Final Verdict: We want our stack back and other great cIV features!

[gaiko]

Surprisingly few selected "Something else". For me the choices allowed were things that I am happy to see gone, with the partial exception of religion.

The something else would be that civics choices (IV) or social policies (V) have diplomatic consequences in SP, depending on the AI civilization. As it stands now, the AI could care less whether you go down the Tradition, Commerce or Piety branch. This would add another facet to the player's SP choices.

 

[LDiCesare]

My opinion:
A better explanation of the game through usable civilopedia instead of the current piece of uselessness, and better details of where the figures come from would be nice.
And meaningful diplomacy too, in particular with city states which look SO gamey as they are.
regarding your points:
1.1UPT is much better than stacks. It reminds me of Civ 1 too btw.
2. strategic resource system back: The system seems fine as is. I'd probably get totaly rid of strategic resources if anything.
3. slider: Yes. I don't like much the micromanagement heaviness that's implied by having to tune everything at the city level all the time.
4. happiness: Can't say I care much about the system. It looks like unhappiness stunts growth, but it happens mostly when you grow your civ militarily so you're growing anyway, so it's a rather pointless system. It's indeed quite shallow.
5.purchasing units/buildings: Gold should have a use, but speeding up instead of purchasing is better.
6. religion: Couldn't care less. It was a gamey implementation in civ IV.
7. Bring back the graphics of cIV: No. Bring back those of Civ II. Seriously. I mean it. WAY better for modding.
8. map grid: Hexes are way better than squares with their silly 'I move faster along diagonals' symptom.

 

[globalempire]

Voted for 1. Tactical rules for strategy map?Epic fail.

arent tactics and strategy kind of like the same thing. you know tactics involves planning and strategy and tactics are part of strategy, you know whats the strategy, were going to use the chokepoint to cut them off, tactics thats what that is

so saying that using tactics as the combat strategy is epic fail is the only epic fail i see

 

[Strategy Master]

1. Undecided on this. If we had a stack it should have no combat advantages. I.e. on attack you choose unit in the stack to attack or only one unit in a stack can attack in a turn or something like that. That would make us prefer to seperate our troops in battle but would also allow us to group them all up for easy manoverability.

2. like this change. Now you also have to guard your resources wisely as if you lose your source those units will perform worse than normally as they cannot be maintained.

3. Agreed, but in the case of what civ 5 has currently it could be an extra control over happiness. Increase tax you get more unhappiness. Decrease tax you get more happy but less gold overall. Carefully balanced of course.

4. Both should play a part.

5. Realism vs gameplay issue this. But this feature has been a common component of civilization games. Realism would be nice but would need to balanced carefully to avoid damaging gameplay.

6. Yes bring back but in a new way somehow. At the very least it would give us some more diplomacy options.

7. No real issues with the graphics to me.

8. No problem with hex's ,its fairer.

 

[Stefanskantine]

I like Civ V the way it is. Stop living in the past! Or, you can always load up Civ IV.

What we should ask for is instead are some bug fixes, ai improvements, and minor balancing to the good game that is Civ V, so that it will become great.

 

[Lightzy]

haha, poll fail

 

[Mrdarklight]

I was being snarky. Some of the criticisms are fair: the AI does suck. Do the enemy civs ever build navies? If not then that is a huge issue.

However, switching from a square grid to hexes? Who thinks that is bad?

 

[galahadba]

Well, it seens that the majority does not agree with you according to your own poll. i for one, had voted on "Nothing, i like Civ5 how it is" of course that by "how it is" i mean the system, the ai and some other things could get improved.

 

[Stormbolt]

Stack - DO NOT WANT. There is no strategy involved in making a giant stack of doom and sending it towards the enemy. 1UpT forces you to actually think.

Happiness - Don't really care one way or another, but global happiness is more realistic.

Multiple units for each strategic resource - Eh, it depends on the unit in question. I wouldn't mind something like 2 catapults per iron, but more advanced ones should stay as 1.

Sliders - Sliders were boring, and I'm perfectly fine with their removal

Purchasing units with gold - Couldn't you do this in Civ IV in the form of rushing production?

Religion - Was boring, and made diplomacy too simplistic.

Graphics - ...Please tell me this is a joke response...

Map grid - Hexes are far better IMO. They're more interesting, and give the world a much better look.

Overall, I mostly like Civ V.

 

[Maxor127]

I don't want the stack back. The combat is the only decent thing about Civ5. It's everything else that I don't like. Sounds like the final verdict is we DON'T want stacks back. But fix everything else.

 

[NobleJms]

You do have to admit that in the old days where we had our grids, we were able to move in 8 directions (plus the diagonal)! Now we were only able to move in 6.

 

[Maniacal]

Having played the demo, I can say this:

For the most part, on Windows XP and hence DX9, the graphics are sub-par in their resolution for the diplomacy screen backgrounds and the terrain. units and buildings are fine.

While moving armies I can see being a pain with ltos of units, 1UPT is a neat change in direction. The Hex grid is awesome.

I haven't been able to experiment with the happiness, but individual happiness would make a lot more sense.

Good riddance to that annoying religion feature.

Overall I think Civ5 is pretty good and will only improve. I am glad the series is not stagnating and afraid to try something new.

 

[TheBlackAdderBG]

arent tactics and strategy kind of like the same thing. you know tactics involves planning and strategy and tactics are part of strategy, you know whats the strategy, were going to use the chokepoint to cut them off, tactics thats what that is

so saying that using tactics as the combat strategy is epic fail is the only epic fail i see

This is not what i'm saying.I'm saying that the map in its scale is not big enough to operate tactical. There is no room for tactics on the strategy map.(even in huge settings).Not to mention that stacking armies is the why that most of the wars were fought and even to the near past.I would like it if it was made better,not just "units can't stack,archers can shoot".
Here is where another complain pop up,the missing campaign option.Now they could have been super fun to play in Civ V...ah they will be added as a DLC maybe...And here is where my fears really starts to shows,will be the game moddable enough like previous civs, because the Total War case is possible to happen.

 

[Zenstrive]

I want local happiness back. Global happiness feels......overglossing.

 

[sgrig]

1) I think 1UPT has potential, but only for military units. Workers should be able to stack. Also your military units should be able to stack with friendly civs' non-military units.
2) I really don't like global happiness - why should people in LA become happy when I build a theatre in NY? This is just silly.
3) Limited resources is something I really like in Civ5. This is actually far more realistic than unlimited resources from a single mine. I wish they did the same thing for luxuries and bonus resources.
4) I want the slider back! Current system is too rigid and too simplistic.
5) Buying units and building with gold shouldn't be separate from building them, and they shouldn't appear immediately - at least wait until next turn!
6) I want religion back! (and corporations, and espionage from BtS)
7) I have a laptop, so Civ5 graphics don't look much better than Civ4, but the game runs slower.
8) Hex grid is quite good - I like this.
9) Something else - I want Civ4 diplomacy!

 

[Centurio]

All I want is unit diversity and graphical optimization. Other than that, I'm waiting for pleasant surprises in the expansions and updates. Honestly, this game shouldn't be changed back into Civilization IV.

 

[charon2112]

You don't speak for me, friend-o...and most of your little list here are reasons to like Civ V, IMO.

Like most people here, I have been an avid Civ player since Civ I, and I have to say Civ V is such an abomination compared to cIV BtS expansions, not to mention the worst of the series by far.

I believe I can speak for the majority of the Civ players here regarding features that absolutely must be brought back to Civ V, hopefully in future patches or expansions. These features are so essential to the whole Civ experience that I am not sure why Firaxis removed them in this generation.

1. We want our stack back: 1UPT makes moving units around so tedious and it's hard to get into formations in battle.

2. We want the old strategic resource system back: who came up with the idea that one iron mine can only generate one swordman? If I have an iron mine, I should be able to put it to use and build as many iron units as I want.

3. We want our slider back: the ability to shift the macro focus of your empire to either wealth/science/happiness is more dynamic than the current system.

4. We want local happiness back: CiV's global happiness system makes the game MUCH shallower, it's like playing a game for 10-year-olds.

5. No more purchasing units/buildings plz: it makes no sense to buy a building and it's suddenly there the next turn. Firaxis please remove this feature. Realistically, gold should haste the production process, but not producing things out of thin air.

6. We want religion back: religion is what makes cIV a much deeper game than all others in the series, including ciV. Why did they remove religion?

7. Bring back the graphics of cIV: as many players have noted since the game's release, ciV's graphics is absolutely terrible. Rivers and trading posts are just plain ugly. It's just about on par with Civ III if you ask me.

8. We want the old map grid back: sure, hexes are interesting at first glance and seems to make the game look complicated (reminds me of a boardgame), but after several games they begin to get on our nerves.


Firaxis, please pay more attention to what we the core Civ players really want. Until these problems have been fixed, I'll stick to my cIV.

 

[Wosret84]

Like most people here, I have been an avid Civ player since Civ I, and I have to say Civ V is such an abomination compared to cIV BtS expansions, not to mention the worst of the series by far.

I believe I can speak for the majority of the Civ players here regarding features that absolutely must be brought back to Civ V, hopefully in future patches or expansions. These features are so essential to the whole Civ experience that I am not sure why Firaxis removed them in this generation.

1. We want our stack back: 1UPT makes moving units around so tedious and it's hard to get into formations in battle.

2. We want the old strategic resource system back: who came up with the idea that one iron mine can only generate one swordman? If I have an iron mine, I should be able to put it to use and build as many iron units as I want.

3. We want our slider back: the ability to shift the macro focus of your empire to either wealth/science/happiness is more dynamic than the current system.

4. We want local happiness back: CiV's global happiness system makes the game MUCH shallower, it's like playing a game for 10-year-olds.

5. No more purchasing units/buildings plz: it makes no sense to buy a building and it's suddenly there the next turn. Firaxis please remove this feature. Realistically, gold should haste the production process, but not producing things out of thin air.

6. We want religion back: religion is what makes cIV a much deeper game than all others in the series, including ciV. Why did they remove religion?

7. Bring back the graphics of cIV: as many players have noted since the game's release, ciV's graphics is absolutely terrible. Rivers and trading posts are just plain ugly. It's just about on par with Civ III if you ask me.

8. We want the old map grid back: sure, hexes are interesting at first glance and seems to make the game look complicated (reminds me of a boardgame), but after several games they begin to get on our nerves.


Firaxis, please pay more attention to what we the core Civ players really want. Until these problems have been fixed, I'll stick to my cIV.

1) No. 1 Unit per tile is fine. It could use some tweaking though, for example with workers. Otherwise it's fine as-is.

2) Most strategic resources provide more than one of that resource. An iron mine can produce from 2 to 6 irons, if I understand correctly. I like this feature and I think it's more realistic than having a vast army of tanks and motorized vehicles with just one source of oil.

3) I agree it's more dynamic, and the science system as is needs work, but I don't think we necessarily need to go back to a slider.

4) This I agree with fully. Per-city happyness makes a lot more sense to me.

5) I like the ability to purchase things outright. However I think we should have the option to use gold to rush the completion of a building/unit that has already started.

6) I can go without religion, honestly.

7) Civ V's graphics are fine. I would just like you to be able to zoom in as close as you could in Civ IV.

8) No. Hexes are awesome.

In conclusion I think you basically just wanted an updated copy of Civ IV in Civ V. It's a new game entirely. You have to get used to it. Sure, some things are a little off and some need fixing/patching, but the core game is fine. This post should have been titled "Why isn't Civ 5 an exact copy of Civ 4?"

As far as some features from Civ 4 that I miss -- world map trading. That's pretty much it. Or conversely, a tech that reveals the entire world map (sats, maybe). I just hope that things like permanent alliances and scripted events that made mods like Road to War are possible for the modding community here. I want to see an awesome WWII mod for Civ V.

 

[Wosret84]

arent tactics and strategy kind of like the same thing. you know tactics involves planning and strategy and tactics are part of strategy, you know whats the strategy, were going to use the chokepoint to cut them off, tactics thats what that is

so saying that using tactics as the combat strategy is epic fail is the only epic fail i see

Tactics and strategy are different, but related. Military tactics regards how you arrange your forces on the battlefield, strategy is how you use them.

A 'tactical victory' is a victory in which you destroy more enemy units than you lost, a 'strategic victory' is a victory where you accomplish a certain objective beneficial to the outcome of the campaign. The two are not mutually exclusive -- you can have a strategic victory in capturing a city, but a tactical defeat in losing lots of units in the process.

 

[Venger]

1.1UPT is much better than stacks. It reminds me of Civ 1 too btw.

How can it remind you of Civ1? The original Civ allowed stacks.