[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/vst/ - Video Games/Strategy


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


So, it is actually good now after 2.0?
>>
bump because I'm also curious even though I'm sure I know what the answer is. I think a grand total of one anon here ever actually played this piece of shit, and he was a playtester
>>
>WOKE civ?
>holyyyyyyyy
>>
>>2188425
Isn't woke Civ just Civ?
>>
>>2182950
>good
doubt that, the building mechanics seemed tedious
>>
lol millennia is better, that's how low the bar is
>>
>>2193012
I still hope for a Millennia 2. It looked like shit but the infrastructure and national spirits was far better for what I wanted out of a 4x game.
>>
Is it still a tedious piece of shit where you have to micromanage 4 production buildings per territory? If yes, then it's still shit. You have to be turbo autistic to enjoy this, and I like Anno 1800.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.