The March-edition of Swedish PC Gamer has a 6-pages preview of Civilization 5. I suspect that most of the info has already been presented on this forum, but since several here have asked me to summarize the article, I will try to give an overview. I guess hearing the same information with some new words may easen your Civ 5-addiction... :lol:

About Civ 5:

About 50 persons are currently working on the game, which has been in development for over two years, but is now reaching the final phases.

About Sid Meier:

PC Gamer talks a little with Sid Meier. He said: "It is always a challenge trying to find new ways to improve Civilization and at the same time keeping what made the game addictive and fun in the first place. It has always been our philosophy to listen to the players and follow what happens in the modding community and then merge them with our own ideas and even if we are working on console- and Facebook-versions of the Civilization-franchise so has always Civilization 5 been a return to the heart and soul of the franchise."

Hexagons:

The game has a new engine composed of a hexagons. Jon Shafer thinks this change is good, since it gives you lesser options of movement but each option is therefore more important. It also means that for example mountains and forests can have a more natural pattern.

Graphics:

The graphics will have a completely new style- Art-deco, inspired by games like Grim Fandango. It is designed by Russel Vaccaro. The environments, like forests and oceans, will be a lot more animated than in Civ 4.

Sound:

The game will have an advanced sound-engine, which will change sounds depending on if you are in the hills, the forests or on the ocean. It will also have a large soundtrack.

Panzer General:

The new hexagonal change is specifically useful in the new, improved combat system. Now you may only have a maximum of one unit in a hexagon. This includes the cities. Shafer says that Panzer General was the main inspiration for this change into a more tactical battlefield. The new system forces your units out of the cities and out into the terrain, forming natural frontlines and taking advantage of good defensive positions.

Bombardment:

Some units may attack other units more than one hex away, for example archers.

Terrain:

Hills give defensive advantages. Your units can see and shoot farther there.

Leaders:

You will now see leaders in full view. They alsp talk in their native language. Firaxis has resurrected the extinct language of quechua (used by Inca). However, all leaders will have their lines subtitled in English.

City states:

These are small, AI-controlled civilizations. They never grow big and doesn´t desire to win. The player must choose if he is to be friendly, indifferent or hostile towards a city state. The attitude you has towards a particular city state will have a big effect on diplomacy. If for example your units is approaching a city state that have friendly relations with another civilization, he will warn you, and if you ignore them, there will be consequences.

Barbarians:

The barbarians originate from a barbarian city and will get more advanced units later in the game. You need to wipe out all barbarian cities to get rid of the barbarian hordes.

City expansion:

Borders does no longer expand in large areas, but one hex at a time. Remote hexes like marshes, forests and mountains will be harder to acquire.

Economy:

You can invest money in your neighboring hexagons, for example trying to acquire an important resource before your opponent.

Research:

You can also sign a research-deal with another civilization. This way, both civs will cooperate to reach the new technology and both will gain it when the discovery is made. This was included to encourage cooperation between civilizations.

Diplomacy:

The civilizations will have an all-new advanced AI. All opponents will have fixed characteristics. Based on this unique personality, every AI-player will have their own agenda, which the AI will use to plan how to best play to win the game. But there will also be a certain randomness to avoid having the AI be too easy to predict.

Conclusions:

PC Gamer was impressed with what they saw. They think the new graphics was a real facelift for the franchise, and the interface is greatly improved. They also thought the soundtrack was brilliant. They conclude:

"Judging from the gameplay-sequences we saw, Civilization 5 will make no fan of the franchise disappointed."

"Judging from the gameplay-sequences we saw, Civilization 5 will make no fan of the franchise disappointed."

Well I'm more than a little excited already. With my Civ experience so far, I will trust what Sid is changing.

Great job. Thanks for your hard work. :goodjob:

I particularly like the animated forests and oceans. I am a sucker for eye candy. Sounds like the sound part is going to be great too.

Even more excited now. :D

This sounds like the making of a very strong Civ game. The only unknown (that I can think of) is religion.

Now can we get gameplay videos? Please, Firaxis?

Thanks for the info. Was there anything on the economics, like resources, or about research?

No, not more than what I already mentioned like being able to invest money in neighboring regions, being able to trade with city states and having research deals with other civilizations.

Research deal... that sounds interesting. I always wanted to have some actual reason not to go to war with people. I mean, I always preferred war but then it always seemed like the only logical choice.

Also, archers shooting from a distance? Yayz! Maybe the game will finally make some sense. Honestly, archers shouldn't have to be damaged by attacking swordsman.

Research deal... that sounds interesting. I always wanted to have some actual reason not to go to war with people. I mean, I always preferred war but then it always seemed like the only logical choice.

Also, archers shooting from a distance? Yayz! Maybe the game will finally make some sense. Honestly, archers shouldn't have to be damaged by attacking swordsman.

Indeed, and with no tech trading it's an even better motivation to make allies. However, with the resources being changed in how they work it'll make some very interesting choices. Do you ally to get an advantage in tech over other players or do you go to war to get resources which could give you an advantage. Sounds great. :goodjob:

"Judging from the gameplay-sequences we saw, Civilization 5 will make no fan of the franchise disappointed."

The writer should have taken a look at this forum. It seems like half the people have already convinced themselves this game will be awful.

I actually really like the direction the game is taking. Instead of just going with a "more is better" approach, they seem to be making changes that will focus the game more. For example, instead of having a ton of leaders with swappable characteristics, it sounds like they're really making the AI act like real people.

Was there anything specifically mentioned about the fate of culture as a gameplay mechanic? Interestingly it seems that some aspects that were under culture in the past (such as expanding into squares... or hexagons in this case) were under culture, but from what the OP said that may not be the case.

You will now see leaders in full view. They alsp talk in their native language. Firaxis has resurrected the extinct language of quechua (used by Inca). However, all leaders will have their lines subtitled in English.

Quechua isn't extinct. I met a Quechua speaker this summer.

And if that isn't enough to convince you, Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quechua) says it isn't extinct, either.

Indeed, and with no tech trading it's an even better motivation to make allies. However, with the resources being changed in how they work it'll make some very interesting choices. Do you ally to get an advantage in tech over other players or do you go to war to get resources which could give you an advantage. Sounds great. :goodjob:

Is there going to be no tech trading? I hadn't heard that.

So, sounds like culture is probably out. Shame.

I'm a bit leery about spending gold to expand territory.

Otherwise seems promising.

Quechua isn't extinct. I met a Quechua speaker this summer.

And if that isn't enough to convince you, Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quechua) says it isn't extinct, either.



Is there going to be no tech trading? I hadn't heard that.

Quechua is as extinct as Latin.

So, sounds like culture is probably out. Shame.

I'm a bit leery about spending gold to expand territory.

Otherwise seems promising.

No, culture is still in, but the expansion occur differenty, one hexagon at a time. Also, it seems like you can now use money as well as culture to expand.

Graphics:

The graphics will have a completely new style- Art-deco, inspired by games like Grim Fandango. It is designed by Russel Vaccaro. The environments, like forests and oceans, will be a lot more animated than in Civ 4.
I turned that off right away, and I hope I can do that in Civ 5 too, so I don't need to buy a new computer just to waste cycles on glitz when I'm concentrating on a strategy game.

Quechua is as extinct as Latin.

Except for the inconvenient fact that it is still spoken as a primary language by millions of people…


Terrain:

Hills give defensive advantages. Your units can see and shoot farther there.


I think this is a big point as well. It looks like terrain, especially elevation, will play a much bigger part in overall strategy than in past versions. Sure you got a bonus for terrain in other versions, but being able to shoot farther from a hill has some interesting implications.

About Sid Meier:

PC Gamer talks a little with Sid Meier. He said: "It is always a challenge trying to find new ways to improve Civilization and at the same time keeping what made the game addictive and fun in the first place. It has always been our philosophy to listen to the players and follow what happens in the modding community and then merge them with our own ideas and even if we are working on console- and Facebook-versions of the Civilization-franchise so has always Civilization 5 been a return to the heart and soul of the franchise."



Sounds promising. No dumbed down Civilization 5? :)

Quechua is as extinct as Latin.

Are you senile? :confused: Quechua is as alive as Basque, Uyghur, Berber, or Coptic. It's a minority language, but it's most definetly alive. Peruvians, Bolivians, and Ecuadorians would LOVE to meet you in a dark alley........

Hills give defensive advantages. Your units can see and shoot farther there.

So i assume archers are going to be able to shoot 3 tiles away...

leaders will now speak in their native language. That sounds like a great addition

Quechua is alive and kicking. Here's a good resource is anyone is interested.


Quechua Language Homepage

About the Quechua Language
Quechua ("qheshwa") is an indigenous language of the Andean region, spoken today by approximately 13 million people in Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Northern Chile, Argentina, and Southern Colombia. It was the official language of Tawantinsuyu, the Inca Empire.

Quechua is a perfectly regular language, which makes learning the basics quite easy. However, a large number of suffixes and infixes can be added to words to change both overall significance and subtle shades of meaning, which leads to a rare expressiveness. Above the beginning level, Quechua requires some vast changes of mind-set as learners try to master bipersonal conjugation, conjugation dependent on mental state and veracity of knowledge, spatial and temporal relationships, and numerous cultural factors.

http://ullanta.com/quechua/

Bombardment:

Some units may attack other units more than one hex away, for example archers.

Terrain:

Hills give defensive advantages. Your units can see and shoot farther there.


Sounds like, under the right conditions, some units will be able to shoot at least two tiles, (e.g. archers standing on a hill).

Elsewhere it's noted that cities can work tiles 3 hexes away, instead of 2 squares away in our existing Civ4 BFC.

To me these two facts suggest that the maps will be bigger - more hexes in a map, cities spread farther apart, etc. If they're still the size of Civ4 maps, archers won't have to approach a city very close at all before they can start attacking ...

Sad thing is no gameplay videos until E3.

So i assume archers are going to be able to shoot 3 tiles away...

I really hope it's just the more modern units. On an earth map, archers could then shoot over the English channel?:lol:

Are you senile? :confused: Quechua is as alive as Basque, Uyghur, Berber, or Coptic. It's a minority language, but it's most definetly alive. Peruvians, Bolivians, and Ecuadorians would LOVE to meet you in a dark alley........

Thank you for sticking up for Quechua, but I'm afraid Coptic IS only about as alive as Latin. I'm studying it as part of my Master's programme in Theology, and there are only about 300 people who can actually speak it; most of them are Coptic Orthodox priests who use it as a liturgical language (which is its only modern function).

Why not just scan the article for us?

Why not just scan the article for us?

Do you understand Swedish then?

Do you understand Swedish then?
Säker! Många föredrar att läsa den ursprungliga artikeln. Många tack på förhand.

Säker! Många föredrar att läsa den ursprungliga artikeln. Många tack på förhand.

Å andra sidan skulle nog PC Gamer anse att folk som förstår ursprungsartikeln skulle kunna ha artigheten nog att köpa tidningen själva... ;)

Å andra sidan skulle nog PC Gamer anse att folk som förstår ursprungsartikeln skulle kunna ha artigheten nog att köpa tidningen själva... ;)
Jag måste hålla. Detta kan vara ett problem.

Are you senile? :confused: Quechua is as alive as Basque, Uyghur, Berber, or Coptic. It's a minority language, but it's most definetly alive. Peruvians, Bolivians, and Ecuadorians would LOVE to meet you in a dark alley........



Except for the inconvenient fact that it is still spoken as a primary language by millions of people…



I think this is a big point as well. It looks like terrain, especially elevation, will play a much bigger part in overall strategy than in past versions. Sure you got a bonus for terrain in other versions, but being able to shoot farther from a hill has some interesting implications.

You both completely missed my sarcasm as scientists the world over use latin all the time.

You both completely missed my sarcasm as scientists the world over use latin all the time.

Yeah, but not as their native language. Pretty fine distinction, wouldn't you say? Anyways, the tubes of the interweb is pretty much the last place where one should use sarcasm. It just doesn't work.

There is some new screens in the magazine, shows among other things elephants (ivory) as a resource and how a small babarian village look like (babarians in the midle and sharpend wooden poles in a circle around it)

You both completely missed my sarcasm as scientists the world over use latin all the time.

There's ten million native speakers of Quechua using the language in everyday life. There's another two million speakers of Aymara. Both are official languages of Peru and Bolivia.

I just didn't think the appropriate response to my comments were death threats is all, meeting hostile individuals in dark alleys.

I just didn't think the appropriate response to my comments were death threats is all, meeting hostile individuals in dark alleys.

I'm sure those were sarcastic death threats as well. ;)

Back to the topic at hand, since ivory was mentioned as a resource. If the swedish article has the same screenshots as the CBS one then there could also be a small picture showing silk. So silk and ivory will be back in.

You both completely missed my sarcasm as scientists the world over use latin all the time.

The key word in my sentence was primary. I know Latin is not extinct, but it is no longer used as a primary language.

The key word in my sentence was primary. I know Latin is not extinct, but it is no longer used as a primary language.
Latin still is the official language of one country (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_City) :D

I think its good,but its to early.

Also culture needs to be adressed...it seems like they are trying to distract us with all the glitz and glam.....

Latin still is the official language of one country (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_City) :D

Well played sir! Although we could get into the semantics of official vs. primary, that is probably best left to another thread…

Seems like it would be the best thing to get this back on track. No need for latintalk in the middle of everyones civgasms

All they need to do is not screw up the DRM and this sounds like the ultimate game.

All they need to do is not screw up the DRM and this sounds like the ultimate game.

Amen.

Although, I have to say, Civ IV already sounded like that to me. Of course, now that I have seen the previews of Civ V, I realize the errors of my ways. ;)

The king is dead; long live the king! :goodjob:

I post the following text in all topics about the recent Civ V previews, sorry if it counts as spam

But if there's only one unit per hexagonal tile, there'll be a almost completely new combat system as you'll not be able to defend your city and therefore you must take out the enemy before it gets to the city?
And the text mentions that there's one unit per tile including cities, does this mean that there's a maximum of one unit per city or does it mean that you can't have any unit defending/sleeping in a city at all?
That's my two questions hope you can answer them

All they need to do is not screw up the DRM and this sounds like the ultimate game.

Indeed! The latest patch to Civilization IV that removed the CD requirement after installing the game was truly a godsend. That is the way as it should be. I really hope this will be the case for Civilization V when it is launched (and it seems to be shaping up very nicely :D).

Panzer General:

The new hexagonal change is specifically useful in the new, improved combat system. Now you may only have a maximum of one unit in a hexagon. This includes the cities. Shafer says that Panzer General was the main inspiration for this change into a more tactical battlefield. The new system forces your units out of the cities and out into the terrain, forming natural frontlines and taking advantage of good defensive positions.

Bombardment:

Some units may attack other units more than one hex away, for example archers.


Just about everything seems fairly welcoming, aside from these two points. I don't mind the bombardment that has been introduced thus far in the series, but units, such as archers, shouldn't be included. I think they should leave it to siege units, catapults, howitzers, and such.

The one unit per square makes me very nervous. What of falling back to a safe square, using the geography to an advantage? If you want to block off Central America, or the Sinai Peninsula, during medieval eras, is one supposed to spread units from the bottom of the Nile to Turkey just to secure that point from a large offensive power? You can't establish a couple fortresses and prevent assault by land, and force them to the sea instead? I am sure many of you have intentionally built cities in these tactical spots, just to get a one up on defending access to your whole empire.

I post the following text in all topics about the recent Civ V previews, sorry if it counts as spam

But if there's only one unit per hexagonal tile, there'll be a almost completely new combat system as you'll not be able to defend your city and therefore you must take out the enemy before it gets to the city?
And the text mentions that there's one unit per tile including cities, does this mean that there's a maximum of one unit per city or does it mean that you can't have any unit defending/sleeping in a city at all?
That's my two questions hope you can answer them

If I were designing Civ 5, I would give each city a magic Garrison Defender Unit which can't leave the city. This unit would be auto-upgraded as time passes. Also, its strength would be partially dependent on how long the city had been established for, so that a newly conquered city could be easily recaptured.

The purpose of the magic G.D.U. would be so that invading armies couldn't just sweep into your city unopposed, and you don't have to worry about shuffling units in and out of your city to defend it.

This unit might also be able to attack outward from the city to pre-emptively attack enemies, but it couldn't leave the city after it won.

Actually, there was some quote from some magazine that says cities (and forts?) can attack by bombarding, so it may in fact be something like what I've said.

P.S. Yeah, I think that counts as spam Berba - if you're really interested in the question you could start a new thread.

leaders will now speak in their native language. That sounds like a great addition

I hope the Vikings/Scandinavians will no longer speak Americanized modern Norwegian...

The key word in my sentence was primary. I know Latin is not extinct, but it is no longer used as a primary language.

Latin is extinct. It is no one's mother tongue.

Berba wrote: "But if there's only one unit per hexagonal tile, there'll be a almost completely new combat system as you'll not be able to defend your city and therefore you must take out the enemy before it gets to the city?
And the text mentions that there's one unit per tile including cities, does this mean that there's a maximum of one unit per city or does it mean that you can't have any unit defending/sleeping in a city at all?
That's my two questions hope you can answer them ."

I think it's quite obvious that one unit per tile means one unit, but no more, in a city.

But the text said that military unit must leave the city at once?

But the text said that military unit must leave the city at once?

Newly constructed military units must leave the city at once. This would be consistent with the city always having its own magic garrison unit (since the newly constructed unit would then violate 1 unit per tile)

I suppose this would not be consistent with cities being defendable by a regular military unit.

It seem "from the danish PC gamer" that if your got one Horse ressource in your trade network, you can only produce one Horse unit, and can first produce a new horse unit, when the old unit is killed.

Sounds pretty interesting, the fight for resources will be much tougher, but there also seems to be a greater risk for snowballing.... hmm

Newly constructed military units must leave the city at once. This would be consistent with the city always having its own magic garrison unit (since the newly constructed unit would then violate 1 unit per tile)

I suppose this would not be consistent with cities being defendable by a regular military unit.

I think what they probably meant is that if you already a unit in your city and you train a new one, then the new unit must leave the city the moment it's been created. So yes, I do think you can have a unit in a city, just like in any other tile.

In addition, I don't think there'll be a magic garrison unit. Rather, I suspect there will be various buildings or city improvements you can construct to improve your city's defenses. I don' think you'll be able to attack with your city, but your city will be able to defend itself even without a military unit in it and when enemy attack your city, your city defenses will be able to damage those units.

Hello everyone! First time post from a long-time lurker.

I've been following the threads on Civ V for a while, and I just want to chime in with a new idea re. the one unit per hex discussion (entirely unsubstantiated, just a wild guess): Armies.

An army could be one unit in terms of occupying a hex, but would actually be composed of several units that travel together, maybe under the leadership of a Great General or similar. Such units would be far more powerful than lone units, as they would allow combined-arms and troop concetrations. Presumably there should be a limit on the number of armies a civilization could field, as well as the number of units they could contain. The capability of fielding armies should of course be tied to technological progress, and later technologies should allow more/larger armies. That would allow well-organized civilizations to outperfom less well organized civilizations, even if their weapons technology itself isn't that far ahead, like e.g., the Romans vs. the Germanic tribes.

For example, in the Ancient Ages, the army of Alexander the Great would be the one army that the Greeks could field. Later, medieval civilizations become able to field more, larger armies during the Crusades etc., and later still (Renaissance, Napoleonic, Industrial), increasingly large field armies become the focus of military campaigns.

What do people think?

Cheers,
Jan

Another random thought re. the one unit per hex rule and city defences:

What if, instead of building city walls as a "building," in Civ V you can build walls/fortifications in the hexes surrounding the city? These would then have to be manned by garrison troops in order to function properly, and conquered by assaulting troops before the city itself can be threatened. That would allow defence in depth, and the defender would not be restricted to having only one unit in the city itself. I think I personally like that idea :)

One more thing... I'm another one of those who think tech trading is just a tad too "gamey". I think I like the idea of being able to trade/share "research" rather than actual technologies. I hope that it will also be possible to conquer "research" by military or espionage means. That way, a backward civilization may be able to catch up to a weak, yet technologically advanced nation (historical example: Romans and Greeks) through military means, but only by winning research that can be invested into the civilization's own, current research tree.

And Civ V needs more different military units between the Medieval and Industrial ages, by the way. Where are the Tercios? The medieval siege artillery? The dragoons?

I'll shut up now.

Hello everyone! First time post from a long-time lurker.

I've been following the threads on Civ V for a while, and I just want to chime in with a new idea re. the one unit per hex discussion (entirely unsubstantiated, just a wild guess): Armies.

An army could be one unit in terms of occupying a hex, but would actually be composed of several units that travel together, maybe under the leadership of a Great General or similar. Such units would be far more powerful than lone units, as they would allow combined-arms and troop concetrations. Presumably there should be a limit on the number of armies a civilization could field, as well as the number of units they could contain. The capability of fielding armies should of course be tied to technological progress, and later technologies should allow more/larger armies. That would allow well-organized civilizations to outperfom less well organized civilizations, even if their weapons technology itself isn't that far ahead, like e.g., the Romans vs. the Germanic tribes.

For example, in the Ancient Ages, the army of Alexander the Great would be the one army that the Greeks could field. Later, medieval civilizations become able to field more, larger armies during the Crusades etc., and later still (Renaissance, Napoleonic, Industrial), increasingly large field armies become the focus of military campaigns.

What do people think?

Cheers,
Jan

Dimon,

This discussion also got me to sign up and post. After making my posts, which were done largely on emotion, I came to my senses a bit. The reason, I started thinking of a greatly expanded, and more realistic, army feature. If armies, as you mention, are a far more intricate part of the game... then this would certainly be a welcomed innovation. However, in Civilization III, which is the latest I have played, armies are extremely difficult to come by, that is, unless I change all the rules, which isn't necessarily fun. Again, if armies are changed and are a far more prevalent feature, then I actually would change my stance from nervousness and fear, to wonder and anticipation.

Again though, armies have to become THE option early. That is, by the time legionaries come about... I better be able to regularly have the ability to put together an army of catapults, archers, and horseback units all in the same spot. It would have to be dependent on the size and riches of the civilization, not necessarily the era.

Hi Livin,

Thanks for your comment.

Please bear in mind that it's pure speculation, but... I just feel that the concept of armies (not necessarily in the Civ III sense, more in a general "vehicle for troop concentration" sense) would be a great compromise between the one-unit-per-hex rule and the "get there fastest with the mostest" Stack-of-Doom approach. A civilization would only be allowed a certain number of armies (think about the American Civil War; there were, what, four Union and three Confederate armies throughout the entire war?), which would put a natural limit on the SoD problem. On the other hand, it would still reflect the historical emphasis on the large army making its way across the land (Hannibals invasion of Italy, crusaders in the Holy Land, Fredericks maneuvers in Saxony, you name it...)

At the end of the day I guess I see the army concept as something tech-enabled rather than something brought about by a Great General, after all.

Another random thought re. the one unit per hex rule and city defences:

What if, instead of building city walls as a "building," in Civ V you can build walls/fortifications in the hexes surrounding the city? These would then have to be manned by garrison troops in order to function properly, and conquered by assaulting troops before the city itself can be threatened. That would allow defence in depth, and the defender would not be restricted to having only one unit in the city itself. I think I personally like that idea :)

Great idea! And those hexes could be improved upon (eg. moats, stronger walls ect.)

The idea that each tile can only contain one unit is very unrealistic, I think instead they may impose a maximum number of units per tile, or alternatively as some have already suggested introduce the concept of armies to increase the number of units in a tile.

You will now see leaders in full view.

What does that mean.

What does that mean.

It means the leaders will now cover the entire screen, walking about in their 3D setting.

Latin still is the official language of one country (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_City) :D

no it isn't. Have you even read the link you posted ?

It means the leaders will now cover the entire screen, walking about in their 3D setting.

And when Catherine slaps you her hand will come right out of the screen and deal you a real zinger.

Hexagons:

The game has a new engine composed of a hexagons. Jon Shafer thinks this change is good, since it gives you lesser options of movement but each option is therefore more important. It also means that for example mountains and forests can have a more natural pattern.

Panzer General:

The new hexagonal change is specifically useful in the new, improved combat system. Now you may only have a maximum of one unit in a hexagon. This includes the cities. Shafer says that Panzer General was the main inspiration for this change into a more tactical battlefield. The new system forces your units out of the cities and out into the terrain, forming natural frontlines and taking advantage of good defensive positions.



I played the PC game Panzer General (PG) and I like it, but here I have a suggestion for CIV 5 that not just copy the battle system from the PG. Although, CIV 5 allows a ground unit to share the same hexagon with a air unit, but not another ground unit. I nethier don't like the rule "a maximum of one unit in a hexagon" nor "no-limit units in a square". I suggest that the CIV 5 should allow maximum 2 ground units and 1 air unit to share the same hexagon, that the other ground unit ,eg. infantry, can protect ,eg. artillery.

I used to expect the government systems can have more funs: more options, more combinations, more limits in "governing" the state. And the Power Balance of military, law, and finance can shape the so call characteristics of civilizations rather than the fix ones.

I used to expect the Non-government organizations can play more and important roles in the "free market" such as private police station, Mercenary, private hospitals, private universities, private banks. Without players investment, low tax rates. And them can cross all sates and form the capita empires beyond borders of states, powerful than the religions, because a government can step into the "unhealthy financial habits" like heavy debts and uncontrolled welfares. The "oversea assets" can access any resources wanted without warfare.

I used to expect the international events like F1, world cup, Olympics, financial crisis, international conferences, etc.

I used to expect the United Nations can be more powerful and execute some military tasks to be a real peace keeper. And its goals should be more.

I used to expect the so called "Judge made laws" can play important roles in some civilizations. And Laws production - both Ius and Lex - should occupy player more time because they also present the culture difference like languages. religions and types of entertainments.

I used to expect to rivers can be more useful and let ships cross. Canals, should be allowed to build.

I used to expect the "government budgeting" and "National project" can replace the unit "worker". I just do not like to manage every single of units.

I used to expect the "military advisor" can help to build army units which including different kinds of units. And the place of building unit does not matter at all, the place of units to be placed does matter. e.g. a fleet may include many different kinds of warships in classes and versions and ages, and this fleet is placed in a zone far from their nearest motherland. Thus, the expenses of maintaining and using this fleet should be different from the other fleet.

The uniform, equipment, structure, size, and training level can be adjusted, the expenses can be separated into the maintaining and using expenses. And the "budgeting" can limit and supporting the military power as one of the triangle powers mentioned above.

An army of fleet unit can only occupy one hex, but as the culture influence does, its effective zones or areas should not be limited into one hex or its attacking ranges. I used to expect the "patrol" function of the army unit. Its adjustable "patrol zone" can let one army unit to defense a large areas lands/seas/air zones which we have to product many units to achieve in the past.

I believe the air transports is an optional to transport land forces to the battle zone in time. And paratrooper should always be an option. The Supply Line, must be introduced into a game like civilization because its the strategic level thing. Battle zone or front line should be not the main focus, or at least not the only one. By cutting the line, it should reduce enemy unit's power without direct engagement. Of course, the areas supply line passes will not be a straight line but it is hardly be a secret to enemies.

Finally, there should be an options to empower one or more lived generals player produced to carry out the war. As the unlimited wars will be bored to anyone at last when you play one hundred times. Was is not everything in this game. It should not be.

I used to expect to create the unique government system, laws, musics, sports, arts, companies and new religions. Because they are more interesting than buildings. Because they are the major parts of civilizations.

Why this brave new world has no crimes, drugs, and sex problems? Don't they at the civilization level? Can't we build Las Vegas? Can't we produce drugs for trading. just like British did to China in 1840? Can't we build a Gotham City and read Batman's news? How about AIDS? How about the 300 gays and the bisexual acts? (Suetonius tells us that Caesar was called "the man of all women and the woman of all men")

Is it possible the mod supporting the other races civilization such elf, drow, dragon, orc, etc?

Hexagons:

The game has a new engine composed of a hexagons. Jon Shafer thinks this change is good, since it gives you lesser options of movement but each option is therefore more important. It also means that for example mountains and forests can have a more natural pattern.

Panzer General:

The new hexagonal change is specifically useful in the new, improved combat system. Now you may only have a maximum of one unit in a hexagon. This includes the cities. Shafer says that Panzer General was the main inspiration for this change into a more tactical battlefield. The new system forces your units out of the cities and out into the terrain, forming natural frontlines and taking advantage of good defensive positions.



I played the PC game Panzer General (PG) and I like it, but here I have a suggestion for CIV 5 that not just copy the battle system from the PG. Although, CIV 5 allows a ground unit to share the same hexagon with a air unit, but not another ground unit. I nethier don't like the rule "a maximum of one unit in a hexagon" nor "no-limit units in a square". I suggest that the CIV 5 should allow maximum 2 ground units and 1 air unit to share the same hexagon, that the other ground unit ,eg. infantry, can protect ,eg. artillery.

seldom meet another HKer in this site. But your idea is more like a battlefield commander rather than a state ruler. In the view of a ruler, it does not matter how an army operate. The ruler just push the army to do the right job in the right place at the right time. It is the politics. Ruler set targets and control budgets. Generals do the bloody jobs. In this game, players are not generals, they are rulers.

Why there is no separation or distinguish of the breakthrough and improvement in the technologies?

An improved old technology in use may be more economic and powerful than a non-improved new technology.

Quechua is as extinct as Latin.

Latin isn't extinct.

It is used in England in law and Finland play a radio station in Latin.
The pope speaks in Latin too.

Latin isn't extinct.

It is used in England in law and Finland play a radio station in Latin.
The pope speaks in Latin too.


Latin is extinct in the fact that there are no new words or any group of people that calls it their mother's tongue. The whole point is that its a dead language. We're just speaking the latest version which ended many centuries ago. Quecha on the other hand is very much alive, still have many people who speak it as a native language and new words and meanings are happening.

The most vibrant language so far is English. Ever year, hundreds of new words are recorded in the dictionary. Its estimated that there are over 1 million words so far.

In short, Latin is dead. Fortunately, many European language have roots in Latin, thus learning and understanding Latin isn't too difficult compared to other extinct languages.

Latin isn't extinct.

It is used in England in law and Finland play a radio station in Latin.
The pope speaks in Latin too.

That was my point both lanuages are still in use.

That was my point both lanuages are still in use.Oh please, pretty pretty please ... let's fill another 40 posts of this thread with this silly & completely irrelevant esoteric argument!

:deadhorse: