Civilization: Beyond Earth-Robots versus Kaiju versus Battleships

Robots versus Kaiju versus Battleships: WHO WINS?


  • Total voters
    213

MJ12 Commando

Shadow Cabal Barristerminator
Civilization: Beyond Earth, aka Civilization IN THE FUTURE, is now out. It's definitely a Civilization Game, in that it's a good game which is probably going to become amazing after a few expansions.

I played a game at the default settings as SPACE ASIA, and my comments are a fewfold:

1. The Affinity upgrade system means it's actually really difficult to meaningfully fall behind on the military tech curve. Similarly, the tech web means that you're probably not going to manage Civ IV/V "I HAVE ALL THE WONDERS FEAR ME"

2. Fuck aliens. Seriously, the aliens are absolutely goddamn vicious in the early game, although because they don't upgrade they start becoming increasingly less relevant. A CNDR with the Purity 3 perk (+20% attack/defense against aliens) and the Military perk for +25% attack/defense against aliens can murder a siege worm, and they come fairly early in the midgame. I'm sure similar unique units are equivalent.

3. Tall v. Wide is balanced better than in Civ V. I had a dozen cities, and although it was really touch and go for a while (it was mostly someone declaring war on me, me conquering things, suddenly having way too much unhealth) it was quite possible for me to unlock enough health boosts to end up at Utopian health at the late game. Similarly, the Knowledge affinity gives you a pair of Tier 2 boosts which cut down the effect of extra cities on increasing tech/culture costs by a massive 40%, which means quite a lot. Even at the highest level of unhealth, the max losses are apparently just -10% to all yields, -50% to all growth, and Spy Vulnerability, which a wide empire can compensate for. Dipping into negative health is not actually a death sentence.

4. AIs denounce you a lot less now. Thank you. I didn't feel like I needed to declare war on everyone just to make them shut up because I was a WARMONGER. Warmongering seems to be significantly less important as well-the only people who ended up Guarded/Hostile were the people who I declared war on and conquered cities from, while even the ones super-worried about my Warmongering were only Neutral, and that was mostly because I was a different Affinity.

5. Wonders feel a bit weak, especially since you're going to get fewer of them. They seem a bit... underwhelming overall.

6. Units are pretty cool, although there are fewer options to breach cities outside of 'giant army hordes.' That may be intentional, although it was nice being able to meaningfully outtech someone and run a small, elite military. The upgrade system is basically Alpha Centauri now, where you merely get +10% strength per veterancy level unless you want instant healing. No more choosing range/etc upgrades. The only upgrade 'choices' are the ones that occur due to Affinity upgrades.

7. Still annoyed that there's no "repeat last trade route" button for trade units-especially now that you can get +10 food/production from internal trade routes, running a massive internal trade web is super-important and each city can have like, 5 trade routes. You should make trade managing easier! :(

8. You can, in fact, research most if not all of the techs in a single game, but it probably requires you to go Wide and Tall to get the sheer science output to do it. It's also pretty inefficient.

9. Vaguely annoyed that you don't get any additional Affinity perks past 13 when you max out at 18. You get unit upgrades, though, and the late-game Affinity buildings give you massive yields boosts based on what your Affinity rating is, so it's not useless, just moderately annoying.

10. It's kind of cool that the vast majority of your faction's customization is going to be done in the game, rather than by choosing what you're doing at the start.

Overall I think it's a good game and worth your money, it's just that if it gets an expansion or three it'll be a great game.
 
There are some really good wonders, and I think wonders get quests too. That said the wonders just lack a sense of feel or style. One of my favorite things about civ games was seeing the creative cutscenes or seeing the wonder in your city
 
I'm playing the game right now and I think I found a bug already. The negotiation screen leaders have no legs, just a void between their waist and the bottom of the screen. Other than that I love the game so far.
 
Last edited:
I feel they did a better job with this than they did with Civ 4 or 5 as far as 'being a good game out of the box,' so it's less like they're fixing problems and more like they're making an already good game better when we get the inevitable expansions.

Currently a little over 200 turns into a Harmony playthrough as Arabs In Space (at least, I'm assuming that's what my faction is.)

I'm stuck between the francos and the delightfully smarmy australian CEO type on the continent, with trade routes thoroughly intertwining me witht hem so that neither can really afford to declare war on me, but they're limiting my room for expansion pretty drastically.
 
I'm playing the game right now and I think I found a bug already. The negotiation screen leaders have no legs, just a void between their waist and the bottom of the screen. Other than that I love the game so far.

That's not a bug, but a feature!....Of some horrifyingly advanced technology.

Yeah it's probably a bug- Another one apparently involves the visuals bugging out when you change resolution.
 
Honestly, I think the game is worse than Civ 5. I've played about 10 hours so far and I can say I really dislike it.

1. None of the factions have anything important or relevant to say or be or do, they're totally meaningless windowdressing that doesn't even look interesting.
2. There are so few units and all of their models are butt-ugly; they've removed all the things that made unit veterancy interesting, and half the time I can't tell what's superior to what just by name.
3. None of the tech items are meaningfully descriptive, so it's always sitting there poring through the exact details to figure out what is going on.
4. The espionage/covert ops system is basically incredibly, meaninglessly boring.
5. The color palate is ugly as fuck.
6. The orbital layer is fucking awful to manage.
7. The aliens are garbage and don't even attempt to make rational sense (like they did in Alpha Centauri).

Otherwise? It's Civ 5 with some changes. I'd give it probably a 3/10.
 
I haven't even played Alpha Centauri and even then Beyond Earth feels about as deep as a kiddie pool to me. Everything's just so token and spread so thin. There's this almost psychotic obsession with "PLAY IT YOUR WAY THERE'S NO WRONG ANSWER", and all the choices are between such minor things, it feels like a complete placebo. Like all the choices are just busywork to make me feel like I have input in how my civilization grows when in actuality I'm exactly the goddamn same as everybody else.
 
I haven't even played Alpha Centauri and even then Beyond Earth feels about as deep as a kiddie pool to me. Everything's just so token and spread so thin. There's this almost psychotic obsession with "PLAY IT YOUR WAY THERE'S NO WRONG ANSWER", and all the choices are between such minor things, it feels like a complete placebo. Like all the choices are just busywork to make me feel like I have input in how my civilization grows when in actuality I'm exactly the goddamn same as everybody else.

I'm going to disagree, the choices start off being relatively minor (+1 of one thing versus +1 of another) and start getting drastically dissimilar. +10% health is significantly different from +5% all yields, for example, as a lategame building. A bunch of the lategame buildings give pretty huge yield boosts from their building quests of one thing or another, and dependent on what you choose your focus will be drastically altered.

If you keep focusing on stacking one thing, it adds up. If you keep choosing things in a way which leads to 'balanced' outputs your choices will be busywork because you wanted a balanced civ and so your choices are 'keep your yield boosts roughly even,' but that's a choice you make. You could totally make an awful industrial dystopia (I realize that technically my last game was this for ~50% of its duration because I had awful -Health through and through) and it'd be viable, but play differently, from a tiny tech-focused faction. Tall and Wide are meaningfully different in how they work but of roughly equal viability, which is always nice.

I mean, I see the argument that if you have a favored playstyle in this game all the factions will feel samey because you're capable of twisting them all into playing your favored playstyle, but I think that's a feature, not a bug.
 
I start off from a perspective of deep skepticism towards anything billed as a successor to Alpha Centauri, because Alpha Centauri is fucking amazing by any standard. And when I hear somebody say 'shallow', that's, well, that's the exact opposite of Alpha Centauri, so. . .
 
Currently playing as Polystralia, Turn 92...

...Barbarians? Please come back. I'll never rage or complain about you again, I swear.

Seriously, FUCK ALIENS AND THE MIASMA. It is way more difficult to build up your early territory with so many hostile elements all over the place. The overall interface seems less intuitive than Civ V, and I don't like how the Supremacy affinity seems to have such a zealous quality to it. I mean, the advanced Supremacy infantry are called Disciple and Apostle, and the Emancipation Victory leans very hard on the whole YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED shtick.

I DO like the Quest system they have in place, I think it really adds character to your civ development. I also like the fact that Virtues have bonuses that extend across categories.
 
Last edited:
I start off from a perspective of deep skepticism towards anything billed as a successor to Alpha Centauri, because Alpha Centauri is fucking amazing by any standard. And when I hear somebody say 'shallow', that's, well, that's the exact opposite of Alpha Centauri, so. . .

They specifically don't bill it as a successor to Alpha Centauri. It's Civ V in space, not Alpha Centauri 2. In fact, you can sort of see it in how the approaches are incredibly different. AC is often incredibly dystopian about things, while BE is primarily utopian.

Also, the Civilopedia is p. good. It's got plenty of sci-fi fluff! And is apparently canonically Space Facebook or something.



Don't fuck with the Markov Eclipse, guys.

Also, why Supremacy is the best:

 
Oh right the Civopedia is a thing. It's been so long since I've played one of these games that I'd forgotten.

I just played through an entire game to the point of emancipating the shit of Earth with my tall, Science-Culture based nation and was wondering why there was so little backstory behind everything..
 
They specifically don't bill it as a successor to Alpha Centauri. It's Civ V in space, not Alpha Centauri 2. In fact, you can sort of see it in how the approaches are incredibly different. AC is often incredibly dystopian about things, while BE is primarily utopian.

Also, the Civilopedia is p. good. It's got plenty of sci-fi fluff! And is apparently canonically Space Facebook or something.

*Image 1*

Don't fuck with the Markov Eclipse, guys.

Also, why Supremacy is the best:

*Image 2*
Wow, those are, well. Those are really some text. They have story and tech and things.

... they are paramilitary technobabble. My eyes slide off of them as they try to say something impressive, yet only appear to play up theoretical optimizations by computer magic. They are the standard "I can calculate the exact number and spots to use bullets" idea that I cannot buy, mostly because it assumes you can get and use that data in a battlefield situation.

I kinda want to cry now. This is not at all SMAC because SMAC was as hard grounded as a future game could be (bar psi stuff), while this is standard sci-fi future stuff. The kind of thing you would see in Star Trek, Star Wars, Mass Effect, and I hate this the most James Cameron's Avatar.
It is looking futuristic without any grounding in reality. It is Hollywood alien future.
I feel sorry for it because it will never escape SMAC despite being in a different genre.
 
Wow, those are, well. Those are really some text. They have story and tech and things.

... they are paramilitary technobabble. My eyes slide off of them as they try to say something impressive, yet only appear to play up theoretical optimizations by computer magic. They are the standard "I can calculate the exact number and spots to use bullets" idea that I cannot buy, mostly because it assumes you can get and use that data in a battlefield situation.

So it's apparently not hard science because you don't like it. Got it.

I kinda want to cry now. This is not at all SMAC because SMAC was as hard grounded as a future game could be (bar psi stuff), while this is standard sci-fi future stuff. The kind of thing you would see in Star Trek, Star Wars, Mass Effect, and I hate this the most James Cameron's Avatar.
It is looking futuristic without any grounding in reality. It is Hollywood alien future.
I feel sorry for it because it will never escape SMAC despite being in a different genre.

Did you... not actually play Alpha Centauri past the 200th turn or so? This is literally the only way I can explain the statements you're making. Let me remind you that Alpha Centauri is a game where you had antimatter and neutronium as armor materials, "Resonance Fields" which were literally magic, "singularity" and "quantum" reactors (the reason these existed is unknown when you got efficient matter-energy conversion significantly earlier), materials with literally impossible strength-weight ratios, parallel universes, a deterministic model of what is right or wrong in human society (i.e. objective morality), the ability to discover the purpose of the universe, and so on and so forth.

Having ridiculous extrapolations of modern science because, hell, modern science doesn't say it's impossible is perfectly within being SMAC, and I'd argue that hypercomputation is at least as realistic as most of the out-there things in SMAC, possibly even more. It is "Hollywood alien future" because they actually point out how goddamn magical these things are in the 21st century context, rather than leaving it up to the reader to studiously ignore anything they don't like.

Also lol at your claim that James Cameron's Avatar, one of the most well-researched sci-fi universes out there to the point where Cameron was acutely aware of every one of the physical impossibilities he allowed for simply for more drama or a better film, has no grounding in reality.

There is nothing wrong with liking Alpha Centauri and its massive amount of fiddly bits more. I love myself fiddly bits too. But when you're making shit up to justify how great it is, and how it's MORE SCIENTIFIC, there is something wrong because you're implying you can't like it simply for its own virtues. Alpha Centauri was significantly more blase about these ridiculous game-changing technological wonders, but it didn't exactly shy away from ridiculous hypertech either.
 
Last edited:
Playing the Pan-Asian Cooperative. Currently so far into Supermacy my AIs have their own city. No seriously, that's happened, pretty interesting quest chain.

On a Fungal Island map, managed to get lucky and landed on an island that was pretty free of aliens, though there's an island not to far from me that was insanely overrun with the things, just getting to the island cost me most of my navy, damn Krakens.
 
Playing the Pan-Asian Cooperative. Currently so far into Supermacy my AIs have their own city. No seriously, that's happened, pretty interesting quest chain.

On a Fungal Island map, managed to get lucky and landed on an island that was pretty free of aliens, though there's an island not to far from me that was insanely overrun with the things, just getting to the island cost me most of my navy, damn Krakens.
Actually if you know what you are doing, Aliens are a god send if you go Might.
 
Do we have any word on what happened to Central Europe (and Britain) and the Middle East? They seem like DLC/Expansion pack material for sure.

From what I'm seeing, this looks like it's going to be a shoe in for my november game budget.
 
Well, I'm thinking to buy the game despite the slightly higher price. But I have two questions. As the gameplay? How good it is? And how well the game conveys the atmosphere? And what is the atmosphere?
 
Central Europe is probably going to be some sort of DLC, and the Middle East probably blew itself up.
I did feel that Germany and the other irrelevant nations of northern and central europe it's valued partners of culture and geographical proximity were somewhat conspicuous in their absence. They do seem to be prime DLC material.
 
Looks like I'm waiting for the expansion packs of this game before buying.
Yeah, from what I've heard on SA, this is a standard Civ game, meaning a decent game that becomes a great game after expansions come out and fix all the bugs that inevitably come with a game of this type at launch.

The opening cinematic video got me really excited for the game, but not enough to the point where I'll pay full price for it. Probably wait until the Steam Summer sale, as that's probably the earliest it'll get a discount.
 
Last edited:
My main problem with the game is that the difficulty is so skewed. On the lower few tiers you just blaze through the AI without a second thought, seeing as the aliens can't even reach your city and that they can't improve, causing them to be utterly flattened when they come against CNDRs, Xeno Cavalry, ANGELS, and the like. On Apollo however, it's a rush to the fence in order to stop yourself from drowning the the waves of aliens at first, but it's once again easy to defeat them once you get into an affinity. Other AI Civs scale well enough, but the Aliens don't even pose a threat later on in the game, when you can practically take out entire armies with the right unit.

I love the quests, however, as they give a sense of creating your own story that none of the others have really had to this level. Furthermore, they change the way your buildings act, making them different on each playthrough, and making it so that your cities won't always act in exactly the same way every single playthrough.

How does it perform as a game? I really enjoy it. Some have complained about the tech tree, and though it is true that you sometimes need to wade through a slog of technologies to find the right ones, it gives a diversity that the Civ 5 tech tree didn't have. However, I find that I can last entire games without even bothering to talk to my neighbours due to the fact that I no longer need to trade luxuries at all, and the favour point system isn't as good as it was made out to be, since the AI don't give back what you put in (In my first game, I gave ARC 3 energy per turn for thirty turns, and the maximum they traded the favour back for was 25 energy, so I didn't bother after that).

Satellites are fun enough, but the idea of them being major game changers in war is laughable. After purchasing a Planet Carver, I used to on a city to do a pitiful amount of damage before it was shot down in a single turn. Bear in mind that this is the strongest offensive satellite in the game. They can, however, be game changers when used in your own cities, with things like an additional 20% energy or science.

The different victory conditions are great since they give more options than to simply steamroll everyone else, but the difference between them is so different that it's stupid. For example: The Harmony victory monument needed 25 turns to win me the game, wheras the Supremacy victory required 1000 military strength to be sacrificed, which took far longer than that. It's something that I'll undoubtedly got mods to balance, but it isn't really a major issue.

My overview of this may have been a little negative, but I really do enjoy the game, as I've said before. Having spent seventeen hours on it, I've found that I enjoy it much more than Civ 5. I have friends who disagree, but I believe that the pros of the game vastly outweigh the cons. Compared to the state Civ 5 was in at it's initial release this is a godsend (because Civ 5 was appalling without the DLC). Yes it had a few bugs, (The game has frozen at one point, and the troop movement is jerky and awkward when moving after battles) but it's not anything that will really affect it enough for me to stop playing.

Edit: I am, however, pissed off that they turned city states into glorified trading posts. That seems like they've gone backwards rather than forwards.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top