Best Feature of Game

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Uncertainty.

      Uncertainty keeps the game fresh.

      In games like Civilization, until the game's patterns emerge, I enjoy being surprised by the pseudorandom world (the map, the empire and economic growth opportunities to analyze, the race against the AI, etc.) each game session contains.

      CoN mostly uses human players to create uncertainty.

      The more Dorado can do to both prolong game outcome uncertainty, and have player actions be the biggest source of that uncertainty (instead of large, arbitrary AI acts, or similar events), the better.

      Dorado could increase uncertainties in each game's initial conditions, including fuzzing up the tech trees and the map.

      Mid-game uncertainties to increase or introduce might be a little harder to think up.

      Some effects could be part of a slow constant (cyclical?) evolution/drift of some parameters. Some effects could be a more simple (mild) randomization of setup parameters.

      The best surprises (for me) are the ones that have solutions/counters, so long as the players are willing to set aside old habits and adapt.

      KFG

    • The Air and Anti-Air system (including missiles). In my understanding, it influences so many things directly and indirectly that if you don't like the spirit behind it, you have high odds to dislike the game as a whole.

      Second, Radars.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.

    • Opulon wrote:

      The Air and Anti-Air system (including missiles). In my understanding, it influences so many things directly and indirectly that if you don't like the spirit behind it, you have high odds to dislike the game as a whole.

      Second, Radars.
      Without wanting to derail this thread into a discussion about the air/anti-air balance, I actually don't like that part of the game much! It's one of the things I would change most if it were up to me.
      I do like radars, though!

      I think my favourite feature overall, though, is Officers. They're probably the single thing that give the most potential for creative strategies, I reckon.

    • Uncertainty yes and everything in early to mid game when you struggle with resources and you must decide what to do next.
      Also if I play small to mid country with several neighbors. This can give me special feeling of full depth strategy game with everything included, even diplomacy.

      Regarding game play what I like the most is area control. Including air, ground and sea.
      Radars, AA, arty, fighters/bombers, ships. They can control large areas in combat. It's not unit vs unit melee only, many units have range and I like it.
      I would hypothetically say I would add range for every unit even melee. Because they have it in RL and it would fit in game as well.

      What I don't like is a lot of resources in late game. It's not balanced enough.
      Also a lot of player drops and no way for come back if you loose couple of core cities.

      Resources in late game I would solve with higher costs when unit is higher lvl and also if you already have the same type in service. Eg. 1st unit is 100% cost, 2nd 120%,3rd 150 cost etc...

    • Zemunelo wrote:

      Uncertainty yes and everything in early to mid game when you struggle with resources and you must decide what to do next.
      Also if I play small to mid country with several neighbors. This can give me special feeling of full depth strategy game with everything included, even diplomacy.

      Regarding game play what I like the most is area control. Including air, ground and sea.
      Radars, AA, arty, fighters/bombers, ships. They can control large areas in combat. It's not unit vs unit melee only, many units have range and I like it.
      I would hypothetically say I would add range for every unit even melee. Because they have it in RL and it would fit in game as well.

      What I don't like is a lot of resources in late game. It's not balanced enough.
      Also a lot of player drops and no way for come back if you loose couple of core cities.

      Resources in late game I would solve with higher costs when unit is higher lvl and also if you already have the same type in service. Eg. 1st unit is 100% cost, 2nd 120%,3rd 150 cost etc...
      It is up to you to balance your economy by doing for example annexations.

    • Zemunelo wrote:

      I don't understand you?
      I sad "a lot of", meaning too much resources in late game. Abundance.
      Why would I need more?
      Well, annexations cost a lot of resources. If you have an abundance of resources in the later part of the game, you can spend them on annexations, which will in turn allow you to mobilize units away from your homeland. This gives you a strategic advantage, and also allows you to use up more resources on unit production than you otherwise could.

    • Maybe what Z means is that the challenge of having to carefully choose how to allocate your resources across conflicting objectives largely disappears in the latter parts of many games, if you are expanding well.

      Your income and how you can spend it are affected by home & annexed city counts, army size, investments in buildings, morale, and captured territory production (at least). Those effects do seem to grow more unbalanced as time goes on (it becomes easier to play (some would say boring) as your territory grows, instead of becoming harder).

    • KFGauss wrote:

      Maybe what Z means is that the challenge of having to carefully choose how to allocate your resources across conflicting objectives largely disappears in the latter parts of many games, if you are expanding well.

      Your income and how you can spend it are affected by home & annexed city counts, army size, investments in buildings, morale, and captured territory production (at least). Those effects do seem to grow more unbalanced as time goes on (it becomes easier to play (some would say boring) as your territory grows, instead of becoming harder).
      Yeah, but that's pretty much par for every strategy game where the objective is to expand, and resources increase with expansion.

      I don't see a way around that, or even a reason to change it from that. They could rebalance early game resources and research costs a bit so that turtling inside your homeland borders was actually a viable strategy to start the game with. But you'd still end up with an abundance of resources in the late game.

      At least annexations do give you something worthwhile to sink your resources into, even if it doesn't make things 'harder' in terms of further expansion. The only thing I can think of that might check expansion would be increasing effects of insurgencies - but I believe it's developer policy not to emphasise the player vs AI aspects in that way.

    • WalterChang wrote:

      Opulon wrote:

      The Air and Anti-Air system (including missiles). In my understanding, it influences so many things directly and indirectly that if you don't like the spirit behind it, you have high odds to dislike the game as a whole.

      Second, Radars.
      Without wanting to derail this thread into a discussion about the air/anti-air balance, I actually don't like that part of the game much! It's one of the things I would change most if it were up to me.I do like radars, though!

      I think my favourite feature overall, though, is Officers. They're probably the single thing that give the most potential for creative strategies, I reckon.
      It's interesting because i came to gradually dislike officers for their "lack of subtlety" ( I don't mean i dislike officers, merely the broad concept approach). I mean, officers, they are good, you do them for your units, period. Creativity, as says the painter, is what is born from the brain under the shackles of restraint. I think i may prefer if i had to do "2 officers type" max per map, and once i've researched two of them, the other are locked for this map.

      When you have deployed all of them, i find they give so much "doors" that they ironically go against the purpose of allowing the player to be creative (when everything is creative, nothing is really)
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.

    • Opulon wrote:

      WalterChang wrote:

      Opulon wrote:

      The Air and Anti-Air system (including missiles). In my understanding, it influences so many things directly and indirectly that if you don't like the spirit behind it, you have high odds to dislike the game as a whole.

      Second, Radars.
      Without wanting to derail this thread into a discussion about the air/anti-air balance, I actually don't like that part of the game much! It's one of the things I would change most if it were up to me.I do like radars, though!
      I think my favourite feature overall, though, is Officers. They're probably the single thing that give the most potential for creative strategies, I reckon.
      It's interesting because i came to gradually dislike officers for their "lack of subtlety" ( I don't mean i dislike officers, merely the broad concept approach). I mean, officers, they are good, you do them for your units, period. Creativity, as says the painter, is what is born from the brain under the shackles of restraint. I think i may prefer if i had to do "2 officers type" max per map, and once i've researched two of them, the other are locked for this map.
      When you have deployed all of them, i find they give so much "doors" that they ironically go against the purpose of allowing the player to be creative (when everything is creative, nothing is really)
      ^^^^^
      tldr version: When there are too many officers, my arm gets tired from saluting.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD

    • If we're speaking about the "best" feature in the game (wich is referred to by many players as a big or important feature)

      Except that this isn't how I exactly see the best feature is.

      I find CoN's best feature in every minute detail its gameplay offers. From playing it clean and being loyal to my teammates and allies to joining new players' coalitions and helping them getting better at the game to having epic battles with different players and saying 'GGs' at the end wether If I won or lost (won't matter)

      That's what gives playing CoN a special taste...

    • KFGauss wrote:

      Maybe what Z means is that the challenge of having to carefully choose how to allocate your resources across conflicting objectives largely disappears in the latter parts of many games, if you are expanding well.

      Your income and how you can spend it are affected by home & annexed city counts, army size, investments in buildings, morale, and captured territory production (at least). Those effects do seem to grow more unbalanced as time goes on (it becomes easier to play (some would say boring) as your territory grows, instead of becoming harder).
      Thank you for explaining the point.

      And just to add, I am completely familiar with the annexation part of the game but it does not sink resources at late game. You would have to annex too many cities to be able to spend all resources. And with every annexed city you have more resources.

      You will always have too much of everything at late game.
      Except maybe if you don't expand. I don't know about that because I never tried to be turtle.

    • You can't play "tall" in CoN, to speak in the general "axioms" of 4X games.

      In CoN, you play wide or you die. It remains a arcadish wargame :D
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.