Lowered Player number ... why?

[Xerberus86]

why did you lower the total player number in this game from the previous 12 (like you did in age of wonders planetfall) down to 9 players now? bad move ... please up it again to the 12 you had in planetfall!

and increase map size please to the same size you had in planetfall too. please DON'T shrink your 4x games map size.

civ6 supports over 20 AI players ... right now you support only 8 opponents! its sad!

[Husbando]

+1

[DeepXen]

I'm curious about this too. Must be performance related...

[sandman25dcsss]

+1

[⎝Wyrd Deofol⎠]

-1

[Arkorat]

That does seem pretty bizarre. If its a stability issue, I would have much preferred them simply giving a warning instead. (similar to have you might get warned when making large worlds in other games)

[ayrtep]

+1 map size, +0 player number

[Kel Kerman]

Originally posted by Arkorat:

That does seem pretty bizarre. If its a stability issue, I would have much preferred them simply giving a warning instead. (similar to have you might get warned when making large worlds in other games)

if it is performace you only need to look at Jedi Survivor to see what would happen if it released with performance issues. warning or no, people would still treat it like the end of the world.

[⎝Wyrd Deofol⎠]

I think they condensed everything including player total. I'm not sure there is any reason beyond that. Seeing you can play with a motherboard from 2011.

[Xerberus86]

Originally posted by ⎝Apostate⎠:

I think they condensed everything including player total. I'm not sure there is any reason beyond that.

again ... in planetfall there were 12 players ... no reason to lower it. in civ 6 you can have up to 22 i think.

there didn't need anything to be "condensed" ... if not many people voiced the negative opinion that everything was a bit too close or cramped, which i felt too.

there was enough room in planetfall to move around and feel like you are in a big world and not in a gamey scenario. there were also not more or less stuff going on in planetfall. there was actually more stuff going on in the map in planetfall.

[⎝Wyrd Deofol⎠]

Sorry but the reason: Planetfall did it so this game should also... is not enough for me.

I found that in Planetfall you actually had too much room to walk and it felt insignificant and not very tactical. It had to do with the theme i guess. Just as this game and its maps are part of the theme.

I like how this game looks and feels like a living boardgame and your actions weigh more heavily. I applaud the two map system. Let's not forget that it exists.

Also i see no point for this game to lower it to 9, i also see no point in it to crank it to 12.

[RangerRobAZ]

+1

[Xerberus86]

Originally posted by ⎝Apostate⎠:

Sorry but the reason: Planetfall did it so this game should also... is not enough for me.

I found that in Planetfall you actually had too much room to walk and it felt insignificant and not very tactical. It had to do with the theme i guess. Just as this game and its maps are part of the theme.

I like how this game looks and feels like a living boardgame and i applaud the two map system. Let's not forget that.

Also i see no point for this game to lower it to 9, i also see no point in it to crank it to 12.

yes the reason is enough, its about evolution and not regression. its also about options in a game all about player choice and customization.

i don't care if you felt insignificant ... for me it felt good to be in a 4x game where you can actually explore the map and have some room to grow and explore. so different opinions, but there is no reason why not to put it up to 12 ( again, it was already in the game) ... there is no harm in more options and you can play with player count 4 or whatever you want and i want the max.

also one thing many streams had in common was the annoyance of streamers when they got border gored by the AI on their second or third turn. literally the AI putting an outpost 3 tiles away from your starting town / capital city because they are like 10 tiles away.

i am sorry but this is stupid ... this is gimping the exploration hard and is really annoying when i get boxed in by the neighbours on my second or third turn already. just bad game design!

[⎝Wyrd Deofol⎠]

Originally posted by Xerberus86:

Originally posted by ⎝Apostate⎠:

Sorry but the reason: Planetfall did it so this game should also... is not enough for me.

I found that in Planetfall you actually had too much room to walk and it felt insignificant and not very tactical. It had to do with the theme i guess. Just as this game and its maps are part of the theme.

I like how this game looks and feels like a living boardgame and i applaud the two map system. Let's not forget that.

Also i see no point for this game to lower it to 9, i also see no point in it to crank it to 12.

yes the reason is enough, its about evolution and not regression. its also about options in a game all about player choice and customization.

i don't care if you felt insignificant ... for me it felt good to be in a 4x game where you can actually explore the map and have some room to grow and explore. so different opinions, but there is no reason why not to put it up to 12 ( again, it was already in the game) ... there is no harm in more options and you can play with player count 4 or whatever you want and i want the max.

also one thing many streams had in common was the annoyance of streamers when they got border gored by the AI on their second or third turn. literally the AI putting an outpost 3 tiles away from your starting town / capital city because they are like 10 tiles away.

i am sorry but this is stupid ... this is gimping the exploration hard and is really annoying when i get boxed in by the neighbours on my second or third turn already. just bad game design!

You are not aware that you can decide how far the players spawn from you?
Did it occur to you that the streamers TOOK this choice just to make the stream faster and more interesting?I haven;t seen ANY streamer get annoyed by it.

To call it bad game design without even having touched the game is really too much for me.

[Xerberus86]

Originally posted by ⎝Apostate⎠:

Originally posted by Xerberus86:

yes the reason is enough, its about evolution and not regression. its also about options in a game all about player choice and customization.

i don't care if you felt insignificant ... for me it felt good to be in a 4x game where you can actually explore the map and have some room to grow and explore. so different opinions, but there is no reason why not to put it up to 12 ( again, it was already in the game) ... there is no harm in more options and you can play with player count 4 or whatever you want and i want the max.

also one thing many streams had in common was the annoyance of streamers when they got border gored by the AI on their second or third turn. literally the AI putting an outpost 3 tiles away from your starting town / capital city because they are like 10 tiles away.

i am sorry but this is stupid ... this is gimping the exploration hard and is really annoying when i get boxed in by the neighbours on my second or third turn already. just bad game design!

You are not aware that you can decide how far the players spawn from you?
Did it occur to you that the streamers TOOK this choice just to make the stream faster and more interesting?I haven;t seen ANY streamer get annoyed by it.

To call it bad game design without even having touched the game is really too much for me.

i honestly don't care what is "too much" for you or not, none of my concerns.

the streams did select mostly 7 players .. some did 4 but they showed the whole player count which was 9! in the previous dev streams and in some previous faction creation vids you could see up to 12 players.

also i am aware that you can set player distance ... this has literally nothing to do with the player amount but the distance between each player ... what is so hard for you to understand here?

9 is lower than 12 .. not hard to grasp i hope. with the stupid new system of player count + player distance = map size ... this means that the maps have become even more smaller than before.

again ... i don't care if you felt insignificant ... you can feel whatever, it doesn't matter for me and i don't care about that. you and your feelings don't matter for me. you can player on smaller maps...more choice for you ... go be happy ... don't care.

but there is ZERO reason to decrease the player count when a) it was in the game before and b) it was in their previous game before too.

and as you can see by most other posters here....not unimportant for them too.

so instead of some baseless shilling, just accept that some people like bigger maps and more players in a day and age where we can have 1000 star systems in stellaris or up to 2000 star systems in distant worlds 2. there is ZERO reason that AoW4 only has 9 players and a medium map size other than somebody f*cked up the optimization / coding and the game sh*ts itself with bigger maps.

again...because after they build the game and then did a huge rewrite of an integral game system (map size selection to player count + distance) might have f*cked up something in the game.

[s]

I like civ 6 and was looking for a new X4 game. But honestly, I feel like the game will be too small for my taste. It is a shame.

Not only in map size, but also in longevity of a game.