Civilization 5 Rants Thread

LOL. Civilifailzion.

On a more serious note though, OP is absolutely correct, I've thought about the same thing. How come the AI never comes to you to offer you a deal where it swaps its surplus ivory for your extra cotton?

... but don't worry, all these issues will be fixed when the game is finally finished in 2014.

lol yeah in 3 years!
 
i don't like the new patch that much. it hampers the cultural win greatly (look at the changes for hermitage, broadcast towers and sixtine chapel...) plus why did they make changes for the technologies but computers are still not required for satellites is beyond me. they didn't even boosted the landmark. finally castles are almost useless now with 4 def.
 
When will the devs fix nukes!!??

I like to play into the late eras and I'm getting a bit tired of the AIs turning the world into a glowing mess of nuclear fallout.

I'm also getting tired of seeing my carefully nurtured, highly promoted super-units being vaporised in a single turn, when it took me 500-1000 (on marathon) turns to make them what they are.

I'm pretty annoyed that my city full of 15 jet fighters, all promoted to interception II cannot shoot down a single atomic bomber and instead just get vaporised. I've never seen an atomic bomber get intercepted, ever.

50% interception chance indeed... Perhaps the devs made a mistake and put the decimal in the wrong place, perhaps it's supposed to be 0.5, but ended up being 0.005??? 0.5% chance of interception would seem about right in my games. Well, 0% would be more accurate actually.

Nuclear missiles need a defense. I like how they can completely obliterate a city, that's nice. But I want to have a counter to them. No, I do not want the counter to be "win before the AI gets them" or "nuke the AI first and destroy his nukes" or "prevent the AI getting uranium" or "edit the XML files to make the Manhattan Project unfeasibly expensive" or any other such work-around.

Horses get spears. Knights get Pikes. Tanks get Anti-tanks. Modern armor gets choppers. Bombers get fighters. Nuclear bombers are supposed to get fighters and jet fighters. Missiles get nothing. This is ridiculous, absurd and illogical.

If the devs want, put an SDI-eske national wonder in the future era at the end of the tech tree, that would been good enough and still make nukes a real threat, but for hecks sake put something in there to counter nuclear missiles. What, GDRs are realistic/a good idea/cool, but a defense against nukes is terrible?

Nuclear bombers not being able to be shot down by fighters/jet fighters and no defense at all, at any time in the game, for nuclear missiles, is ruining the late game. Rather like the military adviser in Civ2, who used to yell about building city walls, I want to shout out "FIX NUKE DEFENSE!!!!"

OK. Rant over.
 
Nukes are super lame in the current iteration.

I can probably count on both hands the time I have used Nukes in the Civilization series. I just don't like them.

Now, as you said, it's either win early or "Nuke or be nuked".

Doesn't sound like fun at all.
 
I hated Catherine denouncing me in the first few turns, and then later being friendly!, What's up with that! Because I was Denmark?
 
i think the game should end in 2075. i almost always discover all techs before the end of the game but they don't pay off. i don't have time to build and use what they give!
 
Blizzard ---> Diablo Series Runic Games ---> Torchlight Series

Firaxis ---> Civilization Series ??? ----> ???

History always repeats itself. That we can be sure of.
Where there is a need, the need will be filled by people with passion and ambition.
Where is that company that is working to fill that void?

I daresay, companies shouldn't be afraid to take on Civilization anymore.
Just like Runic Games has the courage and passion to take on the elephant in the room as far as "hack and slash" RPG action genre goes.
By Firaxis going mainstream and abandoning the middle market there is a good opportunity for an ambitious, small company to jump right in and fill a need.
You don't have to have AAA graphics. (not that Civilization 5's are anyway)
Just solid gameplay and replayability.

The last really good Civilization type game outside of cIV was Rise of Nations.

We are due...
 
Been said in here before, but;
Civ V feels like Civ Lite with alot of unresolved issues.
As I see it (in my usual pessimistic view), the only hope for a new GOOD Civ game is if Sid comes back and takes control.

Terje
 
Been said in here before, but;
Civ V feels like Civ Lite with alot of unresolved issues.
As I see it (in my usual pessimistic view), the only hope for a new GOOD Civ game is if Sid comes back and takes control.

Terje

I am not even sure of that anymore. I think Sid wants Civ lite. He's sold out and gone mass market as has the game series. Sid loves Civ Rev and Civ World. Pity. :sad:

We really need Soren Johnson or Brian Reynolds back but they are off making a fortune now, making mind numbing facebook games and other casual fluff products.

Since they are unavailable, we need another visionary.
 
Well, look at the constant 'rebalancing' Firaxis have had to do and the gazillion different nerfs which affect the player ... they haven't been able to make an AI that can take advantage of half the new features implemented in Civ5 which is why they are nerfing every new strategy or gameplay style come up with by players in each patch.

They simply don't want or can't fix the AI, so the 'improvements' consist of nothing more than nerfing everything in sight and constantly confusing the player by 'rebalancing' and tweaking all the variables.

Then, once players have got used to the new tweaks, they bring out a new patch with even more new tweaks ... leaving the same old crappy AI as before.
 
Yes, agreed, the endgame nukefest is not fun. It should be game design 101 to not introduce a game element without a counter.

For me it is more evidence that the devs gave up on making the game work once they saw how far up the creek without a paddle the decision to base design on a wargame mechanic (1upt) had left them.

"What the heck - unbridled nukes will resolve the carpet of doom problem!"

When will the devs fix nukes!!??

I like to play into the late eras and I'm getting a bit tired of the AIs turning the world into a glowing mess of nuclear fallout.

I'm also getting tired of seeing my carefully nurtured, highly promoted super-units being vaporised in a single turn, when it took me 500-1000 (on marathon) turns to make them what they are.

I'm pretty annoyed that my city full of 15 jet fighters, all promoted to interception II cannot shoot down a single atomic bomber and instead just get vaporised. I've never seen an atomic bomber get intercepted, ever.

50% interception chance indeed... Perhaps the devs made a mistake and put the decimal in the wrong place, perhaps it's supposed to be 0.5, but ended up being 0.005??? 0.5% chance of interception would seem about right in my games. Well, 0% would be more accurate actually.

Nuclear missiles need a defense. I like how they can completely obliterate a city, that's nice. But I want to have a counter to them. No, I do not want the counter to be "win before the AI gets them" or "nuke the AI first and destroy his nukes" or "prevent the AI getting uranium" or "edit the XML files to make the Manhattan Project unfeasibly expensive" or any other such work-around.

Horses get spears. Knights get Pikes. Tanks get Anti-tanks. Modern armor gets choppers. Bombers get fighters. Nuclear bombers are supposed to get fighters and jet fighters. Missiles get nothing. This is ridiculous, absurd and illogical.

If the devs want, put an SDI-eske national wonder in the future era at the end of the tech tree, that would been good enough and still make nukes a real threat, but for hecks sake put something in there to counter nuclear missiles. What, GDRs are realistic/a good idea/cool, but a defense against nukes is terrible?

Nuclear bombers not being able to be shot down by fighters/jet fighters and no defense at all, at any time in the game, for nuclear missiles, is ruining the late game. Rather like the military adviser in Civ2, who used to yell about building city walls, I want to shout out "FIX NUKE DEFENSE!!!!"

OK. Rant over.
 
Indeed. You can't have a game where the rules change every 2-3 months.
Also, I'm starting to begin to see this behaviour in real life situations and that's a very dangerous path.

With the problems CivWorld has, my expectations to have better gameplay in civ5 has dropped close to zero.
CivWorld has different gameplay problems and I'm curious how Sid + crew will solve them.
At the moment I'm more competing with my team members than with others civs.
 
The game was released far, far, far too early. Greedy 2K Games had to get their payday in order to satisfy their shareholders.

We can see that the modern era is badly done and looks unfinished. Likely there was to be a much more fleshed out future era (we only get to see the GDR) but Millstone 2K Games pulled the plug. Perhaps there was an effective counter to Nukes planned but was not implemented due to lack of time or resources.

In any case, very poor show Firaxis and 2K Games.
 
The second part of the tech tree in CivWorld is far worse then the modern era in civ5.
Meaningless techs + wonders and units (bombers, rocket launchers, etc.) which will never see a battle.
The second tech tree part is only interesting because enough techs give a science era victory to end the game faster.

I don't hope CivWorld has a deadline because of the shareholders and certainly not this year.
CivWorld is competing with people's real time (maybe real money too) and in its current state it will loose that fight.
 
Since they are unavailable, we need another visionary.

I don't even think you necessarily need that. Just someone who's familiar with Civs 3-5, is aware of what works and what doesn't, and embraces a philosophy of "complex yet accessible."
 
I don't even think you necessarily need that. Just someone who's familiar with Civs 3-5, is aware of what works and what doesn't, and embraces a philosophy of "complex yet accessible."

Well, what I meant was the past designers are not available so they'd have to get someone else. By visionary, I meant someone that understands what fans of the historical turn based genre really want. Complex yet accessible, as you said, is a good start.
 
The second part of the tech tree in CivWorld is far worse then the modern era in civ5.
Meaningless techs + wonders and units (bombers, rocket launchers, etc.) which will never see a battle.
The second tech tree part is only interesting because enough techs give a science era victory to end the game faster.

I don't hope CivWorld has a deadline because of the shareholders and certainly not this year.
CivWorld is competing with people's real time (maybe real money too) and in its current state it will loose that fight.

Personally, I can't see the connection between filling in the type of puzzle games that the average 5-year old has outgrown to get culture, or solving fairly simple labyrinths to gain science have to do with Civilization at all. You'd have to be really bored to want to spend a lot of time at CivWorld. Or should I say you will be really bored if you spend any time at CivWorld. Its not Civ for civ fans, its Civ for people who spend their whole day on Facebook anyhow.
 
You'd have to be really bored to want to spend a lot of time at CivWorld. Or should I say you will be really bored if you spend any time at CivWorld.

See, that's the genius of it: a loop that keeps people playing forever, without the need for outdated motivation methods like actual enjoyment.
 
I see a new thread talking about Stonehenge still appearing in the water.
Naturally the Op is getting chastised for pointing out that it has almost been a year and it still hasn't been fixed. :crazyeye:

Did they fire/lay off all their artists/programmers or are they too busy churning out DLC? :rolleyes:
 
Top Bottom