安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
Actually, the Religion and Espionage systems are included in BNW, so you don't need G&K to get the World Religion resolution passed. Another way to get votes is by being one of the top 2 contenders for a World Leader vote when no one wins; each of those players gets 1 additional vote. To piggyback on what many people have said about taking out city-states, the number of global votes (including the majority needed for a Diplomatic victory) decreases if a city-state is destroyed, so if they were allied with a different civ you are reducing their power without hindering your own.
This is exactly what I was talking about. Don't base your opinion off of 1 single game. Civ is meant to be played over and over. Just because you are struggling diplomatically in one game does not mean you will do the same in the next. Tactics will vary based on map, the civs playing, events in the game, your relations, etc. To be fair to the game, your own playstyle, and the developers, you need to play ~5 games, THEN cast judgement.
This is a great example of what some people are talking about with diplomacy. Pick your friends and stick with them. Denounce the people they are denouncing, declare war when they ask for aid, make frequent trade deals, follow the same religion and ideology, and you will have a BFF. Sometimes they will backstab you (especially if you have a weak military and valuable land), but it is often not too difficult to make permanent friends. When Congress rolls around, they will then vote for your proposals, and probably for you as host and World Leader. If you play the field and stay relatively neutral with everyone or just barely friends, then you may have a little more difficulty garnering their support. That doesn't mean that the Congress system is bad, it just means you are not a power player with Diplomacy.
Huh, didnt know that. Just one less reason why he can not get the votes.
The world congress is a sloppy way of shoving diplomacy onto players.
The theory is to make it more "realistic" or... forcing diplomacy onto people. That way for no good reason, minority nations can impose huge sweeping measures against the major nations. They really want you to keep city-states as pets, constantly feeding them to get their votes. It's stupid.
It makes no sense that say... a huge prosperous country covering half the globe with 3/4 of the wold population in 20 or more cities and 9/10ths of the production power should have to bow down and cower to the diplomatic power of some 4 city peon that has a bunch of city-state buddies. by that contrast, if my 20 cities were all city states, I'd quadruple his votes.
It seems then that it's best to... rush to the printing press, force a world religion, bribe out a bunch of tiny city-states, just to stomp on other nations.
Which if you like to play that way, maybe that's best for you. But you can't ignore the world congress even if you want no part in the farce of "diplomacy" it immitates. Or if it's just two nations ganging up on you for little to no reason banning all your luxuries, forcing a world religion you don't want, and stomping on your culture.
I know they want to make the game "more complex" or "realistic" or.. whatever.
But I really hate the world congress in every way. In Civ4 I'd disable the diplomatic victory for that reason, but at least in Civ4 I could vote based on population.
If the deligate number issue was addressed, it wouldn't be half as bad. But this whole "votes for city states" and "bonus deligates for the idiot that reached the press first" or other dumb bonuses ignoring the will of 2/3 of the planet's population....
What other answer do you have... other than marching thousands of tanks over the world and making more room for your people...
In that sense, the world congress fails.
Its imitation of the UN makes no sense, because in the UN, there's also the security council that can veto issues like this. So the will of huge nations isn't just ignored by thousands of 1-city-wonders when the vast majority is concerned. I may just use the code-disable for hte world congress.
I know it was intended well
but it was poorly excecuted.
I think you should be able to defy resolutions.
Withdraw from the world-"stomp on people we don't like" congress
or even a simple checkbox "disable this bad idea" in the menu system.
I don't do diplomatic victory for a reaosn, it's dull for me. The game has plenty of options to disable spying and other "features" that some people apparently like. But for some reason this whole world congress is imposed on everyone.
No thanks.
You know so much after only 40 hours of play. I also notice you haven'y any other version within your library. Ever think that you perhaps lack in XP to give such a long winded whine?
Yes because in your first fourty hours you're completely clueless and have no idea what's going on. That's like saying you need to play a terrible game for a day before you can realise it's terrible.
What would be the point of the world congress if the most powerful civilization could do what they want with impunity? The only way someone could win diplomatic victory would be if they were close to domination anyway.
Even if I have no intention to conquer, I can't ignore military.
Even if I'm not going to launch a spaceship , I can't ignore science.
Why is diplomacy so special?
Not only that, Znath, but what makes stomping on nations that way any different from stomping on them any other? You list 3 steps necessesary to reach that point—get nearly halfway through the tech tree, push religion, and be strong economically. Those require actual effort, and a lot of it, just like all the other victory paths. I think your explanation only shows how viable and balanced a diplomatic victory is.
In Civ4 you can turn off diplomatic victory if you want to and that disables the game's equivilent of the world congress. The number of deligates is my primary issue. You get far too much benefit for pet-citystates or founding it.
My main beef is that issue. If the deligate number wasn't so messed up it wouldn't be so bad. But I don't see why a 5 city nation with 5 citystate friends should have more voting power than one big nation with 10 cities. That and the benefits for 'world religion' and 'founding the congress' are far too high since the total number of deligates are so small. Population, GDP, etc have no effect on deligation aside from however much you can buy up pet-nations.
I like most of the BNW addons, the congress is the only thing that seems flawed this much.
As much as I see the use and appeal to some who can't/won't fight. It's just irritating.
I also like " you've only played for 40 hours "
I guess after nearly two solid day's worth of playing a game I wouldn't know nuffun bout it...