any evidence, all the evidence contradicts your claims, so kindly stop posting that which does not exist except in your imagination. Your post content shows you believe what you want to believe, in spite of the evidence. You made your point you dont want to buy or play it quite clear, the devs will not be changing it to suit you, and no its not a small change, move on.
You seem to be coming in with the preconception that simultaneous turns are inherently wrong, and that sequential turns are the only right way to do things. If you feel this way, that's fine, but don't misinterpret what I'm trying to say through that lens!
Simultaneous turns have advantages and disadvantages. So do sequential turns. I am equally annoyed by the downsides of either, and in both cases, I play around those downsides. Yes, sequential turns are different and take some getting used to, but they are neither good nor bad. If you'd rather not try the game at all because you're worried the downsides will ruin the experience for you, that's valid. All I'm saying is, they don't ruin it for me, and I can say that without foaming at the mouth like some of the die-hard HK supporters in this thread.
TL;DR - You might find out you enjoy thee game despite the system working differently! And if not, thank goodness there are other 4X games out there that are more your style.