1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Bugged Diplomacy makes my King a Liar!

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by King Phaedron, Oct 9, 2017.

  1. King Phaedron

    King Phaedron Chieftain

    Oct 9, 2017
    Hi, I'm a long time fan of Civ2, just recently got Civ5, and in my second game Im having an issue where the Civs and the Game itself says I broke promises, which I did not. I have many save game files available.

    Settings: Normal, Large map, Standard pace, Pangaea+, Single Player, Poland,
    NO MODS or Customization of any kind. Game Time - Ancient Era to 1655 AD

    Note: Poland is next to: Celts, Venice, Ottoman, all of whom covet their land.

    Specific Issues:

    1) When I got my first spy I sent him to Venice and stole a technology. Enrico asked me to promise I would never do it again, which I did. The spy was promoted and from then on I used him to guard my capital. I also
    have a second spy which I sent to Carthage as a Diplomat. On the Diplomacy screen, where it shows you a history if you hover over the civs, it now says I promised to stop spying on Venice and BROKE MY PROMISE.

    Note: Venice sent spies to steal my technology, which were killed by my spy. Enrico apologized and I forgave
    him, but he continued to do it anyway. HE IS THE ONE WHO BROKE HIS PROMISE, NOT ME. The Celts,
    and Ottoman, likewise keep sending spies to their death, apologizing, and then doing it again.

    2) I Settled my 7th City of Poland, BEHIND my other cities, which are next to the Celts. After doing so, Boudicca gives me a message saying I am settling in their sovereign land, and asking me not to. Apparently that obnoxious woman thinks all of the land is hers, because I made the city in the far north, well away from their land, with my other cities between it and them. Seeing as I intended to make another, I refused.

    3) MOST RECENT. I captured the Ottoman Capital, and another city, leaving them with only one, in the south, a little ways away from my lands. I then traded both cities to other Civs (Arabia and Sweden. Both of whom began to denounce me because now they want my land.) Suliman then complains about my continuing to expand. I now have 8 cities, and dont intend to make any more, esp, nowhere next to him, so I agreed. A few turns later, he appears saying I BROKE MY PROMISE, and in the Diplomacy Screen summary, it says I promised NOT TO BUY LAND TILES, AND BROKE IT. I absolutely did not buy any land tiles, and I don't even have any land next to the one city I left him with.

    I don't appreciate these bugged game mechanics turning my King into a LIAR.

    4) I was about to Attack the Celts, and positioning my troops along their borders. (The land is nothing but forest so its very hard to move and my ranged units range is reduced to one tile.) Boudicca calls me out
    on the next turn, saying "If you are going to Attack, then come. Don't hide in the shadows like a child." My options in response to her were:

    "You are right to be worried. Now it is time for you to die!"
    "I meant you no harm, my units were just passing through."

    So I confessed that I was there to declare war. (I got to a point where I couldn't stand this obnoxious woman, always saying terrible things to me, denouncing me, and then lying that I settled next to her, as if she owns the whole damn continent. I fully intend to completely remove her from the game.)

    Later, in the Diplomacy screen, it says she "Asked me to leave" and I refused. Okay, this one is NOT a Bug, it's just poor game design. She did NOT ask me to leave, she asked me to come if I intended to attack, which I did, (and I took that city and traded it to Arabia for 2 gold per turn, over 30 turns.) At NO point, did she ask me to leave, or remove my troops. Considering all of the Hatred she expressed over the years, I don't think she was opposed to our going to war. Neither was the Ottomans. When I declared war on them, Suliaman said it would be interesting to fight with me.

    5) How it all began. RELIGION. (Coming from Civ2, I'm used to building 20-40 cities in a game. The whole unhappiness from cities, and no way to make entertainers, feels like a poor excuse to prevent you from making cities so that you suck as much as the other civs, which are notorious for not expanding.)

    SO I made a Religion, Zoroastrianism, with Goddess of Love, Tithe, and something else that gives me happiness for every so many followers. Since my Happiness is directly tied with the State Religion, I will NOT tolerate another civ sending their "Great Prophets" into my land. Unlike in Civ2, where you can actually EXPEL Diplomats and Spies, we return to the Barbaric Game Mechanics of CIV1, where you are constantly declaring war every time other civs put units next to your cities, and blocking assess to resources.

    Unless I asked the Maya before and then forgot about it, the option to say "Do not Send Missionaries into my land." in the Discuss panel doesn't appear until AFTER they have converted one of your cities, which is what happened with the Celts. The Celts refused, which I clicked this option. It would be nice if I could insist, and threaten to declare war, instead of simply declaring war, but Alas, Civ5 continues it's trend of trying to make the player civilization as evil and non expansive as the others commonly were in Civ1 and 2.

    I don't start wars, I wait until THEY start wars. That way it's ALWAYS their fault. Civ5 has made a lot of EXCELLENT improvements, in that war is secondary, you can win in other ways, I usually go for Culture. In my first game, there weren't any wars with anyone. Were it not for Barbarians no one would bother making units at all. Neither is there any real incentive for war due to Unit Maintenance and extreme unhappiness from capturing cities. Heck, if you declare war, after x number of turns, the other civ will ask for 10 turns of peace, and GIVE YOU ONE OF THEIR CITIES. See how the number 2 looks like the number 5 backwards?

    Civ5 is COMPLETELY the opposite of Civ2, and yes it's fun and much better in a lot of ways, but why bother making units to capture cities when other civs give them to you? In my first game any city I gave away to another civ, they would immediately raze it to the ground. Of course theres no option to declare war over that either, like cmon, I gave you that city to help you and stuff, and you turned around and killed everyone, and if I declare war, it looks like IM THE BAD GUY who started the war, yes I'm the warmonger.

    Actually I am a Warmonger, but like I said, I want my wars to be justified so that their ruin is their OWN fault, and it was because of their actions that started it, and so far, on two games on normal, no one has EVER bothered to declare war on me for anything, I'm always the one who has to start it, but they often provoke it.

    5b) My Religion was the fourth one founded, and it took me a long time to reach the necessary faith to do so. I don't know how or why, but apparently every other civ has mad access to faith. So like I said, I started war with the Celts by killing their great prophet. Not too long thereafter, the Ottoman did the same thing, sent not one, but TWO great Prophets into my land, whereas I only got one, from completing Liberty and actually choosing it as a free great person to create my Religion so that my civ wouldn't collapse into misery.

    They did not build any wonders, I built the Hagia Sophia and Borbubor later down the road. One turn after I captured these two great prophets from the Ottoman, I noticed they had a THIRD one. Where the heck are they getting all these great prophets? Fine, go ahead and cheat, send in hundreds of prophets, and I will capture every single frickin one of em!

    Then later the Maya, who were my "Friend" did the same damn thing. Only this time I spent a good twenty turns moving around military units to prevent their prophet from reaching my city. After 20-30 turns of wasting their time, it should be obvious to them we aren't going to let it happen. Still there is no option to ask them to stop, no way to EXPEL them, and no way to threaten them with war if they don't stop, only the simple Declare War for the hell of it, and then they don't even know why, they just label you as a War Monger. But I waited so that our delcaration of friendship would expire, and research agreement completed. At first I declared war and captured it, but then the Diplomacy screen says "You declared war on leaders you made a declaration of friendship with."

    Okay, here is where I have a disagreement with THE GAME ITSELF. It is THEM who declared war and should suffer from this diplomatic penalty of making war against a friend, because supplanting the state religion removes the bonuses I get, which are happiness that I absolutely depend upon.

    With the Celts, I had made the wonder that gives you the three missionaries, and took them to spread my Religion around a bit. Of course, Missionaries SUCK, all they do is make 1 or 2 followers in a city, they DO NOT SUPPLANT THE STATE RELIGION. and yet on the Diplomacy screen it says for the Celts "They have their own religion, yet you converted some of their cities to yours."

    Ok, so I admit I'm not completely blameless, but why can't the game tell the difference between smacking someone in the face and stabbing them in the gut? I did not "Convert" Any of their cities, I only added 1-2 followers and moved on, from just one of their cities. And because of this, they send in a great prophet specifically to fully convert my cities, and thereby supplant the Happiness bonus, so that my empire is stuck not being able to grow or produce anything. Ok, that is no light thing, that is AN EMERGENCY.

    Not being to Expel these Prophets, Demand they leave and threaten war, really bothers me. It is MUCH WORSE then if they sneak attacked one of my units, or tried to capture a city. Removing my happiness completely removes my entire empire, and is MUCH more of an act of war, and ought to be considered one.

    But no, Civs in Civ5 DO NOT sneak attack, they DO NOT declare war, they are perfect little Saints, and if should you declare war, now everyone is denouncing you and calling you a bloodthirsty warmonger.

    Okay, It was a nice effort, but due to these bugs and poor game design, I really can't take Diplomacy seriously at all in this game. I best not promise anything, since the game will falsely call me a liar, and the truth of the matter is, these civs were ALL next to me, Celts, Ottoman, Venice, and the Maya were also nearby, on the other side of the Celts. They are STILL the same PETTY fools, and all their "complaints" really boil down is, 1) Their pissed because I settled on the land before they did, and 2) Their pissed because I built wonders they wanted, and because of this, they have coaxed the game engine itself into making ME into a Liar, a Warmonger, and some kind of Devil, when the Truth is, they are just a bunch of Petty Whiny Losers!

    You can test these bugs for yourself on my save files. Accusing me of buying land tiles, after I promised not to settle next to them, was the last straw and now I am here writing this post. How the HELL does this AMOUNT of BUGS exist and really, I'm the one who has to come here and complain about it? Sheesh.
  2. King Phaedron

    King Phaedron Chieftain

    Oct 9, 2017
    lol, sorry for the long rant. This is brave new world, and I haven't even looked for any patches, or updates. I prefer to use a gamepad when possible, so I mostly play emulators, but Civ5 looks like a lot like World of Warcraft, which I also used to play.

    Interestingly, all of the Religions in this game were founded in the west. Celts, Venice, Ottamon, Maya, and Poland, and Arabia made the last one very recently. Nor am I the only one capturing cities. Carthage took Arabia's capital, and Morroco took another of their cities, leaving them with one. I rather like the leader for Arabia, the scene is nice, he looks and sounds nice, the music is nice.

    It is interesting on the east side of Pangaea they are all ganging up on him, even Sweden. He will probably lose Medina soon. Instead of sending all those missionaries and great prophets to the east, where none of the cities still dont have any religion at all, they all became obsessed with sending them into my lands, where they get shot, or captured and deleted. If a Great Prophet hasn't spread religion you can use him to make a holy site, so they are not entirely useless.

    But it makes sense in a strange sort of way. So I took some cities and gave them to Arabia, cause I wanted to keep them in the game, but having made a religion, I guess they belong in the west. It looks like the east is going to remain Atheist.

    My first game was a small Archipelago, in which I made a city on an island near Indonesia, and they asked me not to settle near them. Many rounds passed and I got a notification saying I had kept my word, so I know keeping your promise does work, sometimes, but because of these bugs I have concluded it is best not to make any promises, so if anyone asks me not to settle, or send in missionaries, or don't spy on me, I have to say no.

    I dont know if the "Extreme Warmonger" penalty actually amounts to anything, but its just more hypocrisy. Carthage and Morocco both captured cities, and no one is calling them "The bloodthirsty one" or expresses any concern about their warmongering. Civ5 is so well designed, I thought maybe the Diplomacy might actually mean something, but alas, they all denounce me for all I care. I suppose I will go Autocracy Ideology, take all their capitals, and go for a domination victory this time around.

    Its too bad, they aren't programmed to learn anything, or detect things done out of spite. Like, you really want to piss me off? I dont care about world opinion, or diplomatic penalties. Those who are still willing to be my friend will find I am generous. Those who insist on being my enemy, will lose their capital, their units, their lands will be plundered and stolen by great generals, and they may even go extinct. And if everyone wants to piss me off, then I will capture and Raze down every city in the game.
  3. Kriogen

    Kriogen Chieftain

    Jun 26, 2015

    What you describe as bugs, but may not be a bug ...

    Ok, first. AI is programed to win. This means destroy all other civs, including *you*. It doesn't make you somehow special though. Any given AI hates all others civs equally.

    AI will do what it takes to win. This includes "trolling", "lying", "misdirection", "ploting with others to destroy one civ and then backstabing ex-friends" ... AI wants to win and will do all sorts of nasty stuff.

    Some examples:
    - "hey stupid human, dont settle on my land" ... well whole planet is mine, so don't settle at all!
    - "don't buy MY land" ... its MY planet so you best just /ragequit !
    - "hey I'm nice, how about we sign Friendship" ... so I can settle all your land and you will not attack me as that would give you stupidly huge diplomatic penalty
    - "but you give me open borders. Doesn't that mean I can spam you with Great Prophets?!?"

    Why are you allowing AI to bully you around? I mean its not a bug. AI is programed to do that. To win. To nerf everyone, including you. Don't buy it, fight back!

    What you should do:
    - I am Immortal Leader of my gloriuos People. I will do whats best for my nation. Not only will I settle where I want, I will even burn a couple of your city. And if you don't shut up, I'll burn everything!
    - no Arabs, we can't be friends, because everyone wants you dead (friend of my enemy is my enemy). But i will become friend with Ottomans. And when Ottomans finish Arabs, I will bribe Sweden you attack Ottomans. And at the same time I will bribe Celts to attack Sweden. "Chaos is a ladder" :p
    - ...
    - do what is best for *you*. No, no AI will ever really like you. It wants you dead, it wants to win. And that means *you* can't.

    " ... dont know if the "Extreme Warmonger" penalty actually amounts to anything, but its just more hypocrisy. Carthage and Morocco both captured cities, and no one is calling them "The bloodthirsty one" "
    Hehe. They do call each other "bloodthirsty one", you just can't see or hear it. Diplomatic conversations are private. Plus its a "trick". Did you stop fighting and therefor your chance to win is smaller (less land for you, etc) or even zero (you want military victory)? If you did (stop fighting), then AI won. It worked! AI 1, Human 0.

    One Inquisitor in, or around city(1 tile I think) will block Prophets/Missionaries.

    Anyway, AI is programmed to "troll" you. Not a joke :) It's kinda smart. I mean it looks like its working against you :p
  4. King Phaedron

    King Phaedron Chieftain

    Oct 9, 2017
    Yeah, I agree, and those are good tactics. But there is a difference between what the Civ leaders are saying, and what my diplomacy screen is telling me I did, such as making promises and breaking them. Indeed, you are right about the AI being sneaky. For instance, in Civ2 someone may ask me to form an alliance to fight another Civ, but this is really just a tactic to lower my reputation. If I decide on my own to declare war on them, and then ask that Civ for an alliance, they will refuse. Of course most of the time you can demand tribute and they will declare war for you.

    What is really fun in Civ2, is when all these Civs make their secret alliances against you, and you are positioned to capture most of their cities, you take a city, agree to peace, then demand tribute and their ally declares war. You attack them, and the former Civ you just made peace with will go to war again. Take their city and they will beg for a ceasefire, but then go back to resume attacking the first guy and they will go to war again. Just go back and forth between 2 or more Civs until they've lost all their cities. It's pretty damn hilarious.

    It's really good that in Civ5 units can embark. In Civ2, I often see Mongolia on a small island somewhere, all they do is make units that can't go anywhere, and then I wind up in 1800 AD getting a message "Mongolia has discovered Alphabet." wow, it took them 5800 years to learn the very first technology in the game. Genghis Khan finally knows his ABCs. May the world rejoice. Maybe actually try playing the game next time.

    In CIv1, they are bad at doing anything, most sit around with one or two cities for the entire game. They barely work the land, and almost never make ships. You get railroad on every space, and they continue to suck. In Civ2, they actually do make railroads on every space, but it becomes their undoing. In Civ2, you need to build farms, railroads are only useful for transport and on spots with 2 or more Shields (production.) They only seem to make farms on large map, but they get their own pop bonus. With railroad on every space, all it takes to completely wipe out their entire civilization in one turn, is about 20 Howerter Cannons and 1 spy to lead units past their Zones of Control. Each one destroys 2 defending units. You can beat them with much less. Since they build forts everywhere, find one on hills or forest with a good defense, put a Mech Infantry there plus a few Howerters, and then every round, have each Howerter destroy one defending unit, and put them back into the fort so they can't be attacked. Weaken them until they have nothing left to defend. With Railroad in every space, you can take all their cities with just one partisan. *

    I am new to Civ5, and just starting to learn their tricks, perhaps I am falling into their plans somewhat, but to be honest, I was planning for this second game to be one of war to begin with, and plan to fill out the Autocracy Ideology. Indeed, that is along the lines of what I would say if given the option. I must do what is best to defend my people. For what it's worth I do occassionally give them things, good deals, and I return their workers when rescued from barbarians. The AI takes whatever it can, with no lasting appreciation or remembrance of it.

    Yes, I did buy an Inquisitor to fix what they did to one of my cities, but at that point in the game I was not generating faith like they were, I only had one great prophet that I got from completing Liberty Tree, and was trying to save my faith for when they become available to purchase. If I were to let all these great prophets convert my cities, I'd have to buy 4-6 Inquisitors, and they would just come back again anyway. So what the hell, if a great prophet enters my land, it is much more effective to capture them and go to war. A few turns later they'll beg for peace and give me a city.

    No Inquisitors do not block prophets and missionaries, they are expended once to "remove heresy" and remove all other religions from the city. But I had a bunch of Chariot Archers standing around blocking them from reaching my cities. So like I said, 20-30 turns of this, maybe 100 years of their insisting to come to my cities, instead of going to the east where NO city has ANY religion, because all the creators of religion live next to me, well... Sometimes bad things come to those who wait. Or those who ring the doorbell for hours and wont go away.

    But yeah it is psychological test in a way. I don't know if there is a Reputation like there was in Civ2, but the trade off is basically, will you go to war and suffer a loss of reputation to do what is best for your people and your circumstance, or will you avoid war at all cost, even to your loss.

    * Use a partisan to capture cities in Civ2, because they ignore Zone of Control, and when you capture a city, it spawns enemy partisans. Also because when you capture a city with a partisan you won't be asked to speak to them, so they can't force you into ceasefire / peace treaty.
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2017
  5. djimi888

    djimi888 Chieftain

    Oct 11, 2017
    Me too. I really love some of the scenarios included in the Gold Edition. And the Scenario Builder.

    Later, I got CIV III Vanilla. I missed the diplomats, spies, and caravans of Civ2. And the partisans, and the fanatics.

    But I liked the 'culture flips', the Unique Units, and the Golden Age.

    In CIV V, there's so much more to like. But I still miss the diplomats, spies and caravans of Civ2. And the partisans, and the fanatics.

    The Unique Units, the Unique Buildings, the Unique Great Persons and the Unique Improvements are great, though!
  6. King Phaedron

    King Phaedron Chieftain

    Oct 9, 2017
    I played Civ1 and Civ2 on Emulator, Snes and Playstation. Not sure if the Pc versions are any different, Im more of a retro gamer. I haven't seen Civ3 or 4 at all, and I read somewhere that in Civ6 you can only play America vs Britain. What was a complete joke. Watch the video 30 facts about America. King George backed both sides of the revolutionary war. America is a British Colony, and Britain is owned by the Vatican. The people who celebrate the 4th of July are ignorant fools who are so far gone, they actually think THIS is freedom. But I digress...

    I dont think any Civ game could account for the amount of deception that really goes on in politics. But I may have to check out some of those. I like Map builders, and Scenarios, things of that sort. I would've made a unit in Civ2 like the diplomat, only he doesn't buy cities, he pays to turn them into barbarian cities. Maybe call him a Wizard. He drives everyone crazy, and makes rituals on land tiles that make them useless until you get a priest to clean them up. I'd also make a guy who makes traps and later land mines that damage enemy units when they cross.

    In Civ2 you have the Slave Trade... yep. In some ways, I liked the design of the units in Civ1 better, especially the Settlers, they remind me of the Oregon Trail, which was an old apple PC game you may have played in school if you grew up in the 80s. Most of your units, and the high council are White, but the Settlers in Civ2 are brown skin negros that look like their running around with giant scissors. I wonder why their so "Suicidal." To do the "Slave Trade" you take all your settlers somewhere 20 tiles away from any of your cities, preferably on a different landmass, and have them settle on forest or buffalo. Produce a new settler before they grow in population so the city is disbanded. This creates a "None" settler.

    The "None" settler can now be taken back to your cities to work your land for the rest of the game, and you never have to pay them any food or resources. Can't really complain though, as it is historically accurate. Black slaves were taken to America by Ships from Africa. If there was a world congress in Civ2, maybe one of the resolutions would involve freeing the slaves. See why Civ games focusing on America are Suspicious?

    But keep reading, this is going somewhere. Once you've made some 20-50 slaves to work all your cities, get control of the Leonardo's Workshop so they all get promoted into Engineers. Then you have the ability to wage a Biological Warfare game. Ok really, I've played Civ2 WAY too many times. You gotta really be bored to do what I'm about to tell you here...

    Biological Warfare is where you sell all of your mass transits and recycling centers and fill your land up with pollution. Then you let the icecaps melt, so that the terrain turns into swamps and deserts. If you do this, it's a good idea to make cities near hills, and then irrigate the hills instead of mining them. Irrigated hills are not affected by the terrain change. It's also a good idea to make cities next to as much water and fish / whales, as possible, and swamp herbs, as it won't be changed.

    Basically, you let the ice caps melt several times. You need about 50-100 turns to phase into biological warfare, and then another 20-40 turns to clean things up, so try to do this before you reach 1900. The land becomes so full of swamps and deserts that all the cities starve and are reduced down to low population. The first time I did this I let most of my cities fall to barbarians, and pollution everywhere, the world was so screwed up it would never get better. If you make an engineer the food he requires takes you down to 1 or 2 population. Draining the swamps or transforming the deserts are useless, unless you clean up the pollution, and those are in player land, so the computer can't do anything, but you gotta love how none of the Civs are programmed to blame you and hate your guts for making the whole world into a crap-hole.

    This is where all those "None" Settlers come in handy. Once the world is fully covered with swamps and deserts and all the cities, including yours lose their population, (your coastal cities will still have like 20 population), then you begin cleaning up all the pollution tiles, and then drain the swamps and change the land.

    When done correctly, your civilization returns to it's former glory, your cities grow back to high population, while the computer Civs are stuck living in polluted swamps with tiny cities. Waging biological warfare takes a lot of time, work, and planning, and the slave trade is what makes it all possible. This is helpful though, by this point you may have passed 2020, and the computer Civs will have all the technology including Rocketry, Nukes, and Stealth. It's really a good idea to destroy any civilization once they discover rocketry.

    They will build lots of cruise missiles, in cities and submarines, that destroy your battleships, carriers, and transports. You may not be able to even approach a civilization if you have allowed them to reach this point of progress without capturing any of their cities. You simply won't have any way in, it won't be possible to attack them anymore. They will put nukes in submarines and nuke any city without an SDI defense, they will also nuke carriers and transports full of units you took a lot of time, and effort to make and position, and destroy them like nothing.

    But one thing you can do, with your army of black plantation slaves, is wage biological warfare. With tiny cities and swamps everywhere, they won't have the production levels needed to make enough missiles and units to defend themselves. So, once you get them down to that weak and repair your own lands, then you can easily invade them. You would think that building an army of spies is a good strategy, but it's really not as effective as you would think. You can destroy every library, university, and research lab they have, and they will still keep progressing in science very quickly, especially on Emperor and Deity. (The only levels I ever play. Everything else is way too easy.)

    I don't know how many times the icecaps can melt from global warming and pollution, but when you've got an army of black plantation slaves anything is possible :p and with Elvis on the high council how can you go wrong? Now ain't that an interesin message, I think it's time to check into heartbreak hotel. There's nothing like ending an alliance you had since the beginning of the game, when another Civ demands technology you don't want to give them, because they will just trade it with everyone else, and then once the alliance is dissolved, that Civ out of nowhere breaks peace by nuking one of your cities. "You're letting our crack troops go to waste general. Lets go bonk some heads!"

    I especially like what happens when you talk to the high council on the last turn of the game after you defeat all other Civs. Your Foreign Adviser will say. "Sir, I cannot abide your lack of resolve. There are other nations in this world and it's up to us to find them." Followed by an affirming "Sir I agree sir," from your military advisor, who ought to know damn well more then anyone we just destroyed them all. Sheeh, lets keep that a secret.

    Yep fun times, and when you Nuke a 1 population city over and over and nothing happens, you'll be banging your head against a wall....

    Yeah, I think I'm ready for Civ5... Although there is still a bit of whackiness, really it is a massive improvement in SO many ways. Automated Caravans and Cargo ships, the ability to tell units where to go instead of moving them 1 turn at a time all over the map, cities that defend themselves, no riots every turn, graphics, I can go on and on.

    But here is where it completely loses on realism: Ranged units, and not being able to stack units, which can make trying to capture a city quite frustrating. The map is the world, and last time I checked, the world is 7,926 miles from one side to the other. And yes, it is the world, because when you come full circle, it says you've "proven the earth is round."

    So... how many miles does each tile represent? I don't know the exact number of hexes per map on the different map sizes, but lets use 100 for example. In that case, each hex would be 79 miles. Now, you mean to tell me I can't have more then one military unit within 79 miles of another?

    Then we have ranged units that fire guns and arrows over 2 or more tiles, and considering the length of turns. When I fire an arrow, it keeps traveling for 5-20 years, and goes over 100+ miles, and then always hits the target. And then you go and research the science of Physics.

    This is where Civ1 and 2 makes a bit more sense. All you would have to do in Civ2 to make a decent ranged unit, would be to let them attack the enemy without being attacked themselves, and damage them a bit. But the units with arrows and gunpowder were simply given a strong defense bonus, which is just as well, considering that every space is 79 miles.

    Civ2 completely ruined Caravans. With each unit representing a unit of troops, how realistic is it for you to make a unit representing x number of caravans, carrying nothing but beads to another city? Even if you trade Oil as Republic, to a Republic, both high pop cities, I still only got a lousy 40 gold. Thats not even worth the cost of producing the Caravan, let alone the time and effort it takes to locate and reach a city that demands what you have. In Civ1 you're in trouble if you dont make Caravans. So I'm very happy with how Caravans and resources work in Civ5.

    And where in the world are "Beads" a natural resource produced by nature? With all this population, should we not assume people and merchants are using the roads and taking ships, going from city to city, though we don't see them as units on the maps? The purpose of the Caravan, like in Civ1, should be to establish a trade route to increase gold, science, and luxury every turn. Not a one time profit of 40 gold. Traveling Medieval Merchants would certainly have a number of things to trade, not a Caravan specializing in beads.

    And then you gotta love how the modern Economic Advisor insists you make more Caravans. Well I can't make any Caravans, because now I can only make FREIGHT units, Jackass. You can't reach the modern age without discovering Corporation. Perhaps the modern military advisor should be asking me to train Archers, Chariots, and Elephants. In Civ games you will always find something thats a complete Joke.

    The only time in CIv2 it is EVER worth actually using a Caravan to trade is when you make one from a super science trade city with the Collosus, Newtons College, and Capernicus Observatory with about 30 population and over 1100 Science on 8 Science at Republic. Trading one of those producing oil with a high pop high trade city in China got me 1800 gold.
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2017

Share This Page