I didn't like the game in my first play through in late September. I kept at it, found some interesting aspects that I enjoyed, but in the past three months, I gave it a thorough playing, time and time again, playing different styles, different leaders, etc.

I cannot get over how much more boring and slow this game is compared to Civ 4. I also cannot get over how happiness is handled. If Civ 5 was real life, me personally, I'd be really ticked off about the Metrodome in Minneapolis having its roof cave in, even though I live in Kansas City. But Civ 5 isn't real life, and I couldn't care less about the Metrodome. I don't see how the happiness of structures built in other cities should have any impact on other cities.

I have been a loyal Civ player since #2 (roaming muskets unite!), and I'm not giving up on this series. But fans like me who favor larger, slower-paced games were really ripped off.

Please respect that these are my opinions. Don't flame me with asinine comments like "play the game more." I have spent 3 months playing it, and I cannot play it any longer. I am officially back to Civ IV.

Cool story bro.

Many people have this opinion. You won't be flamed :D
Flaming this thread after reading this comment does not count

Many people have this opinion. You won't be flamed :D
Flaming this thread after reading this comment does not count

Makes me want to retroactively edit my post with a flame comment. Just kidding.

Meh. I tried going back to CivIV but can't bring myself to do it. CivIV+RiFE or RAND maybe, but not vanilla CiIV.

Many people have this opinion. You won't be flamed :D
Flaming this thread after reading this comment does not count

Read in another thread where someone made the comment that Civ5 seemed to be for his son's generation, rather than for him. I would agree with that. It isn't a bad game, but just not what I prefer honestly.

I do think there's something about getting older and getting set in your ways. Heck, I still play strategy games (real time and turn based) from 6-10 years ago because I simply find them enjoyable.

Tried a slower game speed?

Honestly the patch helps a lot here. But discovery the eldorado on turn 11 kinda gave me a huge boost and I m far from sure my game would have been the same without it :( I enjoyed the culture tile though lol Normand

Makes me want to retroactively edit my post with a flame comment. Just kidding.

Meh. I tried going back to CivIV but can't bring myself to do it. CivIV+RiFE or RAND maybe, but not vanilla CiIV.

Always an interesting feeling to stumble upon threads mentioning your work. :goodjob:


As to the topic... personally I like the happiness setup, as it provides a more interesting tradeoff than that of civIV. Rather than plopping down another city and growing it to the happy cap, now you have to decide between another city and more pop in an existing one; Granted, it could use work, but the idea is sound IMO.

Always an interesting feeling to stumble upon threads mentioning your work. :goodjob:


As to the topic... personally I like the happiness setup, as it provides a more interesting tradeoff than that of civIV. Rather than plopping down another city and growing it to the happy cap, now you have to decide between another city and more pop in an existing one; Granted, it could use work, but the idea is sound IMO.

It makes since from a gameplay perspective, but not from a realism perspective for some.

Though, if they had called Happiness "Stability", I'm pretty sure people wouldn't be complaining about it as much.

Yeah they really should call happiness stabality when the make civ 6 since that's hwo they treat it. I mean martial law giving +1 happy if you have a soldier in the city? Obviously it's not making them happy. Same with courthouses.

I more or less agree about that. Still, as a game mechanic I like the idea of growth being limited on an empire level, rather than city; Encourages some tradeoffs.

Anything can be renamed easily, after all.

...the patch helps a lot here.
No, it does NOT!
I've played 2 full games with the lastest patch and I'm sorry to say but almost nothing has changed.
The AI uses ICS now, 2 hexes between their cities, very ugly and very inefficient.
Those small AI cities won't be building wonders and other projects fast enough to have
a chance to win the game.

Last game, Notre Dame + Porcelain Tower -> late industrial
Chichen Itza -> somewhere in the modern era built by the AI. :eek:
And the AI does not bribe city states to win diplomatic.
And with the introduction of the Declaration of Friendship, the conquest option is gone too for the AI.

The AI uses now the culture bomb with the great artist to steal resources mainly from city states.
One of the few positive changes I've seen in those games.

No, it does NOT
The AI uses now the culture bomb with the great artist to steal resources mainly from city states.
One of the few positive changes I've seen in those games.

That one actually did happen pre-patch already.

Still, as a game mechanic I like the idea of growth being limited on an empire level, rather than city; Encourages some tradeoffs.

I totally agree. But I don't like CiV's way to achieve it. The whole game design is an interesting try, but it is just worse than Civ IV's. It is obvious for me that there was not enough investment in this game. 2K's greed came first.

I also cannot get over how happiness is handled.

Happiness isn't perfect, but I still think it works ok overall.

I understand. Are you heading back to the Civ IV forums as well?

I didn't like the game in my first play through in late September. I kept at it, found some interesting aspects that I enjoyed, but in the past three months, I gave it a thorough playing, time and time again, playing different styles, different leaders, etc.

I cannot get over how much more boring and slow this game is compared to Civ 4. I also cannot get over how happiness is handled. If Civ 5 was real life, me personally, I'd be really ticked off about the Metrodome in Minneapolis having its roof cave in, even though I live in Kansas City. But Civ 5 isn't real life, and I couldn't care less about the Metrodome. I don't see how the happiness of structures built in other cities should have any impact on other cities.

I have been a loyal Civ player since #2 (roaming muskets unite!), and I'm not giving up on this series. But fans like me who favor larger, slower-paced games were really ripped off.

Please respect that these are my opinions. Don't flame me with asinine comments like "play the game more." I have spent 3 months playing it, and I cannot play it any longer. I am officially back to Civ IV.

I cannot get over how much more boring and slow this game is compared to Civ 4. .... But fans like me who favor larger, slower-paced games were really ripped off.


what?