Civ 5 Confirmed Features

[bite]

Well it may only be a small one but we finally have an update

 

[LegioCorvus]

The game uses three to four basic resource. "Food" and "production" remained exactly as they are accustomed to veterans series. But the familiar concept of trade are no more. "Gold" and "science" is now divided and "mined" in different ways. This encourages players to long-term planning of empires, and bad practice to pull up and down sliders distribution of money each turn optimizing costs, disappearing.

Interesting. So instead of the Food/Production/Commerce trifecta, we may have Food/Production/Science/Gold.

 

[madviking]

I wonder if the roads maintenance extends to railroads?

 

[i_diavolorosso]

http://civgames.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/dennis_shirk.jpg

First sight of the UI, is it?

 

[wabatt]

The game uses three to four basic resource. "Food" and "production" remained exactly as they are accustomed to veterans series. But the familiar concept of trade are no more. "Gold" and "science" is now divided and "mined" in different ways. This encourages players to long-term planning of empires, and bad practice to pull up and down sliders distribution of money each turn optimizing costs, disappearing.

and mataince on roads will mean there will be less of them

Both are features of revolutin (which I hated) I wasn't worried about Civ5 untill now

 

[madviking]

and mataince on roads will mean there will be less of them

Both are features of revolutin (which I hated) I wasn't worried about Civ5 untill now

I think as long as there are workers, it will be fine. Roads will become strategic, and will have value in a campaign. If you destroy roads, troops cannot move quickly. But if every tile has a road, roads become almost pointless to pillage.

 

[The Almighty dF]

and mataince on roads will mean there will be less of them

Both are features of revolutin (which I hated) I wasn't worried about Civ5 untill now

Yeah... Here's hoping Firaxis didn't pick the wrong guy to lead Civ5. So far, they probably did.
Too bad they couldn't get Soren again.

 

[Thormodr]

Yeah... Here's hoping Firaxis didn't pick the wrong guy to lead Civ5. So far, they probably did.
Too bad they couldn't get Soren again.

So far, the game looks great actually.

I'm not worried at all. Road maintenance is a good addition.

 

[Duuk]

So far, from the announced features, the game seems to be a tactical level unit wargame without as much depth to the builder side and with several previous features removed.

 

[_random_]

So far, from the announced features, the game seems to be a tactical level unit wargame without as much depth to the builder side and with several previous features removed.

The slider reform ought to anull such fears.

 

[wabatt]

I think as long as there are workers, it will be fine. Roads will become strategic, and will have value in a campaign. If you destroy roads, troops cannot move quickly. But if every tile has a road, roads become almost pointless to pillage.

I can agree with this statment

However the UI is rather plain for my taste

Spoiler :

I like lots of bars and numbers...

Spoiler :

but I suposse this can be modded in

 

[dcmort93]

You know I was hoping to not have to use another BUG mod equivalent , not that I don't like the BUG mod, but it shouldn't be needed. As for the road maintenance, I don't think that is a good idea. Take the ancient Roman roads for example, they were maintained by the military and even if there was some cost to that, it was easily paid off in the amount of revenue that was brought in through trade. I believe that if anything, roads should give you money, not take it away.

 

[Nicolas10]

You know I was hoping to not have to use another BUG mod equivalent , not that I don't like the BUG mod, but it shouldn't be needed. As for the road maintenance, I don't think that is a good idea. Take the ancient Roman roads for example, they were maintained by the military and even if there was some cost to that, it was easily paid off in the amount of revenue that was brought in through trade. I believe that if anything, roads should give you money, not take it away.

The Road Debate has been pretty extensive these last few days. I have a few thoughts:

1) I'm surprised at how many people are quick to criticize the game developers, i.e. Jon Schafer, for this concept. Look, it may work fantastic or only so-so, but no one will truly know until we play. Until then, I think it's odd to say 'Oh, it's obviously a horrible idea.'

What we do know, however, is that Civ IV got a lot uglier once every single tile was roaded... so aesthetically there's a real bonus.

Also, we know that miltiary units will now have a base movement of 2. Which means a roaded network would likely make every unit have a base movement of 4. Roads helter skelter would have a massive effect on military gameplay, as it would enable a defender to basically channel in units in and out like a shell game. Now, you could still do this... but it will cost you money, i.e. just like building units will cost money. But you will be able to road a bunch of tiles in the neutral zone and pay for them: It will simply cost money.

2) As for the Roman perspective, people overlook that the main Roman Roads were built for military... and the effect on commerce was often secondary. And once the Roman Empire began to crumble (i.e. withdrew from territory), a lot of the roads (especially bridges) fell into disrepair. The Merchants didn't pay for them, nor did new rulers. It took centralized money to keep them up, i.e. military spending.

Anyway, the road maintenance is not a change I'd have anticipated, but like pretty much all the proposed changes, I think it's got real potential and could make the game super cool.

 

[Ddude97]

Thanks ori!

 

[frenzyfol]

:

1) I'm surprised at how many people are quick to criticize the game developers, i.e. Jon Schafer, for this concept. Look, it may work fantastic or only so-so, but no one will truly know until we play. Until then, I think it's odd to say 'Oh, it's obviously a horrible idea.'

True that!

 

[bossconian]

http://civgames.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/dennis_shirk.jpg

First sight of the UI, is it?

And imho this is the bigest news in this article - You can simply see the new user interface of the game !!!

- it looks we have some advisors as in civ I - and what's the most important they look sexy too !!! They seem to be standing in the balcony of our palace even though we haven't build it yet. They advise to explore the world using our only settler so they don't seem to be any useful. They link to civpedia topics stright from advisor window (different colour of text).
- settler got movement of 3 ( on the picture we have 2 of 3)
- unit action buttons are stack up at the side of screen + units corner on the left bottom
- diplomacy has its own corner - top right
- top left corner we see some totals distinguished by colours
- bottom right corner - some misterious block - ???? turn units ?
- the game starts in 4000bc


I must agree that ui is too simplified for my taste too. But hey ! It will be fun having street fight between ghandi and stalin !

 

[LegioCorvus]

And imho this is the bigest news in this article - You can simply see the new user interface of the game !!!

- it looks we have some advisors as in civ I - and what's the most important they look sexy too !!! They seem to be standing in the balcony of our palace even though we haven't build it yet. They advise to explore the world using our only settler so they don't seem to be any useful. They link to civpedia topics stright from advisor window (different colour of text).
- settler got movement of 3 ( on the picture we have 2 of 3)
- unit action buttons are stack up at the side of screen + units corner on the left bottom
- diplomacy has its own corner - top right
- top left corner we see some totals distinguished by colours
- bottom right corner - some misterious block - ???? turn units ?
- the game starts in 4000bc


I must agree that ui is too simplified for my taste too. But hey ! It will be fun having street fight between ghandi and stalin !

How the heck did you make out the 2 of 3 movement or what the adviser was saying? I have 20/10 vision and I couldn't make that out. From what I can make out, it looks like, "Consider sending (settling?) our Warrior... something, something." I'm going to guess the Warrior is hidden by the adviser.

Bottom right definitely says "Skip Unit's Turn" though.

And the top left looks like, in order:
*What you're researching (red because no cities are built yet)
*Total commerce?
*Commerce going towards research? (based on green text)
*Commerce going towards gold?
*Culture

I was of the understanding that there would be no, or at least less, slider manipulation, so now I'm curious how they're dividing up commerce into research & gold. Guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

[The Almighty dF]

How the heck did you make out the 2 of 3 movement or what the adviser was saying? I have 20/10 vision and I couldn't make that out. From what I can make out, it looks like, "Consider sending (settling?) our Warrior... something, something." I'm going to guess the Warrior is hidden by the adviser.

Bottom right definitely says "Skip Unit's Turn" though.

And the top left looks like, in order:
*What you're researching (red because no cities are built yet)
*Total commerce?
*Commerce going towards research? (based on green text)
*Commerce going towards gold?
*Culture

I was of the understanding that there would be no, or at least less, slider manipulation, so now I'm curious how they're dividing up commerce into research & gold. Guess we'll have to wait and see.

My vision's awful and even I made out the warrior info on the bottom left.
You just need to zoom in a bit.

 

[LegioCorvus]

My vision's awful and even I made out the warrior info on the bottom left.
You just need to zoom in a bit.

Bottom left I'm seeing the words SETTLER, Movement and what initial appeared to me to be a 2/2.

I was curious how he distinguished the second number as a 3, as even zoomed in I barely noticed the distinction. Not that it's really a big deal, I'm just curious how he got that but missed the other stuff.

 

[The Almighty dF]

Bottom left I'm seeing the words SETTLER, Movement and what initial appeared to me to be a 2/2.

I was curious how he distinguished the second number as a 3, as even zoomed in I barely noticed the distinction. Not that it's really a big deal, I'm just curious how he got that but missed the other stuff.

I stand corrected.
I did see it as Settler, then by the time I saw his post I forgot it was a Settler.

But yeah, that's a 2/2 Settler. Not a 2/3 Warrior.