why are 4X games like thisand how do we fix this?
>>2470537I know what you meanI had the most fun paraslop when I didn't know how to play properly>play HoI3 Germany>take London>russians declare war on me >they steamroll me and cross the vistula>oh shidd fugg>spam out Garrisons and Land Forts>"surely this will stemp the tide">it doesn't>Fuhrerbunker.exebut once you figure out what units are good and how the AI behaves (which isn't hard to figure out in games like EU4) all the magic and therefore fun is gone
>>2470537That might apply to every complex game out there. You learn what makes them tick and the magic and mystery are gone. At least when playing singleplayer you can challenge yourself by going off-meta and doing some meme strat, tho.
You find another 4x game and start things over
>>2470537Just stop playing for a while. It is voluntary harmless lobotomy.
Well for one maybe don't make one resource being 10000x more important than the rest combined.Beaker = win. More beakers = more win. Money is to rush everything that gives more beakers as soon as you unlock them. Not playing beaker focused civ is a handicap bigger than several diff settings.
>>2470537randomness
>>2470826technology is super powerful thoughthe problem is thinking that rulers had any real control over technological output of their territories up until recently
>>2470537Because the mechanics are abstractions of real systems, and as you research how they work and plan on how best to exploit them it exposes you’re just playing an expensive boardgame rather than a simulation. I no-lifed the fuck out of Civ III when it came out, and as a result learned its ins and outs. Now it isn’t very fun, because I can’t suspend my disbelief and if I roleplay I know just how poor my decisions are. Ever since then I’ve never opened a guide on any 4X beyond general tips. I’m fine with not playing on Deity. If I have to play on Prince, I have to play on Prince. It’s more fun that way, at least for me.
games that keep rewarding further understanding of their mechanics are typically only fun to play against other people, like abstract board games. to test your understanding against a bot is uninteresting even before it becomes trivially easy, and when it does become trivially easy you've got nothing. so 4x games, which are typically played against ai, design around types of fun other than deep systems knowledge
>>2470537For me it's more like thisonly games that manage to avoid this are games with good roleplaying potential, like crusader kings, or victoria 2
>>2470873>princeIf you used to excel in Civ III, unless you lost half your brain in the meantime somehow, you should be able to streamroll in Immortal just by doing the most basic and obvious fundamentals.
>>2470537dominions series (in multiplayer obviously) avoids this imo because it's so hard to actually play 100% optimally (i.e. simulating battles with enemy armies before committing) most people won't even try and just settle for 90%so I guess the trick is to have a super complex and non deterministic combat simulation?
