Suggestions for a Civ and simulation game player.

[Tanukitsune]

Frankly, until recently I was convinced I didn't like strategy games, but I just don't like RTS ones. One of my favorite games as a kid was Sid Meier's Pirates and I just found out it's classified as strategy. Apart from playing games like Sim Ant, Sim City, Sim Earth, or similar once in a blue moon, the closest thing to a strategy game I've played was the Pikmin series, which I think I enjoy more because it's more about survival and not about war like in the other RTS-like games.

One day, I actually dared to buy Civ Revolution on the cheap and I actually figured out how to play it (on chieftan) and enjoyed it. But I was convinced I could never get into the "real deal" and yet, I bought Civ V when it went on sale and once again, I enjoyed it! I got Warlock: Master of the Arcane and enjoyed it too!

I even found an old copy of Civ II, which crashes way too much on my PC, but I did enjoy what I manage to play.

I got Total War: Shogun 2 and didn't fare as well, the time limit seemed too strict and while I wasn't losing, I was winning fast enough. (I don't enjoy controlling troops RTS style, so I always auto-battle).

I also just couldn't get into Tropico, it's more or less Sim City in the tropics, yet I lost interest pretty fast. And after playing a few RTS demos, I realized that I don't want to play with troops, I like taking care of cities and I like "eXtermination" of the "4X" games the least.

Where to next? Should I leave my area of comfort of Sid Meier and Will Wright games? Would Alpha Centauri or Sins of the Solar Empire be too much for a Civ "chieftain"? Are there non-Maxis management games worth my time? When we will get Sim Llama?

If it helps, the only other strategy games I've played and enjoyed I can recall are Castles II and Defenders of the Crown (the remake), I may have played others, but as with Pirates, my brain just doesn't classify then as such.

PS: I kinda like playing on chieftan, it's fun to trample troops with a tank when they just started tinkering with the trireme.

[Orv]

A note on the Total War series, the time limits actually don't matter, the game will continue past the end date if you haven't won by then. Don't feel constrained by time when you're learning the games. Though if you're not playing Total War so you can direct huge battle scenes I don't know what to tell you.

If you want a 4X game that's all about high-level management where the combat just involves right-clicking and coming back a few minutes later, I cannot recommend Distant Worlds enough.

I'd also thoroughly recommend bumping the Civ difficulty up to Prince, which is the final level where the AI doesn't get happiness bonuses/omnipotence and so forth. I'd also recommend getting Gods and Kings when it goes on sale (or now!) because while it doesn't deter the Civ 5 AI from being schizophrenic, it does massively improve their tactical level thinking.

Outside Civ 5, Total War and Distant Worlds, I would strongly recommend the Paradox line of grand strategy. I won't sugar coat it, they're crazy, complex games that quite frequently make absolutely no sense, but there's no better set of games for becoming the Sunni Emperor of Sweden. Start with Europa Universalis 3 (CHRONICLES, not Complete. Stupid marketing.) and if that doesn't strike your fancy try Crusader Kings. Europa is very much a government level game where you're the (nearly) faceless head of whatever nation you're running. Crusader Kings on the other hand is all about managing interpersonal relations with hundreds of characters across medieval Europe.

[Gormongous]

Where to next? Should I leave my area of comfort of Sid Meier and Will Wright games? Would Alpha Centauri or Sins of the Solar Empire be too much for a Civ "chieftain"? Are there non-Maxis management games worth my time? When we will get Sim Llama?

I wouldn't recommend Sins, which for all its 4X trappings is really just a macro-scale RTS, but the first Sword of the Stars and Galactic Civilizations II both offer great space opera moments.

I bounced clean off Distant Worlds myself, so I can't comment. I just wasn't able to make peace with automating any part of my empire, even if the computer is better at running it than me.

[Tanukitsune]

If you've read the deals thread, Gods & Kings was on sale at GMG, so I got it.

I'm glad to know the time limit doesn't matter in the Total War games, I do like the battle more that the squad based ones, but the time limit just freaked me out and I rushed thing... Ooops? Speaking of oopsies, does the time limit matter in Civ games too? I really hate time limits and they make do stupid thing like go to war when I doing perfectly being peaceful just because the clock was ticking.

Mount and Blade is the only Paradox game I remember playing and it does enter that crazy complex category fine, what I've seen of Europa Universalis seemed to pique my interest. I think I just missed the Crusader Kings being on sale, but I did get the King Arthur games on that day.

I think I actually got Sin of the Solar Empire mixed up with Sword of the Stars, I don't know the others (I've always been more into fantasy than sci-fi), but I'll write them down.

Thanks for the suggestions!

[Orv]

Civ doesn't exactly have a definitive end point, but you begin to lose points the farther you go past 2000AD, I think. The time compression goes from a century a turn in early BC to a couple years a turn by 1850 AD.

[Tanukitsune]

I care more about reaching my goal than my score, so I don't mind that much, but that takes a huge weight off my shoulders.

[Michael]

I care more about reaching my goal than my score, so I don't mind that much, but that takes a huge weight off my shoulders.

If you're more about goals than points, the Paradox Interactive-developed grand strategy games would be up your alley. They're all very deep and based on the same engine, but each game has its own "theme".

Europa Universalis III is probably the most well-rounded and most-liked Paradox game. It's an overall country simulator that takes place from 1400(?) to 1800ish. While the game gives you intermediate goals (send ships to the new world, annex so and so), the goals of the game are completely up to you. Taking over the entire world isn't very feasible but you can choose to, say, conquer the entire Iberian peninsula. Note that if you go with EUIII you want "Chronicles", not "Complete". Complete is not complete as more expansions came out after it was created.

The other games have their own themes. Victoria II is a victorian-age game that's mainly concerned with its simulation of the world economy. Hearts of Iron III is a WWII simulation. Crusader Kings II is a dynasty simulator in which the interpersonal relationships of your heirs and various court members are the main point of the game. Lots of scheming. Sengoku is the only one I don't have, but it's been described as being closer to CKII. Personally Victoria has always been my favorite, but it's something of the red-headed step child in the series. In any of the games, you should warm up to the notion that sometimes you don't need to be doing anything, and letting some time pass is the best way to progress.

[riadsala]

I'd stay away from Paradox games for the time being. I bounced right off EUIII...seemed far to complicated and fiddly (and I'm talking as somebody who has played Dwarf Fortress).

I'd suggest one of the Anno games, or perhaps Settlers 2?

[Tanukitsune]

In case you haven't read it in the deals thread I got a good deal on a Paradox bundle at Amazon. It had CK II and a lot of it's DLC, Majesty 1 & 2, Sword of the Stars 1 & 2 and Victoria II so I'm pretty happy now.

I played a Settlers game on the iPhone, I found it stupid because instead of a blacksmith it seemed to have a worker for each metal, or at least metal and gold? But I could give it another chance if doesn't get any sillier.

[Orv]

I'd stay away from Paradox games for the time being. I bounced right off EUIII...seemed far to complicated and fiddly (and I'm talking as somebody who has played Dwarf Fortress).

An incredibly enjoyable read, and a fantastic tutorial for EU3 can be found here. http://lparchive.org/Europa-Universalis-III-Divine-Wind/

[Gormongous]

Thanks for posting that LP, Orvidos. I've read a few good Crusader-Kings-to-Hearts-of-Iron-III campaigns, but this guy is a real pleasure to watch at work. Such a virtuousic player makes even the dry and sterile Europa Universalis look fun and fulfilling.

[dibs]

The iDecive settlers is a later gen. Settlers 2 is the be all and end all of that series for me. It's ancient and awesome, but since you didn't have any issue playing Civ 2, i guess you are ok with graphics etc.

Have you tried Civ IV?

[Destrin]

Would Alpha Centauri or Sins of the Solar Empire be too much for a Civ "chieftain"?

It sounds to me that you would definitely enjoy Alpha Centauri, and there is no excuse not to get it given how cheap it is on gog.com.

Sins is realtime but it's 'slow' realtime, you will rarely gain much, if anything, in that game form being a fast micromanager, especially playing AI. I would recommend trying it, although sadly I'm not sure there is a demo available, which is a shame

One other Realtime game which DOES have a demo is AI Wars, which I can thoroughly recommend, it's pausable and you can also control the time pace. If you set the combat to 'slow' and slow the time right down you have enough time to consider your actions.

Consider those recommendations on how you might find a realtime game that you enjoy

[Tanukitsune]

The iDecive settlers is a later gen. Settlers 2 is the be all and end all of that series for me. It's ancient and awesome, but since you didn't have any issue playing Civ 2, i guess you are ok with graphics etc.

Have you tried Civ IV?

I did have issue, although they were technical, I had to quit because it kept crashing, but I seemed to enjoy what I played.

Settlers 2 is on Gog, so at least I don't have to go looking for it, so I'll give it a try.

I spent yesterday playing Civ V Gods & Kings, but I had time to try a bit of Civ IV, I'll probably play the Colonization one first since it seems so interesting.

[dibs]

Oh yes, i do like the colonization version.

Actually, maybe somoen could answer, are the Anno games like Colonization, with the trading and the new world and whatnots?

Just before you go spend a tenner, Settlers 2 is very oldschool. The combat will likely infuriate you. I relaly do love the econimics chain in it for reasons unknown though.

[Tanukitsune]

Well, I played a bit of Sword of the Stars II and... I didn't like it. I turned me off the moment I saw the tech tree, nearly everything seemed to exist to make better ships for combat.

I want to see the people I'm taking care of for me to care about the game. I think I don't care about "taking over tiles" if I can't improve them in some way more visual? Am I missing something here?

At least I know more about what I like in my strategy games: Taking care of something and upgrading it visually.

[Gormongous]

Well, I played a bit of Sword of the Stars II and... I didn't like it. I turned me off the moment I saw the tech tree, nearly everything seemed to exist to make better ships for combat.

Well, you're also playing Sword of the Stars II, one of the worst Paradox titles of the last decade in terms of playability and polish. Its predecessor definitely put the empire management on the back burner though. If you like the feelies involved in customizing each city/planet, you're going to want something more traditional in design, like Civ or Gal Civ.

[Orv]

Sword of the Stars II is in alpha, currently, despite being a released game. Wait a couple years and it might be worth playing.

[Tanukitsune]

I've played all the games in the collection and the only one I got close to liking was the Majesty series, which managed to annoy me anyway since the monsters didn't give you a second of time to do anything even on the easiest missions. If it only had the difficulty slider that all the other games I played from the bundle I could have enjoyed it more.

Not even CK II made the cut , it's just too much, it's like Defenders of the Crown for experts and ridiculously confusing. Civ has a million options too, but at least Civ is better at telling me what each does.

I play on chieftain and I'm still on my training wheels, remember?

[Jaraknarn]

Sins is realtime but it's 'slow' realtime, you will rarely gain much, if anything, in that game form being a fast micromanager, especially playing AI. I would recommend trying it, although sadly I'm not sure there is a demo available, which is a shame

Seriously?

The fast micromanage is the only way I can seem to win anything above normal difficult. I just grab every piece of stellar real estate I can find until the AI tries to rush me.

[Destrin]

Seriously?

The fast micromanage is the only way I can seem to win anything above normal difficult. I just grab every piece of stellar real estate I can find until the AI tries to rush me.

I never manage any of my ships abilities in combat in Sins, just have them all set to auto use and I can fairly regularly steamroller the AI. I accept this is a different state of affairs playing against real people!

[Jaraknarn]

Oh! That's the micromanage you mean, sorry, yer your right I don't deal with any of that stuff, except for those special ion blast shots that always drain my colonizing capital ships anti-matter when their set on auto-use.

I was more refering to the clicks per second that somethings become neccessary. The combats can go horribly wrong if you don't assign targets regularly.

[Gwardinen]

I was more refering to the clicks per second that somethings become neccessary. The combats can go horribly wrong if you don't assign targets regularly.

Honestly even that doesn't necessarily require micromanagement per se, as you can queue commands. So if you just set up your targetting order at the start of the battle, things are often fine unless your opponent is doing weird juking stuff.

[Hell-Mikey]

If the Civ II graphics don't put you off, then I'd have to suggest X-Com Enemy Unknown. Turn-based for all intents and purposes, fascinating to play, and not too hard on the easy settings. You'll lose soldiers, but win the war.

If you like the chieftan-level steamroller that you get in Civ, I'd advise staying away from EU III. Yes, the stories are awesome, and the game isn't as complex as it's reputation, but you need to be happiest making your own narrative (see aforementioned Sunni king of Sweden).

[Codicier]

@Tanukitsune

Hmm i'm confused I was thinking that the games you said have worked for you the best seem mainly to be ones that are turn based, and which focus mostly on economy over combat, and then you go & talk about warlock which although it does have city management is a bit of a combat slug fest.

Have you tried out any of the Kings Bounty series?