Gameplay settings are nothing but the changes done in the game options.
Has this ever happened with you? You are observing an advanced player and he suddenly pauses and changes settings. He also states you have bad gameplay settings. So what does he change? I'll tell you about it.
Does changing gameplay settings matter?
- Yes. Little!
The following are the default gameplay settings:-
The following are the changes made by an advanced player:-
Now see the difference!
- Some players change Auto Citizen to "Build and Gather" also. But its not appropriate because sometimes you might end up losing resources repairing unwanted buildings. While playing an infinite game, "Build and Gather" setting is must.
- Auto Citizen Delay should be as less as possible. You dont want your villagers waiting for a long time.
- Building Stances can be "Aggressive/Defensive". I believe that your armies should always be fighting. So preferably "Aggressive".
- Now see the check boxes ticked in the second image. Advanced options should be ticked so that you get more options to a particular object(building/unit) in the game.
- Auto "All-Clear" should always be ticked. This is a very helpful option. Suppose this scenario. A raiding unit comes to your city and you ring the bell. All villagers go inside. Now you need to ring it again to release the villagers. When this option is ticked, the second bell is rung automatically when the raiding unit goes away from city. So it saves your time as well as you can micro-manage other things after ringing it once.
- Some players also prefer ticking "Use Abilities as Group".
- Increasing "Map-scroll speed" also helps. You can also change notifications to be shown in the game. Sometimes helpful.
Now, dont keep default settings anymore. Because now you know which settings are ideal for a faster gameplay. This was an another basic post but an useful one.
I had no idea about the citizen idle time and I definitely had no idea about the auto clear. I cant wait to try it out and see how well it works.
ReplyDeleteTry it :)
ReplyDeleteWell, each of this settings have its own advantages/disadvantages - i cant imagine, that if am under sieging in nomad game, all my villies around city are garrisoned inside for nothing. Agrresive stance is stupid too. Many times when you dont watch your army just for 3 seconds, some of your stupid units spread around and get killed absolutely reasonless, only cause of this stance. I prefer defensive stance. With this setting, unit will response against attack but wont run away. Gl
ReplyDeleteYou are right, but under some circumstances every stance is stupid. That's why control matters. Ever happened to you when an archer attacks your cataphract on defence stance and then the cataphract goes to the archer and 1 milimeter away from him he returns without even inflicting damage? Or when you put your army on stand ground, but half of it is out of range and you waste it? :D
ReplyDeleteGodzilla
Ah. I know Godzilla. Its annoying to see horses come back just because of defensive stance.
ReplyDeleteBut even alan's right. You dont see your armies and they die. :D
I feel it depends on the player. How he shifts between stances. I usually keep them on defensive or standground when I dont want them to attack. Else they are on aggressive.