Relics

Hmm, relics. Not a bad idea, but I would vote no. I've played the "Age of Empires" series, which invloved relics in the gameplay, and they did prove to be usefull, although irritating :mad:. However the game series did not invlove religion in the game and Civ does, so the relics in Civ5 would just conflict with the religions. Therefore, unless Sid removes the religious aspect from the game and Bill Gates becomes a beggar, there is about a 0.001% chance of there being relics in Civ5.

the relics in AoE are 100% different from the ones in Civ Rev.
 
Hmm, relics. Not a bad idea, but I would vote no. I've played the "Age of Empires" series, which invloved relics in the gameplay, and they did prove to be usefull, although irritating :mad:. However the game series did not invlove religion in the game and Civ does, so the relics in Civ5 would just conflict with the religions. Therefore, unless Sid removes the religious aspect from the game and Bill Gates becomes a beggar, there is about a 0.001% chance of there being relics in Civ5.

Agreed. But I mean may case here isn't as much against relics in general ( I, will still disliking the idea think they may be good for a fast paced console game. A traditional PC civ on the other hand...) as for them in Civ V. Also they were little more than an annoyance in AOE III too.
 
they were completley different:

Civ: Relics give you bonuses when you find such as free wonders and temples, and such things

AOE; Gives you gold.

Now how are they the same.
 
The legend of atlantis started with Plato and probably was linked to a greek city that sank into the sea after an earthquake.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helike

Plato was an early proponent of a political structure not subject to the whims of individual leaders. Have such a government would be an advance even in this day and age.
 
Personally, I like the concept of relics. Sure, if you want uber-realism, perhaps changing names to more "realistic" ones (rather than mythical/legendary) makes more sense, but they serve a good purpose in game, encouraging exploration (which could use a further nudge, compared to say CIV4) and they also simulate a realistic historical advantage some nations gained by simply exploring, without even a need to actually colonize/conquer new areas.

Plus it sounds like a fun concept, so I'm all for it. :)
 
It's another choice, and Sid loves choices. If you build a boat early on to search for relics, that is production that is not going into early land exploration to find goody huts, barbarians, going towards city defense, etc. You might spend all that production to build a boat, and not find a relic at all. It's a gamble, and sometimes it pays off, others, not so much. Either way, you expose a good portion of the map that you might not have otherwise.
 
Atlantis,, hmmm ,,Some people think the "Holy Grail" doesn't exist either but they have searched forever for that..
I think the Relic searching is fine and a new twist.. And as someone else posted it does encourage Exlporation ,,which was always neglected in previous games.
In the end I for one do not wants the same old re-hashing of Civ after more than 15 years of playing it almost the same practically way ?? New graphics did not mean better gameplay..
 
As far as the demo is concerned Relics are great. Two free techs, or Gold, or a wonder, or (not sure havent gotten the other one.)
 
Note to self:

Atlantis will complete the 3 lowest techs. Make sure crappy techs are completed before finding. :crazyeye:
 
They are a bit overpowered, to say the least. I think they're fine for this reinterpretation of Civ, given the pacing and more constrained focus of Civ: Rev.

But I second the OP, in their current form, they have no place in Civ 5.
 
I really like the idea that when I go explore with my galley, I can also go on land with a "ranger" unit that comes with each galley I built. It really makes it fun and easy to search for goody huts and relics by sailing out to sea with a galley.
 
Top Bottom