Advertisement
Civilization Fanatics' Center

Go Back   Civilization Fanatics' Forums > CIVILIZATION V > Civ5 - General Discussions

Notices

Civ5 - General Discussions Forum for general Civ5 discussions.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old Feb 28, 2010, 05:29 AM   #1
King Lewie XIV
Chieftain
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 14
Will Civ V bog down less at end

I was wondering,

Does anyone know if Civ V will address the problem of the game bogging down at the end game. I'm sure most know what I am talking about. When the turns start going a year at a time later in game and you have a lotta units the game starts to drag a bit.
King Lewie XIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2010, 05:42 AM   #2
Mesodius
Warmonger
 
Mesodius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Lewie XIV View Post
I was wondering,

Does anyone know if Civ V will address the problem of the game bogging down at the end game. I'm sure most know what I am talking about. When the turns start going a year at a time later in game and you have a lotta units the game starts to drag a bit.
Assuming you have a large empire with tons of units to move, I don't see how you could shorten the time it takes to micromanage everything, especially when you go to war.

What I hope is that the game graphics don't hog so many resources that you have to wait several minutes for the AI to take their turn unless you just bought your computer 10 minutes ago.

EDIT: One way to lessen the bog down at the end of the game would be to put a unit cap for each Civ based on available resources, manpower, or some other factor.

Last edited by Mesodius; Feb 28, 2010 at 06:05 AM.
Mesodius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 09:20 AM   #3
fuerza
Chieftain
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 47
This is a good question KL XIV. As you may recall, tons and TONS of people complained about random game crashes as you progressed through the gameplay in Civ IV (especially late game play when you had the map full of stuff and many civs battling it out), and as you also may recall 2k games did absolutely nothing about it. Many times, late-game saves became corrupted or did not save properly and the only answer that you got from the publisher was that is was YOUR system that caused the problems. If Civ V doesn't address these issues, it will lose positive reviews early on.
fuerza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 09:41 AM   #4
GoodSarmatian
Colonist
 
GoodSarmatian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany, The Horned City
Posts: 6,018
The one unit per hex rule seems to indicate that there'll be far less units running around than in former games and tactics will be more important than sheer numbers, so I'm hopeful (as long as it's better programmed than Civ4).
__________________
How much joy does this new planet hold, when all I can think of is everything I've left behind ?
GoodSarmatian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 10:15 AM   #5
r_rolo1
King of myself
 
r_rolo1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 13,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodSarmatian View Post
The one unit per hex rule seems to indicate that there'll be far less units running around than in former games and tactics will be more important than sheer numbers, so I'm hopeful (as long as it's better programmed than Civ4).
I don't think I ever seen a Civ IV game where there were more units than tiles in the map, so that is not a valid argument IMHO
__________________
" I'm the Lord of the lords, not the servant of the serfs" - D. Joćo II of Portugal

My Civ lema: Qui vincit non est victor nisi victus fatetur

Lonely Hearts Club Bullpen / You , Yourself and your shadow : Some lessons on isolated starts
r_rolo1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 10:33 AM   #6
GoodSarmatian
Colonist
 
GoodSarmatian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany, The Horned City
Posts: 6,018
And I am sure you will never see a game of Civ 5 with one unit on every tile, but it's still -together with the limit to certain units per available resources- an indication that it is being designed with smaller armies in mind.
__________________
How much joy does this new planet hold, when all I can think of is everything I've left behind ?
GoodSarmatian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 10:43 AM   #7
r_rolo1
King of myself
 
r_rolo1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 13,818
That would be true if you could ensure the map sizes are equivalent. And to be honest my gut feeling is that the maps in Civ V will be substantially larger than the civ IV ones with the equivalent tag.

And about putting a cap on resource to certain units... well, that limit those units, surely. But what about the others?

I also don't expect to see a Civ V game with units in every tile, but my point was not that either I was just pointing that a cap like that will not bring down the unit numbers by their own compared with the Civ IV system...
__________________
" I'm the Lord of the lords, not the servant of the serfs" - D. Joćo II of Portugal

My Civ lema: Qui vincit non est victor nisi victus fatetur

Lonely Hearts Club Bullpen / You , Yourself and your shadow : Some lessons on isolated starts
r_rolo1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 12:22 PM   #8
Hail
Satan's minion
 
Hail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mother Russia
Posts: 459
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Lewie XIV View Post
I was wondering,

Does anyone know if Civ V will address the problem of the game bogging down at the end game. I'm sure most know what I am talking about. When the turns start going a year at a time later in game and you have a lotta units the game starts to drag a bit.
i'm skeptical about firaxis's will to cope with the late game's boredom and bogging down. it will most likely be the same old sh*t imho with the game decided by industrial or late medieval and with no insensitive what so ever to play the game to the end.

Quote:
Originally Posted by r_rolo1 View Post
That would be true if you could ensure the map sizes are equivalent. And to be honest my gut feeling is that the maps in Civ V will be substantially larger than the civ IV ones with the equivalent tag.
strange gut feeling: larger map -> more cities -> more units. well, that is if any resourceless units types are present, but they should be in, since their absence will tilt the balance toward those with more resources. and a larger map implies more resources. let us not forget, that firaxis wants to move away from unit hoards, so my bet is that maps in civ5 will be no more than maps in civ4
__________________
what is bogging civ4 games down in modern times? trade routes' assignment, trade group calculations, and python calls
what is bogging civ5 games down in modern times? AI workers
Gott ist tot

Last edited by Hail; Mar 01, 2010 at 12:28 PM.
Hail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 12:41 PM   #9
mattigus
Warlord
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by r_rolo1 View Post
I don't think I ever seen a Civ IV game where there were more units than tiles in the map, so that is not a valid argument IMHO
With SoD, you would see a single stack of 20 bazillion units being thrown into a city, with each city holding a huge garrison if needed. No one here knows how the new system will work, but only one unit can defend a city, and it seems that only something like 5 units are needed to take a defended city (2 axemen, 2 archers, and a catapult, for example). Logistically, you cant send much more than that without running into issues with moving a huge army like that.
mattigus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 01:08 PM   #10
CornPlanter
Emperor
 
CornPlanter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lithuania
Posts: 1,014
Quote:
but only one unit can defend a city
Let me kindly point out that it's only an almost-baseless speculation

Who knows, maybe every hex around the city center counts as cities hex too - just one example.
__________________
The night is dark and full of Terrans
CornPlanter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 02:10 PM   #11
r_rolo1
King of myself
 
r_rolo1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 13,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattigus View Post
With SoD, you would see a single stack of 20 bazillion units being thrown into a city, with each city holding a huge garrison if needed. No one here knows how the new system will work, but only one unit can defend a city, and it seems that only something like 5 units are needed to take a defended city (2 axemen, 2 archers, and a catapult, for example). Logistically, you cant send much more than that without running into issues with moving a huge army like that.
You have a point, but that has zero to do with what I was arguing. Ok, you may have less incentive to make a boatload of units , but my point was about max units in game: for example, if you had made a cap for the number of land units equal to the number of tiles in the map in Civ IV , I bet that 99% of the games would have the exact same number of units they have today . So making a hard cap to the number of units in the map via capping the number of units per tile alone will not reduce the number of units compared with Civ IV, that was the point of the person I was responding to.

@Hail

The only fool-proof way of reducing the number of units in a game is make them hard to get ... You can have huge maps with little units if you make them hard to get ( say , the equivalent of getting a rifleman in ancient ages cities in Civ IV ) or a lot of units in small maps if you make them ridiculously cheap, so any reasoning based on the ( desired or not ) number of units is atleast shaky. My gut feeling about the size of the maps comes from other considerations ( not all from gameplay, though : one of the biggest and more consistent pet peeves about Civ IV was the small size of the maps compared with previous versions of the game ... )
__________________
" I'm the Lord of the lords, not the servant of the serfs" - D. Joćo II of Portugal

My Civ lema: Qui vincit non est victor nisi victus fatetur

Lonely Hearts Club Bullpen / You , Yourself and your shadow : Some lessons on isolated starts
r_rolo1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 03:03 PM   #12
Hail
Satan's minion
 
Hail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mother Russia
Posts: 459
Quote:
Originally Posted by r_rolo1 View Post
The only fool-proof way of reducing the number of units in a game is make them hard to get ... You can have huge maps with little units if you make them hard to get ( say , the equivalent of getting a rifleman in ancient ages cities in Civ IV ) or a lot of units in small maps if you make them ridiculously cheap, so any reasoning based on the ( desired or not ) number of units is atleast shaky.
all right lets start from here:
1) assuming in any unit rushing mechanic the rush "cost" is proportional to the unit's cost, the number of units is inversely proportional to their cost
2) assuming constant resource density, a larger map will have more resources, than a smaller map
3) a larger map has more tiles, than a smaller map
do we agree so far? i sure hope so!
so let's more on:

since in civ5 units will be capped by their required resource(s), from 2) we get that on a larger map, the resource cap will be higher, meaning that generally a larger map will have more units.
point 3) means that a larger map will generally have more cities. assuming the existence of resourceless unit types, this also means more units.

so what?
from firaxis's point of view, more units is undesirable

Quote:
Originally Posted by r_rolo1 View Post
My gut feeling about the size of the maps comes from other considerations ( not all from gameplay, though : one of the biggest and more consistent pet peeves about Civ IV was the small size of the maps compared with previous versions of the game ... )
shrinking map sizes in civ4 probably had a lot to do with the 3d stuff. the 3d stuff is in civ5 also, so i would not expect a major increase in map sizes.

and second! does firaxis actually expect people to maintain 20-30 tile fronts and love it!?
__________________
what is bogging civ4 games down in modern times? trade routes' assignment, trade group calculations, and python calls
what is bogging civ5 games down in modern times? AI workers
Gott ist tot

Last edited by Hail; Mar 02, 2010 at 04:29 AM.
Hail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 03:42 PM   #13
r_rolo1
King of myself
 
r_rolo1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 13,818
Your point 1) ( in spite of not being wrong ) assumes no method of rushing a unit, especially one that treats units in a far better light than buildings ( but not only ) , like the Civ IV drafting, to be fully appliable. as every civ game so far from quite a while had some kind of rushing feature, that is a little shaky ground....

.Your point 2), as others pointed to me in other discussions ( and not in my help ), is shaky at best

Your point 3) is true, but not necessarily relevant ( it would be only revelant if you can ensure the same medium output of the land that Civ IV has and having more cities might bring some strings attached ( Civ IV already has some ) and city states might have been putted in the game with the sole reason of blocking the land out of the "real" civs while giving a reason to not raze them on sight )

About the map size.... not so sure on the 3D being the sole reason to make maps smaller ( or even being a reason at all ... IMHO the real reason for the map sizes as they are has much more to do with the strain produced by the number of units in play compared with a decent computer of the times Civ Iv got out than anything else ). Even then, as other posters pointed elsewhere, Civ IV graphical engine was horribly unoptimized in stock Civ IV and I would not be surprised if Civ V bringed a far less intensive graphical aproach than Civ IV... anyway, Firaxis has a good reason to push the maps to the highest possible size: try to catch the people that shunned Civ IV because of that, and that aren't as few as that... just peek at the Civ III forums to grab a few if you want

Well about firaxis thinking that moving 20-30 units line is fun or not .... well, they definitely thinked that a SoD aproach to the game was unfun and tried to get rid of it in Civ IV ( if you have Civ IV just dig the manual out and read what Soren Jonhson said there ) and we all know how did that got out
__________________
" I'm the Lord of the lords, not the servant of the serfs" - D. Joćo II of Portugal

My Civ lema: Qui vincit non est victor nisi victus fatetur

Lonely Hearts Club Bullpen / You , Yourself and your shadow : Some lessons on isolated starts
r_rolo1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 05:00 PM   #14
bonafide11
Worker
 
bonafide11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: STL
Posts: 2,889
I strongly feel that the late game will be less bogged down, and I believe that is why Firaxis is going the one-unit-per-hex route. Without massive SoDs, there will be much smaller armies actually engaged in battles, and this will significantly quicken the late game up. The enormous SoDs really slowed the late game down for me, and I think this is why Firaxis is trying to move away from them.
__________________
The only constant is change.
bonafide11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 05:08 PM   #15
Gamemaster77
PC > Mac
 
Gamemaster77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: In a place.
Posts: 1,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuerza View Post
This is a good question KL XIV. As you may recall, tons and TONS of people complained about random game crashes as you progressed through the gameplay in Civ IV (especially late game play when you had the map full of stuff and many civs battling it out), and as you also may recall 2k games did absolutely nothing about it. Many times, late-game saves became corrupted or did not save properly and the only answer that you got from the publisher was that is was YOUR system that caused the problems. If Civ V doesn't address these issues, it will lose positive reviews early on.
Thats like someone selling you a condo but then you find out you cant get to it because it is at the north pole in the middle of the water. Then they tell you its YOUR COUNTRY that prevents you from getting there because they don't have any air or sea ports in that location.
__________________
A Civilization 5 Nuking Montage...set to the 1812 Overture! : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoEyRQn2nf8

Life is not a journey to the grave with intentions of arriving safely in a pretty well-preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out and loudly proclaiming ... WOW! What a ride!" - Unknown
Gamemaster77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 06:19 PM   #16
chongli
Prince
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 310
One thing nobody has mentioned yet is the new victory condition that allows you to win simply by capturing all opposing capital cities. This alone should significantly speed up the endgame should you be able to establish a large enough lead that you can quickly dominate these cities.
chongli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 07:03 PM   #17
bonafide11
Worker
 
bonafide11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: STL
Posts: 2,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by chongli View Post
One thing nobody has mentioned yet is the new victory condition that allows you to win simply by capturing all opposing capital cities. This alone should significantly speed up the endgame should you be able to establish a large enough lead that you can quickly dominate these cities.
Where did you see this? I have not read or heard anything about the victory conditions. This condition was in Civ Revolution, but I have not seen it mentioned at all yet for Civ V.
__________________
The only constant is change.
bonafide11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 07:15 PM   #18
chongli
Prince
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonafide11 View Post
Where did you see this? I have not read or heard anything about the victory conditions. This condition was in Civ Revolution, but I have not seen it mentioned at all yet for Civ V.
From this thread.

Who knows if it is really true, it's the same "Danish magazine" we're all basing our facts on.
chongli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 07:15 PM   #19
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
 
Aussie_Lurker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 6,765
Well if we're just talking about the *inevitability* of the Industrial/Modern Era, then one step forward might be to alter the way victory is determined. A gradual points accrual system-across all areas (culture, war, technology, economics), similar to what Rhye has, would make the end game a lot less obvious-especially if we included the Civ-specific goals of RFC!
Another idea from Rhye, which would help alleviate both end-game boredom & micromanagement is the idea of stability. If extremely large empires can potentially break up due to poor management, then suddenly bigger doesn't always mean better (Maintenance went a long way to curing it, but stability would really put the final nail into the "Bigger=Better" coffin!)

Aussie.
__________________
Don't like how religions are currently founded in Civ4? Feel like religion is nothing but an early tech race, with no other strategy involved? Then try my True Prophets Mod v0.7 for BtS. If you want to discuss this mod, then please check out This Link Also, feel free to try my CivicInfosPlus mod component for BtS & keep an eye out for fully re-worked Civics based on this Mod Component!
Aussie_Lurker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 08:01 PM   #20
chongli
Prince
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussie_Lurker View Post
Well if we're just talking about the *inevitability* of the Industrial/Modern Era, then one step forward might be to alter the way victory is determined. A gradual points accrual system-across all areas (culture, war, technology, economics), similar to what Rhye has, would make the end game a lot less obvious-especially if we included the Civ-specific goals of RFC!
Another idea from Rhye, which would help alleviate both end-game boredom & micromanagement is the idea of stability. If extremely large empires can potentially break up due to poor management, then suddenly bigger doesn't always mean better (Maintenance went a long way to curing it, but stability would really put the final nail into the "Bigger=Better" coffin!)

Aussie.
Curing it? I would personally attribute maintenance to be one of the main causes of "bogging down" during the mop-up phase. Civ4 featured a negative feedback cycle that progressively crippled your economy the bigger you got, slowing the game to a crawl.

Couple this with your enemies retreating and digging in as you advance, culminating in a mega SoD in their last remaining city that is nearly impossible to bring down in a reasonable amount of time.
chongli is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Go Back Civilization Fanatics' Forums > CIVILIZATION V > Civ5 - General Discussions > Will Civ V bog down less at end

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Advertisement

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This site is copyright © Civilization Fanatics' Center.
Support CFC: Amazon.com | Amazon UK | Amazon DE | Amazon CA | Amazon FR