Civ Fuehrer
Drifting through space, lost
Afforess, you pretty much hit the nail on the head with this one, I just hope that 2K/Firaxis takes this thread into a huge consideration for the next patch/expansion.
My totally unbiased and definitely not paid for by 2k review
- Thread starter Afforess
- Start date
Afforess
The White Wizard
Play a couple more games. I had a rush of excitement after the first game. After 5 games, I am barely motivated to go back. It's sad and funny, because I WANT to like this game. I really really want to like it - but I barely played it at all this weekend. Watching House reruns was more exciting.
That only treats the symptom, not the problem.
I appreciate your well thought out and very well executed argument. Unfortunately for you, I came prepared:
Good day to you too sir!
Afforess
The White Wizard
brento1138
O' Mighty CivII Warrior
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2005
- Messages
- 104
Wow. Maybe one of the best reviews I've read of Civ 5 yet. Agree with absolutely every point. And to top that, the suggestions are brilliant.
Well done! You make reviews faaaar better than any of the more "official" reviews I've seen. I hope the developers consider the changes you've proposed!
Well done! You make reviews faaaar better than any of the more "official" reviews I've seen. I hope the developers consider the changes you've proposed!
Afforess
The White Wizard
Thanks.
I'm 99% sure that all review sites are paid for "official reviews" and only do actual reviews when the company is to poor to pay them. It explains why all blockbuster games always get above a 90%, no matter the actual quality. Read a few of the reviews, like from IGN. It's all buzz words and no actual gameplay. I don't even think the writers installed their press copies.
Great review. A few points of contention and inquiry:
- The AI in my game performs equally poorly on offense and defense. In one Earth map game I made a push on one civ through North Africa coast and through the Middle East. Instead of pushing their reserve forces to the front lines they just stayed back near their capital. So I fought them in groups of 2-3 instead of one large army. On offense, the AI made a great a push through one choke point but failed to follow it up offensively. If an attack works, don't stop!
- What you really needed to point out is that AI is even WORSE when it comes to navy. It has no idea WTF to do with the ocean. With Civ 5's chokepoints this puts them at a huge disadvantage.
- I can understand the issue you have with building speed being that you don't do anything on a turn except press 'next turn'. However, I like that a city doesn't have time to build everything on it's own. I found it lame that several cities in Civ 4 would max out on buildings and I ended up producing research/culture/wealth or units for the hell of it. No strategic thinking mid-late and late game. So I like the research to building pace.
- I have had no problems distinguishing terrain or units. Is this a common complaint? I play on max settings with DX11 so maybe that's why?
- I don't think there are OP wonders. They should be awesome. There are definitely UP wonders like the Eiffel Tower though (which could be easily tweaked). Would be nice to have seen another wonder per age though.
- I agree with all recommendations except that I'm not sure about 'barbarians should always give XP' and 'trebs shouldn't need iron, cannons should'. The only reason I'm not sure is for balance purposes. Barbarians can be easy to farm on certain maps with navies, especially because the AI can't do it. Trebs are a bigger jump from cats than cannons are from trebs. Making iron needed seems more important for trebs than cannons. There's a lot of realism not being a factor here and if it's best for gameplay then I would say leave as is. Do you feel there is a balance reason to make this change?
- Add a recommendation 'make puppet states build only things related to culture, happiness, growth, research, and gold'. Running up maintenance costs by them producing barracks and armories is idiotic.
OK. Those are my comments. I was planning on doing something similar but figured I'd tack my thoughts onto yours since you've already said many of the same things.
- The AI in my game performs equally poorly on offense and defense. In one Earth map game I made a push on one civ through North Africa coast and through the Middle East. Instead of pushing their reserve forces to the front lines they just stayed back near their capital. So I fought them in groups of 2-3 instead of one large army. On offense, the AI made a great a push through one choke point but failed to follow it up offensively. If an attack works, don't stop!
- What you really needed to point out is that AI is even WORSE when it comes to navy. It has no idea WTF to do with the ocean. With Civ 5's chokepoints this puts them at a huge disadvantage.
- I can understand the issue you have with building speed being that you don't do anything on a turn except press 'next turn'. However, I like that a city doesn't have time to build everything on it's own. I found it lame that several cities in Civ 4 would max out on buildings and I ended up producing research/culture/wealth or units for the hell of it. No strategic thinking mid-late and late game. So I like the research to building pace.
- I have had no problems distinguishing terrain or units. Is this a common complaint? I play on max settings with DX11 so maybe that's why?
- I don't think there are OP wonders. They should be awesome. There are definitely UP wonders like the Eiffel Tower though (which could be easily tweaked). Would be nice to have seen another wonder per age though.
- I agree with all recommendations except that I'm not sure about 'barbarians should always give XP' and 'trebs shouldn't need iron, cannons should'. The only reason I'm not sure is for balance purposes. Barbarians can be easy to farm on certain maps with navies, especially because the AI can't do it. Trebs are a bigger jump from cats than cannons are from trebs. Making iron needed seems more important for trebs than cannons. There's a lot of realism not being a factor here and if it's best for gameplay then I would say leave as is. Do you feel there is a balance reason to make this change?
- Add a recommendation 'make puppet states build only things related to culture, happiness, growth, research, and gold'. Running up maintenance costs by them producing barracks and armories is idiotic.
OK. Those are my comments. I was planning on doing something similar but figured I'd tack my thoughts onto yours since you've already said many of the same things.
Hydromancerx
C2C Modder
Thanks for the great review Afforess! 
Tomorrow, I was planning on writing up some "A Week Later: CiV Review" detailing my thoughts about the game. Instead, I'll just post here agreeing with most of what you said. Well said.
In particular, I love your idea of 'immigration' as a result of unhappiness - that's an idea that I wouldn't have considered and I think it would make an excellent addition/change to the game. Would unhappy citizens of one civ join another? If so, a leader would need the ability to close/open his country for immigration as the situation required.
I have a few points of my own to add, and since this thread seems genuinely thoughtful, I might as well stick them here.
First is Great People. While the 'tile improvement' idea is a cool one in theory, I'm not sure I like it in practice. It seems like it hurts as much as it helps - taking the Great Artist's 'Landmark' improvement as an example, I'd typically rather take 2 extra gold from a trading post or 2 extra hammers from a lumber mill than the +4 culture from a landmark - especially since gold and production can be easily boosted by easy-to-obtain buildings, while culture usually requires wonders. A Great Scientist's Academy is nice - +5 science and boostable by libraries, etc. - but it doesn't compare to using a few GS's to slingshot two ages forward for new policies/city-state benefits up to 50 turns in advance. Ditto the Great Engineer - the +3 production improvement pales in comparison to a rushed wonder, even if said wonders are unimaginative in this game (+3 production is only 1 more than a Steam Power Lumber Mill, anyway). So, while the tile improvements are a good idea, I just don't think they're typically worth it in most cases - Great People are almost always put to better use with their other abilities (Great Merchants are really the only exception).
I would like to mention the crashes that I've experienced. While they don't limit my enjoyment of the game as soon as I get started - I've yet to have a crash actually affect a game in progress - they're a pain in the ass when starting up. Interrupting the opening movie seems to cause the problem. I can avoid the issue by letting the movie play out, but that's a waste of time.
Also, the problems with the AI can't be mentioned enough. It's basically just bad in general - it has no idea how to make war, the pathfinding is bad, and automating anything is a horrible idea. Everybody seems to have a story about how they learned not to use worker AI. I turned automation on, founded a new city about 20 hexes away for iron and luxuries, and my entire workforce decided to take a cross-country trip that included a scenic stop right next to a barb camp that I hadn't gotten around to crushing yet. I don't expect the AI to do things the same way I'd do them, but I would appreciate it if it would act more intelligent than an autistic 6-year-old.
One thing you didn't mention I do love about the game is the effort they made to make every civ unique. Each has a playstyle that is more or less uniquely its own. The Aztecs stay at war with the world and try to kill everything that walks for culture points, the Iroquois have perhaps the highest production potential of any civ and make great builders, Egyptians want to hoard wonders, Persia wants to stay in chain Golden Ages to overrun the world, etc. I love this - I think it's what they've tried to do since Civ 3, and while I did like the traits from the last two games I think they finally got it right. Babylon was also a worthy addition in my opinion and went a long way toward convincing me to consider future DLC civs.
I'll leave it at that for now and probably post more thoughts tomorrow.
tl;dr:
Good post;
Great People need to be balanced;
Crashes are annoying;
AI and automation is even more annoying;
Uniqueness of each individual civilization is great.
I'm kind of in the same boat here as well. Hopefully the game will pick up some of its addictive allure as patches, mods, DLC and expansions are released.
In particular, I love your idea of 'immigration' as a result of unhappiness - that's an idea that I wouldn't have considered and I think it would make an excellent addition/change to the game. Would unhappy citizens of one civ join another? If so, a leader would need the ability to close/open his country for immigration as the situation required.
I have a few points of my own to add, and since this thread seems genuinely thoughtful, I might as well stick them here.
First is Great People. While the 'tile improvement' idea is a cool one in theory, I'm not sure I like it in practice. It seems like it hurts as much as it helps - taking the Great Artist's 'Landmark' improvement as an example, I'd typically rather take 2 extra gold from a trading post or 2 extra hammers from a lumber mill than the +4 culture from a landmark - especially since gold and production can be easily boosted by easy-to-obtain buildings, while culture usually requires wonders. A Great Scientist's Academy is nice - +5 science and boostable by libraries, etc. - but it doesn't compare to using a few GS's to slingshot two ages forward for new policies/city-state benefits up to 50 turns in advance. Ditto the Great Engineer - the +3 production improvement pales in comparison to a rushed wonder, even if said wonders are unimaginative in this game (+3 production is only 1 more than a Steam Power Lumber Mill, anyway). So, while the tile improvements are a good idea, I just don't think they're typically worth it in most cases - Great People are almost always put to better use with their other abilities (Great Merchants are really the only exception).
I would like to mention the crashes that I've experienced. While they don't limit my enjoyment of the game as soon as I get started - I've yet to have a crash actually affect a game in progress - they're a pain in the ass when starting up. Interrupting the opening movie seems to cause the problem. I can avoid the issue by letting the movie play out, but that's a waste of time.
Also, the problems with the AI can't be mentioned enough. It's basically just bad in general - it has no idea how to make war, the pathfinding is bad, and automating anything is a horrible idea. Everybody seems to have a story about how they learned not to use worker AI. I turned automation on, founded a new city about 20 hexes away for iron and luxuries, and my entire workforce decided to take a cross-country trip that included a scenic stop right next to a barb camp that I hadn't gotten around to crushing yet. I don't expect the AI to do things the same way I'd do them, but I would appreciate it if it would act more intelligent than an autistic 6-year-old.
One thing you didn't mention I do love about the game is the effort they made to make every civ unique. Each has a playstyle that is more or less uniquely its own. The Aztecs stay at war with the world and try to kill everything that walks for culture points, the Iroquois have perhaps the highest production potential of any civ and make great builders, Egyptians want to hoard wonders, Persia wants to stay in chain Golden Ages to overrun the world, etc. I love this - I think it's what they've tried to do since Civ 3, and while I did like the traits from the last two games I think they finally got it right. Babylon was also a worthy addition in my opinion and went a long way toward convincing me to consider future DLC civs.
I'll leave it at that for now and probably post more thoughts tomorrow.
tl;dr:
Good post;
Great People need to be balanced;
Crashes are annoying;
AI and automation is even more annoying;
Uniqueness of each individual civilization is great.
Afforess said:
I'm kind of in the same boat here as well. Hopefully the game will pick up some of its addictive allure as patches, mods, DLC and expansions are released.
Afforess
The White Wizard
I must have been lucky then, but the AI seemed to do fairly decent (not good, but decent) on offense. But I agree, they totally suck with defense.
I don't even bother with navies... feels like cheating.
There has to be a happy medium though. You've just described two ends of the spectrum. In the middle exists perfection.
My 1 year old lappy can only play on Medium. Textures lag behind loading (but I figure that's my problem), but units and terrain (and unit nationality) aren't easily visible on the normal view.
*Cough* Statue of Liberty *Cough* Forbidden Palace *Cough*.
Capping at 30 xp is ridiculous. Basically, the game is saying that my units will never ever learn anything from combat with barbarians, even if it's barbarians who are just as strong as me, or stronger. I hated this in Civ4 too - so much so that I developed a dynamic XP gain system for my Civ4 mod, where units gain XP between 0.25 and 6XP a battle, depending on the odds they had, and the outcome of the battle.
Gameplay > Realism only works when it's not completely ridiculous. The trebuchet in Civ5 looks like it's made of wood, is animated like it's made of wood, and fights like it's made of wood. So why does it require Iron? Likewise, the Cannon looks like it's made of Iron, is animated like it uses iron cannonballs, and fights like a beast made of Iron. So what is it really made of? A super secret wood alloy?
Oh yeah, I totally forgot to complain about those. Well, I suspect most people here wouldn't appreciate me revising my score LOWER though...
Afforess
The White Wizard
Thanks for the review of my review!
Will end up being a mod, I'll make it, just wait.
I agree completely. I never have used a GP to build an improvement. You also forgot that future resources might be discovered under the improvement, causing it to be destroyed in the future.
I've gotten 5-6 crashes myself, but didn't feel like bashing them for that. I hope it will be ironed out soon.
Agree.
Good point - I definitely didn't have any issues thinking the Civ's were too similar. I'll add this to my review if I feel the need to pad it from future down-revisions.
Becephalus
King
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2005
- Messages
- 725
Play on smaller maps with fewer civs, and/or in strategic view.
I have a horrible PC and I have almost no turn wait time on small with 12 civs 24CS. Even late game.
great review, I also agree with most of it and I have to say that it feels like fireaxis built a fantastic engine for a civ game and forgot to do the AI polishing and mechanic balancing to make it a great game. I for one am not worried I think the modding community will whip into shape in no time.
Also we're all comparing civ v to civ IV + BtS + warlords + mods, its not a fair comparison yet.
Also we're all comparing civ v to civ IV + BtS + warlords + mods, its not a fair comparison yet.
There has to be a happy medium though. You've just described two ends of the spectrum. In the middle exists perfection.
Yeah, fair enough.
I haven't really tried a GP strat but SoL seems geared for it? Not much more of a comment since I haven't used it. Forbidden Palace is good for large empires. With a 12 city empire that's 12 happiness for 600 production. Or 24 happiness if you are Gandhi
I guess I somewhat contradict myself by defending these since I said they should all awesome. But oh well! They seem to have situational merits.
Capping at 30 xp is ridiculous. Basically, the game is saying that my units will never ever learn anything from combat with barbarians, even if it's barbarians who are just as strong as me, or stronger. I hated this in Civ4 too - so much so that I developed a dynamic XP gain system for my Civ4 mod, where units gain XP between 0.25 and 6XP a battle, depending on the odds they had, and the outcome of the battle.
Gameplay > Realism only works when it's not completely ridiculous. The trebuchet in Civ5 looks like it's made of wood, is animated like it's made of wood, and fights like it's made of wood. So why does it require Iron? Likewise, the Cannon looks like it's made of Iron, is animated like it uses iron cannonballs, and fights like a beast made of Iron. So what is it really made of? A super secret wood alloy?
30 XP is too low. I'd be OK with lessened gains after that but the issue is still you get XP at no risk. I suppose it's no risk vs. AI right now too but of course that will be fixed!
Trebuchets were made of iron and painted wood colored so the enemies didn't think they were as advanced as they really were. Cannons are just made from leftover frigate cannons which don't need iron either.
Becephalus
King
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2005
- Messages
- 725
Excellent review, excellent ideas. But remember, programming a good AI is crazy hard.
Civ 4's AI was also atrocious.
This can't be hard. Before the unit embarks check for enemy navies within visual range. If yes, don't embark.
os79
Deity
Great review.
I barely play my new civ5 game now because of UI issues related to my low vision, but I already have few qualms from observations. So I'm glad you took time to give a good review, THEN give out a good list of suggestions. That should smooth down feathers and move discussions/mods/patches/expansions forward. Good politics.
I barely play my new civ5 game now because of UI issues related to my low vision, but I already have few qualms from observations. So I'm glad you took time to give a good review, THEN give out a good list of suggestions. That should smooth down feathers and move discussions/mods/patches/expansions forward. Good politics
.
Dale
Mohawk Games Developer
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2002
- Messages
- 7,601
Completely subjective of course. I've been playing for over a year and I still have fun with the game.
I had this problem on my first game, but after a few hours of game is now very easy to recognize each unit without any particular effort (also they have a unique icon..), so I don't agree with this point. Except for this it's an excellent review, bravo
dannythefool
King
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 657
I've played for 34 hours since EU release + 6 hours demo, way more than five games as I prefer playing on small-ish maps so I can try more things.
I don't have TV though so I can't watch House reruns.
Like I said, I agree with your points, this is just the best I can do to alleviate the pain. Some people are posting that having to micro their workers spoils their fun, so I try to point out that they can change the setting if they want to automate them.
Similar threads
