Australian Gamer Preview

Hadn't seen this posted anywhere, so here is the preview by AJ over at Australian Gamer. Some reassurances for those with doubts:

For those players who are frightened that Civ 5 is the sequel to Civ Revolution, have no fear. The game is now very much back in the realms of Civ 4. Probably the only thing that seems to have been kept from Civ Rev is a much more appealing interface. The UI is far more vibrant and functional, yet still manages to squeeze in all the information you could need to know about your research, culture, gold and other resources.

Click to expand...

Also, a comment the author made in the comments below the article, relating to the playability of small empires:

I tried out this sort of scenario last night.

I started of with 2 cities only and later added a third. What becomes rapidly apparent is that the effect of additional cities on cultural advances is quite dramatic. I think each additional city adds 30% to the cost of the next "upgrade". As a small nation of only 2 cities, I could quite quickly take advantage of many of the cultural bonuses. If you're playing culturally, it helps to get City-States onside, as they can act like another 5 or 6 cities if they are your allies.

Click to expand...

And, Firaxis continues to update the press preview build:

UPDATE: After completing this preview, our press version of Civ V was updated on Steam... coincidentally the same day that I bought a new video card. I don't know whether it is just the new card, or whether the update helped, but the game performs so much better. In addition, the interface has become more refined, and a lot of the elements of the game that were missing or slightly broken have been repaired. I haven't had time to go through it that much, but the game is substantially more polished than what my preview is based on. So add another 1.5 points to my imaginary score.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that.

In the article it says that city states can help you with research. I wonder if this means you can have research pacts with them or if they just give you a certain amount of science a turn. Or perhaps share a tech from their separate tech tree. Intriguing possibilities...

It seems somewhat reassuring that he thinks the game will still be complex with different play styles being viable.

Thanks Thyrwyn. Especially the part about small empires is the kind of thing I want to hear about. As long as Firaxis can make every victory option viable and also make large vs. small Empires work I don't care about what features exactly are in or out. It will be a very entertaining Civ game indeed!

Thanks for the post. For us peacemongers/builders it did feel a bit reassuring.

I can't wait to play my first game with an Indian 3-city empire, aiming for cultural victory ! Thanks for this Thyrwyn

Agreed: I was definitely pleased to hear that "the effect of additional cities on cultural advances is quite dramatic. I think each additional city adds 30% to the cost of the next "upgrade". " It was nice to get even a rough estimate of the affects of more cities, as well as an indication that smaller empires may be more viable than in previous editions.

Thormodr said:

Thanks for that.

In the article it says that city states can help you with research. I wonder if this means you can have research pacts with them or if they just give you a certain amount of science a turn. Or perhaps share a tech from their separate tech tree. Intriguing possibilities...

It seems somewhat reassuring that he thinks the game will still be complex with different play styles being viable.

Click to expand...

I think that is just slightly sloppy writing and he means he effect that city states can provide you with additional culture, which helps with the research of social policies. Most articles have been so sloppy and ridden with mistakes that you shouldn't take anything in the text for granted.

Example from this very article: "There are 10 culture trees each with around 5 or 6 policies". Nope, they always have 5 policies, not more, not less.

The guy buys a new graphics card... and then is surprised that the game runs more smoothly?

Is the game journalism community entirely peopled with morons?

hmmmm

"When you consider that you can now lose the game by losing your capital, war is no longer always the easy option."

Click to expand...

AriochIV said:

The guy buys a new graphics card... and then is surprised that the game runs more smoothly?

Is the game journalism community entirely peopled with morons?

Click to expand...

Yes.

This was another episode of SA2SQ.

Landiron said:

hmmmm

"When you consider that you can now lose the game by losing your capital, war is no longer always the easy option."

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Never once did I win a game in which I lost my capital.

Xzylvador said:

Never once did I win a game in which I lost my capital.

Click to expand...

I have, but generally I consider the loss of my capital to be a sign that winning the game is not likely.

This does however add a new strategic element of capturing cities. In Civ IV, capitals were only really primary targets when trying to stop a space race victory. Otherwise they were just another city to capture, probably better defended and often deep into enemy territory to take straight away.

Here, I could see a potential interest in making a rush for the enemy capital in order to try and make a quick outcome to a war. However, based on what is said about city defense, the more developed capital city is likely to be amongst the hardest to take and so such a quick win may be a fair deal harder and with greater risk to the attacker.

Since civilizations lose the game on the loss of their capital, I would like to know what happens to their remaining cities. Do they capitulate to the conquerer of the capital, or slip into barbarism, or what?

Well from this replay I can conclude one thing if playing for culture a player should have few cities probably 3 is the best and ally with some of the city-states especialy the cultured ones like Florence.

Thormodr said:

Thanks for that.

In the article it says that city states can help you with research. I wonder if this means you can have research pacts with them or if they just give you a certain amount of science a turn. Or perhaps share a tech from their separate tech tree. Intriguing possibilities...

It seems somewhat reassuring that he thinks the game will still be complex with different play styles being viable.

Click to expand...

Calouste said:

I think that is just slightly sloppy writing and he means he effect that city states can provide you with additional culture, which helps with the research of social policies. Most articles have been so sloppy and ridden with mistakes that you shouldn't take anything in the text for granted.

Example from this very article: "There are 10 culture trees each with around 5 or 6 policies". Nope, they always have 5 policies, not more, not less.

Click to expand...

firaxis has said that city states will have a number of different bonuses, maybe the writers found one that boosts research? doesn't sound sloppy or even far fetched to me.

the game isn't out yet, they are making changes all the time, and from the sound of recent previews, they are putting the steam updater to use rather frequently. that in itself is impressive to me. i'v never heard of previewers getting thier preview copy patched as the developers continue to work on it. very impressive.

Xzylvador said:

Never once did I win a game in which I lost my capital.

Click to expand...

I have several times. Especially with coastal capitals. Usually happens when some small backwards civ I never cared about suddenly declared while my entire army was on the other side of the continent. Then I'll need a few turns to recapture it.