How is the BNW expansion?

[Ops Fox]

I am one of those Civ IV vets who despised CiV when it came and wrote it off as a complete failure. While I still view CiV with a bit of disdain due to a few particular outstanding issues I thought I would give the BNW expansion a try and wanted the communities opinion on how BNW is like and is different from either Civ IV BTS or CiV vanilla.

I plan to heavily mod the game after I have played it a few times and I would also like to know how friendly it is to modding, before I commit to buying it. but in the end Regardless of the things I dislike about it, they are superficial and shouldn't be to much of an issue to get rid of if I can start modding it(crack jawed insane AI, no civic options, empire wide happiness etc), while the positive things are hardwired into the game(1upt, ranged combat, hexes, cultural options, art deco etc).

So what is your opinion on BNW in general and how do you think BNW compares to either Civ V vanilla or Civ IV BTS(I always play with the RevolutionDCM mod)?

 

[Barghaest]

Civ V is very mod friendly for the most part (all expansions) as most of the modding is intuitive and can be done with Notepad or ModBuddy quite easily (much like Civ IV, as I recall) - although some changes may have a more dynamic impact that requires various adjustments after implemented (an issue I'm having with my current mod - slowing research makes anything that gives free tech a gamebreaker for example, so you have to hunt down all free tech things and mod them as well).

I was a Civ IV fan, but I've grown to like Civ V more. I do still miss some features from IV, but I think both G&K and BNW have gone a long way to improve the game (BNW has removed a lot of the fickleness of AI - not sure if that adjustment applied to vanilla Civ V or if most of it is due to BNW core mechanics). BNW isn't as dynamic a change as BTS was for Civ IV though, but I still enjoy it more than Civ IV (vanilla or BTS).

 

[Arcaian]

BNW is pretty great, and definitely makes CiV a full-fleshed civilization game. I've owned every Civilization from 1-5, and I must say that 5 is my favourite (though 1 will always have a place in my heart). BNW is great expansion from a non-militaristic point of view. It doesn't have all that much of a benefit if you only like conquest victory types, but it greatly improves the culture, and trade routes and the world congress are great additions.

They seem to be working on multiplayer mod support, which should just about perfect the game. If they open any more up to modding it'd be great, but you can mod a lot of stuff as it is right now. Civic options would definitely be moddable, if you wanted them like Civ IV. The insane AI can be kinda modded... it's a lot less warlike in BNW, but it depends on what part of the AI you dislike.

It's much, much, MUCH better than Civ V vanilla, I'd never want to play that again. It's different to Civ IV BTS. Better in many ways, worse in some others, but about equal. Try it out!

 

[Makavcio]

C5 BNW is still the same Civ5. There were no revolutionary changes made since GnK. The game evolves the same way Civ4 did, i.e. more mechanisms are added, AI is being modified, rebalancement is being conducted and so on. BNW is ofc greatly superior to vanilla because of all these elements, however if you truly despised the game before, you won't find it any better now.

I must say that I don't really understand fans of the civ franchise who "despise" the latest iteration. It has many flaws, but they certainly do not justify straightforward hostility from people, who love the genre in general. Modding it may certainly be an option for you. The game is really friendly to modders, though I have yet to see a "complete overhaul" c5 mod that is not a complete disaster. If you hate the game as it is now, you may find these mods enjoyable, though

 

[Shimmler]

Vanilla Civ V was inferior to Civ IV.

BNW Civ V is equal to Civ IV, if not superior.

 

[PhroX]

BNW is, for me, the point at which Civ V became a great game. It's still the same core, just with all the mechanics polished up and some new details added - so if you absolutely hated the basic concepts of V, then it won't change your mind, but if you though it had some good ideas but just implemented them poorly (my personal view), then you'll probably enjoy it.

Or to put it another way, it does to Civ V what BTS did to IV.

It's much, much, MUCH better than Civ V vanilla, I'd never want to play that again. It's different to Civ IV BTS. Better in many ways, worse in some others, but about equal. Try it out!

This is pretty much my thoughts. Doesn't replace Civ 4, but stands alongside it nicely.

 

[Deadly_Nightshade]

When Civ V first came I thought that it was slightly inferior to Civ IV which I enjoyed a great deal.
But now with these two expansion packs I feel that Civ V is finally the game it was supposed to be ( now it's superior to Civ IV imo)

 

[phillipwyllie]

There's one thing lacking and that border shifts due to culture. It would be nice to be able to swamp the AI who settles near you with your culture rather than take it by force(war or great general).

 

[Glassmage]

uh ideology does that....

 

[Resipsa]

uh ideology does that....

not in the way Civ4 did it. I don't think there is anything wrong with it but it is different

 

[Mudrac]

I am one of those Civ IV vets who despised CiV when it came and wrote it off as a complete failure. While I still view CiV with a bit of disdain due to a few particular outstanding issues I thought I would give the BNW expansion a try and wanted the communities opinion on how BNW is like and is different from either Civ IV BTS or CiV vanilla.

I plan to heavily mod the game after I have played it a few times and I would also like to know how friendly it is to modding, before I commit to buying it. but in the end Regardless of the things I dislike about it, they are superficial and shouldn't be to much of an issue to get rid of if I can start modding it(crack jawed insane AI, no civic options, empire wide happiness etc), while the positive things are hardwired into the game(1upt, ranged combat, hexes, cultural options, art deco etc).

So what is your opinion on BNW in general and how do you think BNW compares to either Civ V vanilla or Civ IV BTS(I always play with the RevolutionDCM mod)?

Civ V was my first civ game and I loved it. It is true that with expansions the game became significantly better and more complex. I tried out Civ IV and didn't like it. Currently I am trying out CIV III and I am finding it pretty fun so far. Both Civ V and Civ III are (for me) better than Civ IV, never will I understand where does that "perfection" of Civ IV comes from. Because it has Science/Gold slider? If I want that I play Paradox's games where I enjoy myself in dictating the taxes of Rich,Middle and Poor Strata and decide the funding of Education and Administration. Civ V is a different game for me, here I build my cities, expand my empire, develop my culture from time immemorial to XCOM squad. I don't need a bunch of sliders and overcomplicated complex systems that don't add to any depth.In Civ V you make the right decisions or you don't, and not simply, "ups I got that bad let me draw the slider to fix things up''.(I am glad that EU IV is also more of this type, making important decisions instead of just drawing sliders, that is DEPTH and I am glad Paradox is going down this path)

But on your question. Yes. Try it out, since the only thing you lacked is more content (Never understood how could people compare the amount content of a game with expacs with the one that just came out ), but you liked the new mechanics and ideas of Civ V, so BNW is just more (much more) content with those said ideas and mechanics.

 

[Janig]

Youre forgetting Civ 5 Gods and Kings, which shouldn't be written off. In my opinion, Civ 5 with the Gods and Kings expansion is the polished product Civ5 was intended to be upon release. Even when Gods and Kings was initially released I wasn't impressed by it, but it has been well developed.

Having only tried the BNW Demo, I suppose BNW goes a step further than G&K, introduces some new ideas, and makes the game more detailed for those who have mastered G&K.

 

[brewgod]

With the expansion of Gods and Kings and Brave New World I wonder what the creative minds can do if and when Civ 6 comes out. Can this game go only so far or can it continue to grow with technology of programming etc.

Brew God

 

[Louis XXIV]

I think the next step is the same as Civ5. Don't make Civ6 Civ5 2, just like Civ5 wasn't Civ4 2. Make it something different. Take risks. If it isn't as good, work to improve it. You'll always have the previous versions to play if you want to (although I can't get Civ2 to run on my computer, but I digress...).

 

[Aristos]

I am one of those Civ IV vets who despised CiV when it came and wrote it off as a complete failure.

You just described me, more or less. I was you. I got into a lot of trouble in this very forum because of the deep reaction the first version of civ5 created in me.

Now I cannot go to civ4 anymore. BNW has made civ5 what it should have been. I don't forget why though, and truly appreciate the change of leadership that Firaxis decided to do, and to me, right on time. The new leadership transformed that first version into the "you can let civ4 go now" version that it is now.

Without hesitation, get it, and welcome back to CivAnon.

 

[Sonereal]

So what is your opinion on BNW in general and how do you think BNW compares to either Civ V vanilla or Civ IV BTS(I always play with the RevolutionDCM mod)?

Does BNW compare to CivIV BTS? Yes. Does it compare to BTS+RevDCM? No, not at all.

 

[njmfff]

not in the way Civ4 did it. I don't think there is anything wrong with it but it is different

Sure, but cultural boarder push will not work in ciV.

anyway, I don't understand those "purist". It's not like cIV has gone anywhere. I loved it too, but time to move on.

is ciV better? Dunno. Depends on what players want. Did it improve upon cIV? Yeah, some things (no more stacks of doom). Do I miss some features from cIV ? Of course!

but that's what mods are for if you're really that desperate for cIV features.

and ciV is more "user friendly" for new players, and that's great. Always find a way to introduce new people to your franchise.

 

[Louis XXIV]

I'm not a fan of cultural border pushes anyway. It never really made sense to me, even when it first appeared in Civ3. Civ4's version, where a city was completely surrounded and useless was an even more extreme version. When you conquered a city and it lost its entire cultural border, it was even worse.

I dislike Civ5's tendency to have cities flip from all the way over the globe, but I do like that, when a city goes, it takes everything with it.

 

[Ops Fox]

Civ V was my first civ game and I loved it. It is true that with expansions the game became significantly better and more complex. I tried out Civ IV and didn't like it. Currently I am trying out CIV III and I am finding it pretty fun so far. Both Civ V and Civ III are (for me) better than Civ IV, never will I understand where does that "perfection" of Civ IV comes from. Because it has Science/Gold slider? If I want that I play Paradox's games where I enjoy myself in dictating the taxes of Rich,Middle and Poor Strata and decide the funding of Education and Administration. Civ V is a different game for me, here I build my cities, expand my empire, develop my culture from time immemorial to XCOM squad. I don't need a bunch of sliders and overcomplicated complex systems that don't add to any depth.In Civ V you make the right decisions or you don't, and not simply, "ups I got that bad let me draw the slider to fix things up''.(I am glad that EU IV is also more of this type, making important decisions instead of just drawing sliders, that is DEPTH and I am glad Paradox is going down this path)

But on your question. Yes. Try it out, since the only thing you lacked is more content (Never understood how could people compare the amount content of a game with expacs with the one that just came out ), but you liked the new mechanics and ideas of Civ V, so BNW is just more (much more) content with those said ideas and mechanics.

After trying to get the game I am reminded of another key point of why I dislike civ V so much when it first came out. Steam and the fact I have to download the game over the internet even if I bought the disk(I have satellite e-net, data is a premium). Steam Infuriated me then with the required online download and the difficulty in setting it up and its infuriating me now that I am trying to download BNW.

I would not have responded to your post, but I needed a place to rant about steam seeing as steam is probably what made Civ V seem worse than what it actually was in my memory.

Moderator Action: Understand your frustration, but this is not really a part of this discussion. Please stay on topic. I do not understand why Civ4 vets who dislike Civ5 have to drop stuff like this in a Civ5 forum. If you do not like Civ5, please go and play Civ4 and be happy. They are different games...
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Mudrac]

After trying to get the game I am reminded of another key point of why I dislike civ V so much when it first came out. Steam and the fact I have to download the game over the internet even if I bought the disk(I have satellite e-net, data is a premium). Steam Infuriated me then with the required online download and the difficulty in setting it up and its infuriating me now that I am trying to download BNW.

I would not have responded to your post, but I needed a place to rant about steam seeing as steam is probably what made Civ V seem worse than what it actually was in my memory.

Ah.. ok. Guess we always need a place where we can say how we don't like something . As for Steam, that's strange. I never had problem with Steam, it was a little problematic when it came out but after 7 years it's working flawlessly now. Truly a great thing, constantly giving discounts on something and it also allows the indie scene to thrive giving us those small jewels from time to time.