View Full Version : new DLC: better ai + antagonizer mode


Nicol.Bolas
Mar 24, 2011, 08:32 AM
would you buy these DLC?

better ai would improve the ai (20USD)

antagonizer mode would make the game as intended to be (not simplified to masses), but you could only play it, if you finished the game at least once in vanilla dumbed down mode (also 20USD)
it would add:
individual happiness, health, cottages, religions, civics, real diplomacy, fixed victory conditions, war weariness
and other things that were omitted to not scare the casual player off

Lord Olleus
Mar 24, 2011, 08:43 AM
The game is as intended, unless you are saying that between production and shipping someone sneaked in and changed the code :rolleyes:

Rooftrellen
Mar 24, 2011, 08:52 AM
I would like to vote "I would buy neither, improve AI though patches and the game is already as intended."

As such, I voted that I would buy neither, though I would like to see it be a bit harder.

Seems a bit biased.

No way I would spend another $20 to get anything short of an expansion, nor would I consider buying something though Steam. Then there is the fact that there was talk about improving AI though patches.

I'm not sure how you think the game isn't as intended, either. I'm sure they would love to put "real diplomacy," but I doubt super computers could handle something so complex, let alone my good ol' PC. I'm sure they intended for the game to run on PC's.

Keejus
Mar 24, 2011, 09:10 AM
Oh. Whining.
Please don't spam trollingly around.

aatami
Mar 24, 2011, 10:23 AM
Good post, Keejus! : D

This is a stupid poll. You should at least add the "I'll wait for the features to be patched into the game." option into the poll... At least.

Then again, as you (Nicol.Bolas) have stated, I'm not 100% white so I'm a criminal bastard with no brains, so you probably shouldn't listen to me. ;)

Don't troll in any thread, don't try to derail them. Stay on topic.

forty2j
Mar 24, 2011, 10:27 AM
Poll is unnecessarily antagonistic. Improved AI, if available, will obviously be come through free patches.

Nicol.Bolas
Mar 24, 2011, 10:48 AM
Good post, Keejus! : D

This is a stupid poll. You should at least add the "I'll wait for the features to be patched into the game." option into the poll... At least.

Then again, as you (Nicol.Bolas) have stated, I'm not 100% white so I'm a criminal bastard with no brains, so you probably shouldn't listen to me. ;)

where did I state that? post a link please, or I expect an excuse from your lies.
I did never state anything about you or anything about criminal bastards with no brains.

all I stated was that in europe the police officiers are banned from reporting race of criminals, to avoid beying racist.
those are just simple facts.

protecting criminals should bother any person, even more so those, who are good like you, but could potentially be put into the same bag.
solution is not to hide behind political correctness or try to attack thos who pinpoint the problem, but to try to find a real solution to violence and crome among some notorious groups.

Don't answer to trolls, report them and don't troll back.

eric_
Mar 24, 2011, 11:47 AM
Poll is unnecessarily antagonistic.

Hence "antagonizer mode". Very punny! :lol:

I think a more accurate name would be "Civ IV mode".

Michl2602
Mar 24, 2011, 11:54 AM
Filled in "I would buy better AI" (provided the strong players in this forum were satisfied with it's abilities when playing on Deity).

As I'm missing nothing from CivIV the antagonizer mode definitely isn't for me.

SpearMan153
Mar 24, 2011, 05:47 PM
I didn't vote because you didn't give me an "other" option

your antagonizer mode sounds like civ4 to me - so no

the following should be in the game and be fixed in patches not DLC:
- diplomacy - there is "real" diplomacy now but it is bugged/flaky and needs much work
- victory conditions - yes the diplomacy victory needs to be much less cheesy

I'd would buy an expansion (not DLC because DLCs are new civs/maps etc that don't change game mechanics) that extended the civ5 mechanics to add more depth in keeping with the civ5 design

individual happiness - not going to happen, global happiness is core to civ5, no doubt it will get continued tweaking

health - not going to happen (we have health buidings that add food/growth same diff)

cottages - not going to happen (trade posts are the same thing except they don't "grow" but instead improve with tech making them consistent with other improvements - better graphics would be nice and maybe a name change)

war weariness - unlikely, does not play well with the global happiness system and historically dubious as a concept, except for more modern times (vietnam). might work only with certain civics/religions/ideologies assuming such elements existed in the game

religions - yes, I also hope they include secular ideologies as well

civics - unlikely the policy system is here to stay, you could have some kind of hybrid system with both concepts, with policies unlocking certain civics

Nicol.Bolas
Mar 24, 2011, 05:51 PM
are you crazy? wars always caused suffering on both sides of the conflict.

even if the civillians weren't directly under attack, they would suffer from the military economy and military law: lack of food, supplies, excessive work hours to support war effort, all man being taken away...

I just saw a documentary about austri in WW1, prior capitulation the country was falling appart from inside, starved population working 16hours 7 days a week

Stay on topic!

PieceOfMind
Mar 24, 2011, 06:26 PM
Why is it you attach no explanations to the affirmative responses, but do for the negative responses?

As usual, a poll that is created by someone just trying to push an agenda.

Nicol.Bolas
Mar 24, 2011, 06:30 PM
Why is it you attach no explanations to the affirmative responses, but do for the negative responses?

As usual, a poll that is created by someone just trying to push an agenda.

I don't understand what you mean.
I can explain the poll options better, but I think they are straightforward.

PieceOfMind
Mar 24, 2011, 06:40 PM
Consider for example if I wish to answer that I would not buy those mods, but for reasons different to the ones you included in the poll. There is no way for me to vote without creating misleading data.

It's as if you assume that the only reason someone would choose not to buy such mods is because civ5 is too complex and hard, or they should have been included in the product.

Nicol.Bolas
Mar 24, 2011, 06:44 PM
well you can share your reason here in thread. without that, the value of statistical data of "other" is useless anyway

Zyxpsilon
Mar 24, 2011, 07:15 PM
Yet another biased poll - Bibor is that you? :lol:

I have already bought 23+ major Civs & 28_CS different AIs and if they think the product could be made better, i own that much from them - free.

There is no reason to bring other people's names into this discussion.

Scarlet_King
Mar 24, 2011, 09:33 PM
Successful troll is successful.

SpearMan153
Mar 24, 2011, 09:45 PM
no not crazy - don't worry I'm not some far right pro war nut. War is bad with lots of suffering - not saying otherwise

my point is that I don't find the civ4 model of war weariness particularly realistic (or necessary for civ5)

so taking ww1 austria in your example - I'd say that things were falling apart not because of popular dissent over an unpopular war (war weariness) but due to food shortages and economic collapse due to loosing the war

The way I see the war weariness mechanic is that it is modelling civil unrest caused by a popular uprising against the war - send our troops home!

in civ4 its caused in the most part by killing and being killed outside your cultural boarders - things like rationing and shortages just don't come into it

For mass civil unrest vietnam war protest style to be an issue you need - a liberal democracy, a free press and mass media. Even then it is still conceivable to have a broad based bi-partisian support for a so called "just" war, given some overseas tyrant committing suitable attrocities aka Hitler (dang mentioned hitler)

Without a casus belli system there is no way to model whether a war might or might not have popular support or not.

I'm just not aware of anything historically resembling the scale of a civ'esk war weariness mechanic prior to mass media and free press. Did nebekenezer, ceaser, alexander the great, genghis khan, richard the lion hearted, salidin have to worry about war weariness? Was war weariness an issue for the allies in ww2 with the apalling loss of life?

In civ terms you could even argue that the vietnam unrest could be modelled as the result of the draft not some kind of "war weariness". I don't believe the protests ever got to the scale you see in civ games were all your cities pretty much end up in starvation because everyone is protesting the war, thus forcing you to either adopt police state or to end the war.

You could futher make the argument that the government of the day abandoned the war not because of "war weariness" but because they decided that it wasn't worth the cost in "blood and treasure" to defend a distant piece of jungle.

Nicol.Bolas
Mar 25, 2011, 05:56 AM
Well I already got an infraction for trying to explain to you, that war always causes unhappiness for civilians. So I will not continue, and recommend to you, to read some books or watch some history channel.

Also you are beying demagogic. CIv4 model strongly increses war weariness for offensive wars. for defensive wars, it is really much lower.

In the end, weariness reduces productivity of the cities. and yes..... the horrible conditions did reduce productivity of ww2 cities on both sides.

as for genhis khan, did you know he basically enslaved or murdered any villages encountered?
for rome, how much do you really know about their way of life? there were patricians, those really never suffered from anything, but then there were plebs and slaves, and these were forced to go to their offensive wars with not much reward

you are beying too idealistic and naive, because you have't been in any war.

mass media and democracy just change the effect a bit. in reality, the suffering of US civillians was much lower then of those europe civillians in WW2.

actually thinkling about it, US civillians never really experienced any true war weariness, maybe appart from civil war and war for independence, but that was really short

kekekeke
Mar 25, 2011, 07:56 AM
Bad options.

Fixing game should be free patches. Not some extra content you have to buy.

Also, where is the option "I will never buy DLC". I know I probably wont. I may buy civ5 complete edition that includes all dlc in future if game is fixed by then. If that option won't be there then its too bad.

Nicol.Bolas
Mar 25, 2011, 08:41 AM
it's the last option

Revoran
Mar 25, 2011, 09:19 AM
I think this is a silly poll - asking whether people would pay that only applies to those who have not bought the game and even then there are more problems with this than that. It seems as though your poll is simply a way to detract against the DLC (obviously a lot of people don't like this practice and prefer expansions etc) and perceived bad AI (in reality the AI has always been bad and simply was better when throwing stacks at you rather than operating in a 1UPT world). Your thread title is basically asking for inflammatory comments from both sides of the debate (you're essentially trolling).

It's obvious to everyone than any improvements to AI should be a free patch not to mention that major game system changes are almost never implemented in expansions rather than patches (MMOs don't count).

Note to moderators: I know that accusing others of trolling is trolling in itself but honestly it seems that the word "trolling" is becoming a catch-all around here for any less than civil behaviour and even in some cases just strongly worded posts which should really not be infracted at all. Not to mention that I am not saying that to incite anger but because I actually believe there is little discussion value here and that this thread is moreso an outlet for the OPs dissatisfaction with the game rather than a serious poll.

antagonizer mode would make the game as intended to be

I know this is a cliche and doesn't really help discussion, but it really applies in respect to what I have quoted above.

Working. As. Intended.

sschmalz
Mar 25, 2011, 09:25 AM
Not sure that the mods will do anything about this guy. He trolls the Civ 5 forum day and night seemingly, and he hasn't even played the game.

I'm new to the forum, but I gather that most people on here just ignore him.

Revoran
Mar 25, 2011, 09:41 AM
I would like to vote "I would buy neither, improve AI though patches and the game is already as intended."

This would also be my vote.

The_J
Mar 25, 2011, 02:36 PM
...my head...

I can't see how anything good will come out of this discussion.
-> Thread closed.