IGN Offers Its First Civ5 Preview

[Aussie_Lurker]

The problem with Civ4 religions-diplomacy wise-was the *automatic* penalty for having different religions. Any diplomatic penalty should have been small (on a par with having close borders or different civics), but with the ability to build the penalty via your actions in-game-purging religions from your city (which should have been allowed in the game), razing cities with the other civs religion in it &/or having intolerant religious civics. It would have also been nice if players could have had greater power in setting the doctrine of their religion (with attendant bonuses & penalties) when the religion is founded (& at different stages in the development of the religion).

Aussie.

 

[Vortilex]

:

By removing the religion and espionage systems, Firaxis hopes to focus diplomacy more on specific strategic situations and less on the exploitation of more arbitrary game elements. [...]
​

WHAT?! No more religion and espionage?! Espionage is a staple, and I really loved religion! It has been so important in history it was one of the things that was missing in CIII that they added in CIV!

Alright, time to start working on a religion mod! (Once CV comes out, of course )

 

[robcheng]

The comment about the influence of Civilization Revolution in conjunction with ONLY one unit per tile, makes me wonder... will civ V have workers?

I suspect not. After all, it looks like you aren't even picking the tiles/hexes your city will work (at least in the early phases of a city's development, when you only have enough culture for a small number of hexes...probably later when culture expands, you will have to choose which of your hexes you want to work...)

 

[hrman]

The problem with Civ4 religions-diplomacy wise-was the *automatic* penalty for having different religions. Any diplomatic penalty should have been small (on a par with having close borders or different civics), but with the ability to build the penalty via your actions in-game-purging religions from your city (which should have been allowed in the game), razing cities with the other civs religion in it &/or having intolerant religious civics. It would have also been nice if players could have had greater power in setting the doctrine of their religion (with attendant bonuses & penalties) when the religion is founded (& at different stages in the development of the religion).

Aussie.

We're thinking the same way (see my post #32). There were so many ways they could have built on and improved the religion model. It's a shame that they've gone the other way and tossed it out. Even if the gameplay is better because of it, it will mean a less realistic CIV 5.

 

[Blitzscream]

I don't know about you guys but I'm extremely worried about the survival of civilization and my trust to firaxis. My reasons are they want to simplify things , I'm sorry if you don't like complex games. But that's what civ is about its like chess. 2 no more religion and espionage! that's a huge step down, religion is important because its part of history the backbone of civ and what it stands for. Why on earth would you want to get rid of espionage! I don't know if you civ players actually read about history but theirs been so many times in history that it has become important to the great wars (world wars) to the cold war. My favorite part of the espionage system in 4 was stealing technology and causing up roars in cities to my opponents in then blitzkrieg through their cites. And 3rd this has been my problem but why do we need sid any more? Thats right I said it and you can nuke me now, but think about it we pretty much understand what the game concept is its foundations. Correct me if I'm wrong but the only games in civ that sid has worked on is 1 and 4 or maybe just 1! And 4th hexagons? Were do we use hexagons on maps? We use squares because their the best shape for the job and I like what they did in 4 making them strait up and down and not inverted like civ2 and civ3.

Well that's my little manifesto, I know I probably got a bunch of people hating me because what I said about sid. I have to say I will probably pass this game I feel like firaxis is killing one of the greatest masterpeices in history and what it could really stand for and don't see how far this game could really go.

 

[choxorn]

Diplomatic Penalties have always been sort of broken. In Civ 3, there's the whole mess with trading reputation that can make it so the AI won't trade stuff per turn to you forever because of something that totally wasn't your fault, while the AI never seem to care about the other AI's actions. In Civ 4, there's the religious stuff, and also the penalty for refusing to help in wartime/trading with enemies. I really hate it that refusing to do something you cannot feasibly do at the AI's whim pisses them off. It's understandable and kind of realistic, but it's just stupid.

 

[brandonjm8]

I don't know about you guys but I'm extremely worried about the survival of civilization and my trust to firaxis. My reasons are they want to simplify things , I'm sorry if you don't like complex games. But that's what civ is about its like chess. 2 no more religion and espionage! that's a huge step down, religion is important because its part of history the backbone of civ and what it stands for. Why on earth would you want to get rid of espionage! I don't know if you civ players actually read about history but theirs been so many times in history that it has become important to the great wars (world wars) to the cold war. My favorite part of the espionage system in 4 was stealing technology and causing up roars in cities to my opponents in then blitzkrieg through their cites. And 3rd this has been my problem but why do we need sid any more? Thats right I said it and you can nuke me now, but think about it we pretty much understand what the game concept is its foundations. Correct me if I'm wrong but the only games in civ that sid has worked on is 1 and 4 or maybe just 1! And 4th hexagons? Were do we use hexagons on maps? We use squares because their the best shape for the job and I like what they did in 4 making them strait up and down and not inverted like civ2 and civ3.

Well that's my little manifesto, I know I probably got a bunch of people hating me because what I said about sid. I have to say I will probably pass this game I feel like firaxis is killing one of the greatest masterpeices in history and what it could really stand for and don't see how far this game could really go.

i agree with most of what you said, i will add to it though that the trading of resources needed to be tweaked too. ive noticed several times for any strategic resource the AI will trade that to another AI for ONE resource (horse for silk, iron for fish, oil for fur, ect) REGARDLESS OF ATTITUDE (IM SERIOUS UNLESS AT WAR OBVIOUSLY), but with me (or the human player) they want 2-3 resources and/or gold/turn WTF.

ill say it again from what ive been hearing i know i wont be buying the game for quite some time after its released, theres so many mods and maps and what have you for civ4 bts to keep me occupied 'til civ6 or at least some good mods for civ5.

 

[The_J]

Quite. They know that the fan community is strong and they have no reason to try to stop that. I envisage the Firaxis channel existing as an additional resource for modders - people will develop mods at CFC or Apolyton or wherever they feel comfortable, then upload it to the Firaxis site for wider distribution to the worldwide audience who don't typically join fansites and play mods. As such, it would be a great addition. I hope that is how it will work personally.

Thought the same, but i'm also a bit worried.

Why on earth would you want to get rid of espionage! I don't know if you civ players actually read about history but theirs been so many times in history that it has become important to the great wars (world wars) to the cold war. My favorite part of the espionage system in 4 was stealing technology and causing up roars in cities to my opponents in then blitzkrieg through their cites.

And then remember the Vanilla espionage system. It was crap, a not really final idea. Better leave it out, and bring it in an addon again in.

 

[brandonjm8]

And then remember the Vanilla espionage system. It was crap, a not really final idea. Better leave it out, and bring it in an addon again in.

the bts spy system was crap, it was way too easy to see EVERYONES cities and most of their units, way too easy. plus unlimited number of spies, WTF.

at least with vanilla you were limited on number and what they actually could do.

the system they should tweak whether it be in civ5 or as a mod and/or add-on is the vanilla system. make the limit of spies no more than 10 per civ, generally start the game with a lower limit then once you progress steadily increase that limit through certain techs, then ONLY give spies the ability to steal techs (at a hefty price, dont make it too easy), destroy improvements, poison water, bomb infrastructure, and the obvious scouting the terrain. but this auto stuff needs to go, if you want to see their territory then you need to send in spies then with a limit you need to make decisions as to where you send them thus adding to the challenge of the game.

thats my opinion, id prefer civ2 spy system over bts any day, thats how easy bts's spies make it for me, too easy to abuse it to your own benefit. gotta remember spies may be important but not crucial, in bts with spies they ARE crucial especially for quick easy victories.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Wow, spoken like someone who clearly didn't understand the espionage system in BtS too well. I never found it too easy to see into foreign cities-I actually had to make an *EFFORT*-both through the assigning of EP's & by having trade routes & my religion in that city. I always found the BtS espionage system neither too easy nor too hard. Also, I was subjected to enough espionage by the AI (successful & failed) to know that the AI had a good grasp of the system as well!

Aussie.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

For the record, I'm quite happy for espionage to be held back until a later expansion-as occurred with CivIV, but in the case of religion I really do want *SOMETHING* which adequately represents the founding of religions in the real world. The recent Gamespot article has calmed my fears a *little bit*-at least enough to cease complaining until I see more details !

Aussie.

 

[Vortilex]

Penalties in Civ are always broken. In CIII, if you got out of a war for any reason, you were hated. If you were at war with someone's friend, they became polite when you stopped. There were certain more realistic things about diplomacy in CIII, though, like trading communications or workers.
CIV was a bit better, but they got rid of those two cool things.
Espionage was pretty good in CIII, and in CIV they pretty much developed it quite well. Without it, though, it goes against the Civ idea: a history that could have been. It's not so realistic without espionage. Religions, too, are a great dynamic. They need to be further explored.

I will call upon my knowledge of classical music to explain something:
In a sonata-allegro form, you state two themes, and then you play around with them. Sometimes, only one is explored. Here, the development (what the playing around with them is called) has been cut, which basically makes it flat. It can still be good, but it's like being given an appetizer and then desert, you've cut out the main course. I believe Firaxis ought to develop and play around with religions and espionage more.

 

[brandonjm8]

Penalties in Civ are always broken. In CIII, if you got out of a war for any reason, you were hated. If you were at war with someone's friend, they became polite when you stopped. There were certain more realistic things about diplomacy in CIII, though, like trading communications or workers.
CIV was a bit better, but they got rid of those two cool things.
Espionage was pretty good in CIII, and in CIV they pretty much developed it quite well. Without it, though, it goes against the Civ idea: a history that could have been. It's not so realistic without espionage. Religions, too, are a great dynamic. They need to be further explored.

I will call upon my knowledge of classical music to explain something:
In a sonata-allegro form, you state two themes, and then you play around with them. Sometimes, only one is explored. Here, the development (what the playing around with them is called) has been cut, which basically makes it flat. It can still be good, but it's like being given an appetizer and then desert, you've cut out the main course. I believe Firaxis ought to develop and play around with religions and espionage more.

exactly, more depth and make them more direct.

at least it appears they are fixing diplomacy (crossing fingers).

 

[Öjevind Lång]

The comment about the influence of Civilization Revolution in conjunction with ONLY one unit per tile, makes me wonder... will civ V have workers? In my opinion, not having workers comes as the greatest weakness of Civ Rev, and if civ V doesn't have workers I can't see it coming out as fun as civ I, II, or III (I haven't played IV). Can anyone else? How so?

We've been told that the "only one unit per hex" rule only applies to military units, so I am fairly confident that workers will still be around.