Couple of months since release - do you still want more content?

[mitsho]

How are they changing Japan? Just curious

We don't know afaik. It's just that the developers stated in one of the last polycast episodes that they want to change Japan due to feedback from the community.

As for the question, a few small DLC packs feels right. As stated, there's not much more the game can take before being too full, but two limited packs with a few civs or other small stuff is optimal in my mind.

Of course there's so many construction sites left on civ5 even now, but we can address most of it ourselves via mods. So I'm happy.

I wouldn't want them to do civ6 just now, but something else strategy-related first (hint: a new Alpha Centauri-lookalike ).

 

[crawf0rd]

Christ, Civ 5 needs to close up shop! They've added many immersive, complicated things, and it's time they move on.
1. They're running out of civs
I sure hope this new pack doesn't include Australia or something
2. They're running out of fun
New systems add to the depth, but also to the tedium. There comes a point in the late game where I quit because I'm tired of juggling ideological issues, world congress bribes, and trade routes.
3. The games flaws don't fix themselves
It doesn't matter how many civs there are; issues with the Ai and overall game design will always exist. I dont think a fresh civ game will necessarily be perfect, it will just have different issues for me to gripe about.

 

[cakes]

i feel there are a few gaps for more mechanics, representing other historical forces that shaped civilizations. not to make it a paradox game though. 'nations' sounds pretty intriguing

 

[Nujabes]

I'm pretty happy with the game now, though I'd love to see a few more DLC civs. The only thing that really NEEDS to happen for me besides a few general balance tweaks here and there is a revamp for some of the older civs, which has already been confirmed. I love the variety of civs at the player's disposal, but a few of them are just so outdated/underpowered that it is striking. I can't wait to see how they upgrade them.

 

[parts]

While there are a few really simple things I think they could do with the AI to make it better

I understand Firaxis browse this forum, so it'd be good if we -as a community - agreed upon a few really, really simple things that don't require any advanced programming at all and made it clear that Firaxis should adopt them for the really advanced difficulties.

I think everyone can agree that
1) science buildings must have specialists at all times
2) Rationalism must be taken
3) GEs for wonders, only
4) no GMs, ever

These are no muss, no fuss, context-free decisions, right? I'm not even talking about min-maxing, or calculating when to plant and when to bulb a GS.

And another thing - I would genuinely pay for a DLC that consisted of nothing but the ability to lock certain (not all) specialists: i.e. scientists and writers, and let the governor allocate the rest. I can't believe this hasn't been done yet.

 

[blackcatatonic]

Christ, Civ 5 needs to close up shop! They've added many immersive, complicated things, and it's time they move on.
1. They're running out of civs
I sure hope this new pack doesn't include Australia or something
2. They're running out of fun
New systems add to the depth, but also to the tedium. There comes a point in the late game where I quit because I'm tired of juggling ideological issues, world congress bribes, and trade routes.
3. The games flaws don't fix themselves
It doesn't matter how many civs there are; issues with the Ai and overall game design will always exist. I dont think a fresh civ game will necessarily be perfect, it will just have different issues for me to gripe about.

I actually agree with this guy. I think CiV is full up. Admittedly I haven't had much time playing the expansion and am still at the point where my games are taking much longer to finish than the G&K ones are, but it definitely gets tedious towards the end.

I *could* go for more Civs in a DLC pack, but I don't think they're strictly necessary. And I really hope there isn't another expansion. It would be too much.

 

[shaglio]

Is there any chance that these files are simply for the upcoming Fall Patch? Maybe the "Nations" one is for the updates to the old civs.

 

[Securion]

I have actually stopped playing civ completely, and are now playing X3: Albion Prelude instead, so if they release new content for Civ I would be interested and surely buy it.
Never wrong coming back to Civ for a while!

 

[redwings1340]

I understand Firaxis browse this forum, so it'd be good if we -as a community - agreed upon a few really, really simple things that don't require any advanced programming at all and made it clear that Firaxis should adopt them for the really advanced difficulties.

I think everyone can agree that
1) science buildings must have specialists at all times
2) Rationalism must be taken
3) GEs for wonders, only
4) no GMs, ever

These are no muss, no fuss, context-free decisions, right? I'm not even talking about min-maxing, or calculating when to plant and when to bulb a GS.

And another thing - I would genuinely pay for a DLC that consisted of nothing but the ability to lock certain (not all) specialists: i.e. scientists and writers, and let the governor allocate the rest. I can't believe this hasn't been done yet.

#1, 3, and 4 I'll agree with, but I'd rather address these through slight balance changes than AI changes. Even on deity i don't want all the computers going tradition/consulates/rationalism just because it's the best. I still want a crazy warmongering zulu honor, or a brazilian aesthetics. I'd just rather those social policies be the best for those civs to take.

 

[tedoll78]

I want more wonders, more map scripts, more civs, more modders' & WorldBuilders' options.. it still feels like Civ 5 just came out earlier this year, despite my having almost 1800 hours with it at this point. Civ 6 can wait a few years.

 

[Princeofnigeria]

Alternate option:
Eh, maybe on more expansions, Only if they do it in a way ENTIRELY different from BNW. I don't know why, (well I do, but I don't have the time and space to write it all out) but I really dropped off from civ after BNW. I liked most of the new civs (6 out of 9 ain't bad) but all the mechanics seemed to add a lot more flim flam than fun, complicated without actually amounting to anything. As well, the AI seemed to drop out at any sign of a struggle, consigning you to win by turn 150 or so. I was so pleased with G+K, dumbfounded by how much it added without cluttering the experience, and unable to ever return to base, and I declare it the best use of $20.00 ever for me personally. At first I thought I was just being a sourpuss with BNW, and that I would warm up to it with more plays. but after 2 months... I hate it. I really don't get much if any joy from it. Also, what they did to France is INEXCUSIBLE! Reducing the mighty, war winning french into a useless knock off of brazil... Grumble grumble grumble... I would love some new DLC civs though (none requiring BNW, of course).

 

[uncle bulgaria]

I think it's almost there, move on to Civ 6.

I'd like to see a few tweaks though in a patch or DLC

1. Expand diplomacy, give us the same things the AI has (units on borders etc.) and please please if anyone from Firaxis reads this can we have an ultimatum in diplomacy e.g. "spam your religion/spy on me again and it's war" to reduce the war monger penalty when slapping down annoying AI Civ? Please, pretty please with sugar on top? You can even throw in a penalty if you don't follow it through

2. On the F4 screen where it shows the resources each Civ has for trading, I'd rather have a list as text rather then the icon as some of them look quite similar and small or maybe a sub menu where each civ has there's simply listed.

3. When you get a request from the AI it would be great to pull up the diplomacy F4 screen to give you a chance to see what the impact of a request would be, I sometimes forget who is friends with who.

4. Trade routes, place the previous route at the top so it's easier to renew

5. Exterminating Alex or Siam never attracts a war monger penalty ever and is always encouraged by all AI civs. Sorry I just hate Greece and Siam in Civ 5, they're soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo annoying

 

[Tsuchinoko]

For all the people clamouring to get Civ 6 - what's the rush? The vanilla game will likely lack many of the gameplay features that we're now used to and will probably be full to bursting with bugs. If past experience is anything to go by we'll end up going through the same cycle of being disappointed by the initial release (probably due to 2k meddling with it and pushing for an early release), then waiting for the inevitable expansions/DLC that add content back into the game and fix the major problems. It'll probably be about 4-5 years before we have anything comparable to Civ 5 BNW or Civ 4 BtS. I don't see the point of abandoning ship now when the game is finally starting to get really good.

I do however agree with the people who say that adding in a bunch of new mechanics now would probably make the game feel too bloated, but surely Firaxis could just expand the existing systems to give us some new options and keep the game fresh? I'm also pretty certain that given some more time they'll be able to iron out a lot of the bugs and other problems that people want to see fixed.

Personally I'd really like to see one last expansion - perhaps adding one new gameplay system at most (health perhaps?), and just adding more options to what's already there (I think science and espionage in particular could do with being made a bit more engaging). They could also include a bunch of scenarios made by the modding community as they did with Civ 4 BtS. Add the usual 9 new civs and fixes for any lingering issues with the game on top of that and I'd imagine a majority of Civfanatics will be happier than they would have been with Civ 6 Vanilla. The occasional bit of piecemeal DLC wouldn't go amiss either - it helps keep things interesting while we wait for news on the next major project.

Anyways, I'm sure a lot of people are going to disagree with what I've just said, but I do honestly think that sticking with Civ V, even if its just for a little longer, would be for the best.

 

[Guandao]

For all the people clamouring to get Civ 6 - what's the rush? The vanilla game will likely lack many of the gameplay features that we're now used to and will probably be full to bursting with bugs. If past experience is anything to go by we'll end up going through the same cycle of being disappointed by the initial release (probably due to 2k meddling with it and pushing for an early release), then waiting for the inevitable expansions/DLC that add content back into the game and fix the major problems. It'll probably be about 4-5 years before we have anything comparable to Civ 5 BNW or Civ 4 BtS. I don't see the point of abandoning ship now when the game is finally starting to get really good.

I do however agree with the people who say that adding in a bunch of new mechanics now would probably make the game feel too bloated, but surely Firaxis could just expand the existing systems to give us some new options and keep the game fresh? I'm also pretty certain that given some more time they'll be able to iron out a lot of the bugs and other problems that people want to see fixed.

Personally I'd really like to see one last expansion - perhaps adding one new gameplay system at most (health perhaps?), and just adding more options to what's already there (I think science and espionage in particular could do with being made a bit more engaging). They could also include a bunch of scenarios made by the modding community as they did with Civ 4 BtS. Add the usual 9 new civs and fixes for any lingering issues with the game on top of that and I'd imagine a majority of Civfanatics will be happier than they would have been with Civ 6 Vanilla. The occasional bit of piecemeal DLC wouldn't go amiss either - it helps keep things interesting while we wait for news on the next major project.

Anyways, I'm sure a lot of people are going to disagree with what I've just said, but I do honestly think that sticking with Civ V, even if its just for a little longer, would be for the best.

I wholeheartedly agree
Releasing Civ6 in 1-3 years is too soon. And I would cringe if the same leaders were chosen again. I'm sick of Gandhi, Alexander, Catherine, Napoleon etc. They could just use the same VAs again.

 

[EulerMcE]

I assume Gandhi leading India with a high nuke stat will be in every main civ game for the foreseeable future. There's marketing sway in that meme. The other leaders are a bit more discardable if they really wanted to differentiate it. Perhaps a Celtic leader who isn't Brennus or Boudica.

Civ V still has some room for improvement but I think they can be patched out and the game does seem to be essentially complete. I would still like to see some new Civs though, as some of the possible choices now probably won't have the opportunity of appearing in another Civ game for years. I would much prefer them in the form of an expansion too because it opens them up to using new interesting mechanics and I can't really justify paying for standalone DLCs.

 

[bison21]

Christ, Civ 5 needs to close up shop! They've added many immersive, complicated things, and it's time they move on.
1. They're running out of civs
2. They're running out of fun
New systems add to the depth, but also to the tedium.
3. The games flaws don't fix themselves
It doesn't matter how many civs there are; issues with the Ai and overall game design will always exist. I dont think a fresh civ game will necessarily be perfect, it will just have different issues for me to gripe about.

QFT. I selected "Civ5 is finished" though I would not mind the odd DLC. Saying that Civ5 is done doesn't really mean I want Civ6 anytime soon (far from it). I am still a little worried that the developers will give in to whiners demanding stacking units back.

I could see an expansion solely for multiplayer or something, but nothing like GK/Bnw. I still think the art-swapping is the best example of cluttering content without adding actual choices.

 

[mitsho]

I'd prefer dynasties instead of leaderheads. Have ambassadors instead of the leaders themselves. But that's another topic...

Seems like there's a pretty big agreement in this thread. The positions are not that far apart. That's good I guess

 

[Horizons]

Oh god no ... The game needs balancing and refinement not new content.

 

[Alatan]

I think that new content doesn't mean new content "tomorow'' , but actualy would we like to see a new expansion/dlc after BNW is balanced or would we like the devs to start on Civ6.

I agree that another expansion in 1-2 years from now would be much better than a brand new buggy game that lacks content, balance or better AI.

Most of the arguments agains a new expansion and for a new Civ are :
1) "clutter",
2) bad artificial inteligence,
3) lack of posible inovation,
4) modding problems
5) and disapointment that their pet civ didn't get in (i.e. Italy)

These are my arguments:

1. Game content that deepens the game in a reasonable and fun way will always be wellcome by me even if it takes some time to get the hang of it. Civilization series was never the fast to learn fast to finish type of game and if it was i would probably never buy it. After all this is a strategy game.

2.Civ5 does have a "special" AI but most of the games do and i dont see that being changed with a new game if not with a new expansion. If nothin it is much easier to code an ai for a game that is well known and tested than a brand new game.

3. There is still place for new content, mechanics and civs. I would like to see social policies changet to national traits and a political system of governors, laws, inner-politics, crime, domestic espionage/counter espionage and population opinion introduced. Science victory could use a facelift, as well as the diplomacy ending. Archeology could get more flavor and graphical representation. Another path in the teck tree would be welcome but i presume it would be time consuming to balance. More Civs, wonders, natural wonders etc are just cherries on the cake. Basicly there are a lot of fun things that could be implemented.

4. This is the only good argument in my opinion. Little can be done here but if we get more dlcs/exps we will not have to.

5. Well tough luck. If you are so desperate, use a civ you like and rename it to whatever you like and play that way. Its not like the game lacks in variety of UA that can represent your pet civ.

All in all Civ5 BNW is an excelent game that i love and would recomend to everyone interested in strategy games. The devs have done a great job and i hope they would continue the good work on atleast one more expansion.

Thank you for your time for reading this post.

 

[UnofficialJoe]

I can't wait to see civ6 drop, but knowing most civ games don't get good until they drop the expansions :/, so I unsure what I want more