why no panthers, lions or bears?!

[monkeydoo]

Can anyone explain to me why they removed roaming animals?

This game is total <snip> !!

Moderator Action: Swearing is not allowed on these forums, thanks.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/faq.php?faq=updated_rules_2011

[Thedrin]

In CivIV, human barbarians didn't appear for a while, except maybe from huts. In CivV they're there almost from the start.

[Jarwy]

Personally, I miss the elephant carrying axe of Orcus on its trunk. Now there is a beast.

[Abremms]

i seem to remember seeing posts around civ4 release along the lines of "wtf is up with these animals? this game is total sh*******!"

[r_rolo1]

Because it required a nice bit of suspension of disbelief to think that a pack of wolves can beat a group of 1000 soldiers, even if they are only armed with clubs .

[PieceOfMind]

Oh, so you enjoyed having your settlers gobbled up by wolves?

[MaximumPain]

The way they do barbarians now is a vast improvement I always disliked the animals. I love the camps that you have to go kill but if you don't have time they will build units and harass you. Not sure but I think the last patch now has barbarians looting tiles again so they cant just be ignored they didn't seem to do that before but a brute burned down my farm and plantation last night forcing me to buy a unit to go deal with them.

Im having some serious fun with this game good thing Im low on sick time

[kattana]

im sure PETA sent them a letter

[Grat3fulH3ad]

Originally Posted by kattana

im sure PETA sent them a letter

ROFL

[Junuxx]

Originally Posted by r_rolo1

Because it required a nice bit of suspension of disbelief to think that a pack of wolves can beat a group of 1000 soldiers, even if they are only armed with clubs .

Indeed. I got used to the animals eventually, but actually it was a bit silly and Civ5 returns this to the way it was before.

[Haig]

Maybe the Civ 5 haters soon start to fill up the forum with threads demanding back the roaming beasts? Could be a refreshing change for the current hate rants..

[JP1]

Animals were probably in Civ4 to serve the purpose of barbarians (make players escort their settlers and workers) before players were ready to fight real barbarians.

I'd dare to say most people probably hated animals. It takes a huge suspension of disbelief to reason that a pack of bears just killed your army, and forcing people to escort everything they send out from turn 1 of the game was probably an unneeded annoyance.

[jjkrause84]

I, too thought the "barbarian lions" were more than a bit silly.

I got used to them, but never "liked" that they were there.

[Fistalis]

Animals were unique in the fact that they appeared before barbarian troops.. and couldn't enter cultural borders. It was an added dynamic that has been lost whether you liked them or not.

[Louis XXIV]

Originally Posted by Junuxx

Indeed. I got used to the animals eventually, but actually is was a bit silly and Civ5 returns this to the way it was before.

Yeah, I was someone who was probably audibly upset before the game b/c of their inclusion, but eventually decided it was better to accept them. Removal makes sense. They're not necessary. The way they handle barbs in this game is sufficient.

I even managed to imagine the potential of animals (thinking of Assyrian lion hunts and how lions were wiped out outside of Africa). But the game never was close to potential and the fact that Bears could maul an army was just absurd (they should have made it so any military unit could win easily).

[Viperace]

Originally Posted by Thedrin

In CivIV, human barbarians didn't appear for a while, except maybe from huts. In CivV they're there almost from the start.

You make my day. Rolf

[apotheoser]

Originally Posted by PieceOfMind

Oh, so you enjoyed having your settlers gobbled up by wolves?

I did. It added a lot of ambiance in the early game when there were otherwise no threats at all.

[Grat3fulH3ad]

Personally I liked the critters. I thought it added the ambiance, as pointed out by Apotheoser. I thought it was funny to watch some Bears kick the pants off an AI civ's scout. I can understand and I agree with the reasons stated above concerning why they may have been removed, but they were just a part of Civ I liked I spose.

[ChaplainDMK]

Well wild animals were definatly a major obstacle in early civilizations. A pack of lions ain't exactly easy to take care of, and a bear would probably do a number of a bunch of barely armed caveman (settlers for example).
Would be better if Firaxis would implement morale of some sorts (and the more units you would have travelling together, the farther you could go), and traveling trough areas for the first time would be extreamly hard on morale (to simulate more accurately how the stories of wild animals would affect early settlers) so that would probably force your Empire to be much more conservative in early expansion and exploration. And then have random events like bear attack on some undefended settlers, or heavy storm for ships.

[Mac2411]

Originally Posted by Grat3fulH3ad

Personally I liked the critters. I thought it added the ambiance, as pointed out by Apotheoser. I thought it was funny to watch some Bears kick the pants off an AI civ's scout. I can understand and I agree with the reasons stated above concerning why they may have been removed, but they were just a part of Civ I liked I spose.

I don't think the animals were in Civ I. Did you mean Civ IV?