[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 / qa] [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.




Isn't weird that being tall in most games gives you the most science despite having less resources, less territory, production and population than the wide counterpart. Now that I think about it, being small and tall should not give any inherent advantage to tech. So why do this tall playstyle exist aside from rewarding the casual passive playstyle in games about conflict?
>>
>>1151193
>most
I cant think of 5
>>
>>1151193
What advantage should playing tall give you?
>>
>>1151198
Government efficiency, communication efficiency, a lack of assimilation penalties or revolts...
I guess there's also the opportunity cost associated with wars of conquest in that you can't use limited warfare for Portuguese-style play.
>>
File: 1598741562894.jpg (19 KB, 502x500)
19 KB
19 KB JPG
The idea of Tall is the people come to you, not the other way around. The idea of Tall is that your hyperdeveloped city is advanced and culturally monolithic enough to invite people from abroad to come to your city to trade and exchange ideas and you don't need to conquer some backwater nowhere to have a good city. While, yes, your limited space limits your resources and potential population, the quality of the people that come are of higher quality. Skilled tradesmen, the more renowned architects, the spooniest of bards.
>>1151204
These are good values for a Tall "empire" to have. However, I think it's less that Tall should be good at this, but that Wide should be bad at this. Even the fastest messengers needed time to travel to the provinces to deliver orders from the king. The idea that you, the emperor, mind control the little lordling you have a thousand miles away to instantaneously order this is a gameplay abstraction meant to be convenient for actually playing. In truth, this Quality of Life should only be afforded to Tall nations.
>>
>>1151193
>most games
Name 5

>aside from rewarding the casual passive playstyle in games about conflict?
Basically, yes. Casuals have problems outperforming even the shit-tier AI in strategy games, especially 4X where you're meant to expand explosively in the beginning, and possibly even the entire game. Also gaming is a series of interesting decisions and should allow for all playstyles, especially in a 4X where you might find yourself stuck on a small isolated island, or roleplay games like grand strategies.
>>
File: GDP comparison.png (52 KB, 632x321)
52 KB
52 KB PNG
>>1151193
No, you're just retarded baiter
>>
>>1151210
Often grand strategy games have turns last months, sometimes even a whole year. So giving commands to some far off land shouldn't take longer than your turn. Didn't Napoleon ride from Russia to France in only 1 week?
>>
>>1151193
why do you keep spamming these "tall" threads with faggy anime?
>>
Playing tall is cope for being shit at any kind of micro
>>
Playing tall would mean that you aren't waging wars every two seconds against someone else, in other words you are directing your resources towards something that is more productive than war. Sadly the vast majority of games incentivizes blobbing, the only game (mod) that i found playing tall engaging was Meiou and Taxes.
>>
>>1151381
... but isn't tall depending on extreme micro?
>>
File: duv4u.jpg (27 KB, 450x349)
27 KB
27 KB JPG
>>1151544
>the only game (mod) that i found playing tall engaging was Meiou and Taxes.
Have You Tried Not Playing D&... wait, wrong board.
Have You Tried Not Playing Paradox Games?
>>
>>1151549
Yes i did, never found a single 4X game where playing tall is viable, even the one that i consider to be the best (Shadow Empire) doesn't reward it.
>>
>>1151564
playing tall is best in civ 5
>>
>>1151566
Is it? I only played with Vox Populi but from what i have seen by playing tall you are completely disregarding one possible way to win (Domination) and also leaving plenty of resources to other Civs.
>>
>>1151566
>4X game
>Tall
Which part of "expand" and "exploit" you need explained?
>>
The only game I know of where playing tall works is King of Dragon Pass.
>>
>>1151568
In Vox populi I love playing tall cause it is just too much bother to manage multiple cities. My favorite is one city arabia cultural victory. Its just so easy...
>>
>Falling for tall meme
>>
>>1151195
>>1151217
Civ, EU3, Stellaris, uhh.. more civ
>>
>>1151664
Literally only civ 5.
>>
>>1151664
>Civ
>Tall
What are you smoking?
>>
>>1151568
4-6 cities is pretty much the ideal number, and if you properly minmax buildings and focus science you can beat AI in any victory even on highest difficulty
>>
I always start the game playing "tall" but it quickly ends when I start eating my neighbors
>>
>>1151204
>Government efficiency, communication efficiency, a lack of assimilation penalties or revolts...
Those things lead to a wealthier populace, a faster proliferation of information, and better trade policies. All of which tend to make a population more interested in technological innovation.
>>
>>1151204
Well then, I guess within every wide empire there should be a tall empire inside it, centered around the capital.
>>
>>1152904
>Those things lead to a wealthier populace, a faster proliferation of information, and better trade policies.
No they don't. There's not a connection there.
>>1152907
That's normal, but the penalties come from the frontiers of the empire.
>>
>>1151193
The game you played don't have any product of expansion that can used to feedback into tech research, and no penalty from a lack of buffer zone.
>>
>>1153100
Why would civilians on the frontier impact the science of guys in the center? A theoretical wide nation might not make science as efficiently as a tall, nation but the tall section should be no different than the tall nation, so would still out-perform it.
>>
>>1153133
>Why would civilians on the frontier impact the science of guys in the center?
Budgeting and politics. The needs of the state weigh heavily on scientific developments in centralized countries.
>but the tall section should be no different than the tall nation, so would still out-perform it.
Not how it works. Tall nations are better-equipped to invest in their national infrastructure due to a lack of competing options.
>>
>>1153138
And what if they don't? What a stupid cope.
>>
File: tradition.jpg (16 KB, 191x292)
16 KB
16 KB JPG
>>1151193
Why is it weird?
Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great didn't invent computers as soon as they crossed over into the other part of Eurasia. The US didn't get anywhere by fighting Mexico. Russia has always been a backwater. China couldn't make ball points for pens until 2017. India will always be an "up and coming superpower".
>>1151198
Armies can respond to invaders and rebels in the same turn.
You don't have more cities than you have governors to boost resource extraction.
More investment in a few cities makes them punch harder locally than neighbouring small cities.
It's more defensible.
The real problem is that video games let you build tall and wide because wide gives you the resources to build tall, so there is functionally no reason to build tall.
>>
>>1153143
>And what if they don't?
And what if who doesn't what? What a stupid post.
>>
>>1151198
None.
>>
>>1153160
>China couldn't make ball points for pens until 2017.
Hell, the Song dynasty had an economic and technological golden age after losing territory to the Mongols.
>>
>>1151193
>Now that I think about it, being small and tall should not give any inherent advantage to tech.
But that would make tallfags cry about it
>>
>>1153143
>And what if they don't?
Famines, revolts, mass migration, you name it.
>>
>>1151544
this
expansion and developing new areas cost, same for wars
if you invest this in infrastructure and research you can go ahead in it
still there are limits(mostly resources) how far you can go with it, sure you can trade for it but in case of war or embargo you are done
>>
>>1153133
you need settlers and frontiersmen to develop new areas, military to guard them and your supply routes, people who move goods, local administrators etc
all at cost of your core areas that fund it
sure it should offer long term benefits that outweigh going tall but you could go tall and then expand
>>
>>1153720
Maybe Civ V should remove the penalties when you lose a city...
>>
>>1151193
Nakadashi
>>
>>1151564
>playing tall in shadow empire
what retard told you this? the games about conquering everyone else
>>
>>1151193
Just eliminate base square yield and stop favoring ICS when it comes to upkeep/sanitation/rebels/etc.

Also make founding cities slower and more expensive

Then the problem solves itself
>>
>>1151193
People have the wrong idea of what playing rall should be. IRL Russia is playing wide, France is playing tall, Sweden is an npc and Switzerland is a meme challenge



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.