Millennia

Had huge potential. Game already abandoned by Paradox. DONT BUY.

....naja... fast. Das Civ-ähnliche Spiel zeigt viel Potential und tolle Ansätze aber hoffen wir mal auf weitere Updates und Addons., gerne passe ich meine Rezension dann an. Gut: - Zeitalter eröffnen neue Spielregeln/Spielvarianten und sorgen für Abwechslung (auch die Krisenzeitalter sind nett spielbar) - Durchaus mehr Spaß als Civ VI (aber kommt an Civ V nicht ran), Spielgefühl wie Civ CTP - Dank der überschaubaren Grafik schnelle Ladezeiten und Rundenzeiten - die Spielablauflösung für Wettlauf zum Mond und Manhatten-Projekt sind gut gelungen - der Start in der Eiszeit als wanderndes Volk ist stimmig und gut gelungen (AddOn) Schlecht: - Keine Kontrollzonen. Eine Absicherung von Grenzen ist nicht möglich, die unschlagbare Siegesstrategie im Kriege ist es Armeen zu umgehen und Städte einfach zu überrennen. - Burgen sind nutzlos und hilflos - Zeitalter oder Fähigkeitseinheiten kann man nicht updaten (z.B. diese Buschmann-Jäger ) und "veralten" nie obwohl sie nach ein paar Zeitaltern sinnlos werden. - KI ist hilflos und das trotz KI-Cheats (KI kann alle deine Städte sehen und wandert daher zu den Ungeschützen - aber mit einer von Stadt zu Stadt wandernden Schutztruppe kann man damit die KI-Armee quasi fernsteuern...) - praktisch keine Hilfe über Spielfunktionen (Wieso kann ich keine Atomwaffen bauen trotz Manhattenprojekt? Wie erzeugt man Spezialisten? Wie komme ich zu einer Religion usw) - die Spielfunktion der regionalen Hauptstädte hat Potential aber ihr habts vergeigt. Schlecht ist die Lokalisierung (Stadt != Stadt?? Besser wäre das Wort "Siedlung" für die Nebenstädte) sowie das Regionale Hauptstädte zu dicht aneinander gebaut werden -> und die KI die Welt mit Zwerghauptstädten zuspawnt und sich damit blockiert. Derzeit ist das Problem nur mit mod losbar. - Kampfbalance: Milizeinheiten und Wacheinheiten zu Schwach gegen Technologie-Rückständige Einheiten, während echte Kampfeinheiten zu Stark wirken gegen technologie-Überlegene Einheiten - Mitkämpfende Anführer passen nicht in das System und rauben nur Einheitenplatz. Besser wenn Sie passiv sind (In den ersten Zeitaltern spielt das keine Rolle, sie wirken wie Elitekämpfer oder Riesenhafte Einzelkämpfer. in moderneren Zeitaltern ist das aber lächerlich. - keine spürbaren Völkerunterschiede/ Völkerspezialeinheiten. - Kampfanimation für Fliegerangriffe muss man sich immer doppelt ansehen ??? - keine Alarmfunktion für Feinde im Eigenen Land - Stadtstaaten/kleine Völker nur rudimentär - Stadtnamen wiederholen sich ständig (zu geringer Namenspool )

A lot of wasted potential here sadly. Ages and the production chain of resources are ideas which if given more than a surface level amount of effort could add the extra replay and role-play value that 4X games can never have enough of. That is where the positives end, the barbarians are far too numerous, the AI constantly spams military units, to the point where you can easily overtake them technologically. Despite the hordes they have at their command, due to the AI being brain dead, their armies are no more dangerous than a baby with a notably large stick. Worse still, unless you force peace them the AI will NEVER peace out of a war, making an already slow game a tedious slog. The game has clearly not been tested for balance either, vassals are too powerful and you win the game as soon as you can get crusaders, due to their 3x bonus against other religions and how easily they can be spammed . Do not play this mobile game, it is an unfinished product. Play Clash of Clans or something.

Disclaimer: I have not played multiplayer, as it wasn't funcional at game release. The graphics primitive, but very functional. UI works. I didn't encounter any major bugs or crashes. Choosing a civ at the start is entirely cosmetic, but I thigk all things considered that that is a plus. Flavor/Culture is instead derived from national spirits that you pick each age. It solves the feeling of cultural stagnancy that sticking with a static civ throughout the game gives, allowing for a civilizational narrative, but without without breaking immersion (as in humankind and presumably civ 7 when it comes out) due to switching to discontinuous cultures, such as transforming from Sumeria to the Celts, Ethiopia to China, or Inca to France. Ages are pretty neat. They veer into mythology alternate-history and science-fiction, and make for a lot of replayability, as your options and short term objectives can vary wildly between games. The world itself is reactive to the actions of players. Researchable technology differs based on through which age you progress into. Crisis and Challenge ages are damaging/powerful. Being able to plunge the entire world into chaos with an age of plague, conquest, or the AI uprising, for instance, with your own actions is fun in singleplayer (it might get annoying If you are behind in multiplayer, I wouldn't know.) They also are focal to winning, as different ages offer different win conditions. Being ahead of your opponents at the right time is critical to securing victory. Internal empire management in this game is really fun and engaging. Setting up supply chains which develop in complexity as technology progresses is very satisfying. It makes natural resources on the map feel much less interchangeable than other games. For example, rice and wheat can both be processed into flour, but rice can also be used to make wine. Best in class in my opinion. The combat is passable, and not really a focus of strategic gameplay. You build units, move stacks around on the map put in a leader for a % strength bonus, Rock paper scissors, the armies do a little auto-battle thing which shows how the battle went. Overall, pretty good. Has some unique and good ideas that seperate it from the rest of the genre, definitely not a clone as some have said.

I was excited for this one. Paradox doing a 4X Civ version. Sign me up. I was also ok with their DLC model coz at the end of the day, they are a company and they are providing lots of hs of fun so it is ok....but milennia just had too many things that didnt work. I do hope that down the line they pick up the concept again and take some of the bits that do work to make something new (like they have done with imperator.) What worked (kind of) - The Ages system can be cool but a 'first across the line' system just doesnt work and makes no sense. It could have been nicer to have like a counter once a civ cross the threshold before everyone goes into the same age. It also ends up feeling like there is no agency or impact for everyone else that was kind of close enough in triggering it...at the end it doesnt feel like the 'world' earned entering the age of heroes or pestilence or whatever....it just happened that the biggest one drag everyone in there. - I think the resource system was a fun addition without being overwhelming. The chains are not very complex and there is fun in getting a region/city building up a particular chain. - the regions and towns system works well....but it was explained extremely poorly and it is not as dynamic as it should. Meaning that you run with the same problem that Civ6 had at the begining with the sector that you have to plan several ages in advance to not feel like you messed up ....and that you cannot delete them and repositioning them.... the bits that really killed it - There is no civ per se, it is just horrible colored name tags that mean nothing but a list of random cities and towns. It is the antithesis of immersion. Likewise, the bonuses are meaningless and there isnt even an attempt at an explanaiton as to why a given Civ may have this or this other bonus. - Production is just too overpowered as an element at the beginning. IF you didnt get a city maximizing production from the get go then you are too behind to ever meaningfully catch up.... - Diplomacy is pointless, besides fighting barbarians, the world is not alive. The equivalent of city states just sit there doing nothing until you vassalize them one way or another. - Natural wonders are obscenly underwhelming with just a name tag on a normal tile Like at the end of the day, there isnt really a compelling reason to explore the world, or conquer it, or anything....because the world is just not alive. To be honest, it makes sense that they cut their losses and moved on

[h1] The UI and graphics are not great. They are readable, but the game doesn't make things easy for you. And another thing: The only thing this game has in common with Civ is that it is a historical 4X! [/h1] So I really enjoy this one. This is why: 1) It is a much more historic-minded take on a the historical 4X game. Unlike say Civilization which assumes your civilization has immutable characteristics from the dawn of time, Millennia takes the idea that environment, neighbors, resources, etc. are what shaped a civilization into what it is. You are building your civilization as you play, and by the end of the game will end up with a civilization that differs from others to a depth you are not going to see in classic historic 4Xes, and feels organic based on both your choices and how history evolves. 2)The alternate history ages are really cool and generally feel very distinct. Each one has its own improvements, buildings, and special mechanics, and can have a big impact on how the game plays out. I haven't seen all of them yet, but almost all the ones I have seen are very cool and I look forward to see the ones I am not aware of and what modders and DLC will do with them over time. 3)As you get the hang of it, you'll probably start to appreciate the systems, and how the game progressively introduces them. Early on in the Age of Stone and even Age of Bronze you won't have much to manage. By the late game, you're spinning dozens of plates, but assuming you know the basics of how to spin a plate in this game, the number added doesn't really matter all that much because they're added gradually. 4)No, the biggest issue with Millennia is the AI. Your half-witted rivals, possessed of the viciousness of a school of piranha and the memories of goldfish, are adequate enemies but extremely poor diplomatic partners – a fact a bit too reminiscent of my old favorite. Sure, they play the technical game well enough: against Adept AIs (the default) it's hard to be the tech leader and control what age the world goes into, at least unless and until you do something to really establish your heft (like using the Age of Blood to render yourself alone on a continent, say). But your options for talking to other nations are bare bones without sending an envoy on a frustrating mission of getting roadblocked by “friendly” units, and still anemic if you do manage to get there. I understand some things, like repeatedly begging for open borders when denied, but even among themselves the AIs will make and cancel agreements with startling rapidity, allowing the player to watch a procession of one-turn wars and peaces if they're fortunate enough to have met everybody. 5)Other than that, while the overall art quality doesn't precisely bother me, there are a few nagging UX sorts of complaints. For instance, winning doesn't necessarily feel good or momentous: you get a honking fanfare and a popup that features, at least in the case of the wins I've yet done, the age art. Come on, even Civ 2 gave a very rudimentary animated cutscene with its own few seconds of musical score for victory! There's no “one more turn” option either; objectively minor and probably unnecessary, but who hasn't at least once won a relatively peaceful game and then in the postscript gone psycho and burned down all those infuriating AIs? 6)Complaints about RNG do seem valid to me; some games seem much easier to me than others. But I'm approaching that as a puzzle--a sign that there are aspects of the game I don't fully understand. And I'm seeing some evidence that's right, because I've been finding some ways to adapt to various starting conditions to get to a solid mid-game state. Frankly, the biggest issue I've found is that, when you play on the "continents" map, you have no way to interact with what's going on on in the other hemisphere, and sometimes one of the AIs will blob up before you get to a tech level where you can do anything about them. Perhaps that can be improved with fine tuning, but, for me at least, it doesn't ruin my enjoyment that I can't win every game. Likewise, more options for setting up the game--especially map types--would be welcome. And I expect they're coming--in fact, looking at the roadmap, I know at least one is soon to be delivered. [b]Millennia attempts to revitalize the 4X formula established by Civ games, and does a good job of doing just that.[/b]

不说别的，能不能继续更新，明明感觉想法都不错，但是不继续优化更新