Civ 5 - The Good and Bad

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I've noticed that a lot of thread usually focus on the bad of CiV 5, and few on the good, how about you list the things you enjoy about CiV 5, and the things you hate about CiV5?

while many people will probably disagree

PROS : the main two ones is the Hex Grid, and the No-Stacking feature, while many "old" civ fans probably hate the no-stacking feature, I love it, because for me the A.I always stacked so many units which made conquering a complete no-no since i didn't want to waste 100 turns just to build my army of 50 men or whatever, while the Hex Grid is something, new for me, since I can barely think of any game (atleast modern ones) that use Hex Grid instead of Square Grid. I also enjoy the FullScreen LeaderHeads for some reason, and since I'm Achievement Junkie.. the Achievements

CONS :
I personallty HATE having to pay for new Civs, they managed to spoil me with the Free Mongolia and I expected to get other free civs.
The Scenarios I do hate too, for example on Chieftain I failed to achieve victory after iroquois constructed I think 3 wonders and beat me by several points, which disapointed me a lot. I hate timer so badly, I also hate the hight system requirements for the game, my computer literally barely runs it, and all on low detail too! so that's a hug disappoiment, I also dislike the Victory Conditions, mostly Diplomatic which on easier difficulties simply means getting enough money just to bribe all the City States to get their votes, I miss Apostolic Palace and U.N Voting system from Civ 4 . and religion too for some reason, And the Tech Tree seems lacking of something..

So what do you find the PROS and CONS personally in Civ 5? Post BOTH of them, don't just post positive without negative and negative without positive, post both!

 

[TM Moot]

PROS

Unique Abilities
Social Policies
City States (need improving though, more types, better quests etc..)
Hexes
Quantifiable Strategic Resources
Puppets (need improving though)
City Tile Spread

CONS

Boring
1upt (good in concept, poor in implementation)
Diplomatic Victory Condition
Global Happiness
NO HEALTH
VIRTUALLY NO TRADE
Pointless Diplomacy
Too many penalties, not enough rewards
Trade Posts (aarrgghh)
City Screen (far to cluttered)

 

[mitsho]

PROS

Unique Abilities
Social Policies Good Idea, but Civics are good as well, thus a Combination with SP focused on Society/Religion, while civics focuse on government
City States (need improving though, more types, better quests etc..)agreed
Hexes
Quantifiable Strategic Resources
Puppets (need improving though) but they don't replace Vassals
City Tile Spread

CONS

Boring
1upt (good in concept, poor in implementation) would imho need smaller combat hexes (scale everything down/up: size 1 city = 10 citizens and so on, now is that worth it)
Diplomatic Victory Condition see civIV, "Congresses" would be nice as well
Global Happiness agreed
NO HEALTH health is not really needed, a "corruption"/"stability" mechanism is (anti-fast-snowballing)
VIRTUALLY NO TRADE agreed, do you mean diplomatic or economic trade?
Pointless Diplomacy
Too many penalties, not enough rewards
Trade Posts (aarrgghh)
City Screen (far to cluttered)
local Food!

my comments in red

 

[TM Moot]

(in response to Mitsho's comments)

I was trying hard not to compare civ5 with civ4, hence i didn't mention Vassals, Civics etc.. (although i liked both).

I can't agree that health is not needed, it makes city placement crucial and gave lots of buildings a function. Health should be a limit to City growth, Corruption/Maintenance should be a limit to Empire Growth (no. of cities) imho.

re: trade - either, both, any!! I've said it before and i'll say it again, Trade/Commerce should be a big a part of Civ as war, conquest, religion, espionage and so on. I personally would like to see caravans back, map trading, tech brokering/trading, trade buildings, tolls etc.. I reckon when you sell/buy a resource you shoukld have to actually transport it to the destination, which brings into play pirates, brigands, and so on....

 

[WolfyAU82]

This is probably my second, possibly third week playing Civilization and I started with Civ5. Having become curious about Civ4 and purchasing Complete Edition on Steam for Aprox 30USD. I was playing Civ5 up until this morning, now I'm playing Civ4.

The key standout features that set Civ5 apart from it's most recent predecessor would have to be the Hex Grid layout replacing the conventional square grid along with the elimination of stacking (with exception to Military and Civilian sharing the same tile) all of which places a stronger emphasis on strategic gameplay. In my opinion (though it my not count for much being practically a Civ-Noob) the moment those key elements that set Civ5 apart from the others out of the equation... Compared to Civ4 the latest instalment of Sid Meier's opus is nowhere near as satisfying as I feel it lacks the depth that Civ4 has.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Like:
City States (not perfect but a great improvement)
Culture->Social Policies [a use for culture besides culture victory]
Separation between resources (no direct Gold<->Science)
Global happiness [in Principle..implementation is only OK]
Hexes
Embarkation
Strategic Resources
Gold as "general production"

Dislike:
No "city flipping"/significant cost to occupation
No proper anti-snowball tactic
Too much Military Tactical gameplay (have disliked with all civs)
Poor autoworkers
Poor AI (its not stupid at everything, just ery stupid at some things)
Limited significance of Trade
Unit maintenance mechanism
Balance (Great Persons, Tall v. ICS, Policy trees)
Legalism..seems klutzy

 

[Fabiano79]

I've noticed that a lot of thread usually focus on the bad of CiV 5, and few on the good, how about you list the things you enjoy about CiV 5, and the things you hate about CiV5?

I have to disagree, all the threads about how bad ciV is end up merged to the rants thread. But, nvm.

PROS

Unique Abilities
City States (need improving though, more types, better quests etc..)
Hexes
1upt
Quantifiable Strategic Resources
City Tile Spread
Overall Graphics

CONS

Boring
All Victory Condition are shallow
Global Happiness
NO HEALTH
No religion
No coorporations
VIRTUALLY NO TRADE
Pointless Diplomacy
Too many penalties, not enough rewards
Weak Ai on every aspect
AI trying to win concept
No Multiplayer
DLCs policy

 

[whirl]

PROS
1upt (the concept)
hexes
Quantifiable strategic resources
Unique abilities are nice
1 more turn feeling still there! for now.

CONS
AI unable to utilize 1upt
AI "plays to win" = less immersion, doesn't feel like running an empire as much
unintuitive and shallow diplomacy (partly due to the above, perhaps)
poor multiplayer
DLC concept
generally somewhat lacking depth (city micro, religion, corporations, win conditions, diplomacy etc)

Also mixed feelings about a few things. City states are some way towards an interesting feature, but like so much else they feel a bit underdeveloped. With more complexity, choices etc this could be fun, strategical and immersive. I also disliked Social Policies as first, but have somehow come to terms with them, although I'm not sure it is an improvement over Civics. Maybe a combination would be best?

 

[Roxlimn]

whirl:

In concept, I liked Civics better, but in implementation, they generally left a lot to be desired. The mechanic from which they were derived, a similar system in Alpha Centauri, was superior in several ways.

The problem with Civics is that there's generally just one Civic you want for a particular way you want to play, and there's no downside to adopting one or the other as the need arises. Too, certain Civics are just dominating, and tend to reduce Civics play to "race to that Civic and adopt it." No one wants to take Despotism once Bureaucracy is online. There's just no point.

To me, Social Policy has come to feel a lot like an amalgamation of Civ Traits (you'll see some Civ IV-ish policies relatively easily), Civics, and Tech. I can play "Aggressive" England, or "Tradition" England, and provided that I limit myself in the appropriate manner, each play feels significantly different from the other.

Right now, I think Liberty is a little too powerful, a little too essential to the early game, but most Social Policies in the Medieval, Renaissance, and Industrial are competitive, with the possible exception of the Rationalism Opener, which is just brutally strong.

 

[NicTeos]

pros
hexagons - no more unit movement cheating*

cons
1upt - fails, maybe you play battle isle I or history line for good 1UPT
global happiness - even worse to civ3's incredible production corruption to stop from expanding like hell
sp - they stack and no real decision, tied to culture is also worse in some ways
culture spread - it's lame
diplomacy - War, and feed CS with gold
lack of religion
lack of cottages - CE or SE was very nice
lack of espionage
CS - if you play civ5 without it, it feels even more like a civ
trade system
nice graphics - but not functional
less units to control - I don't feel controlling an empire
decisions - there are none
Unit promotions - less decisions
Seperation of ressources - and sowith nothing to decide - boring
lack of specialization of cities - Bigger, the best, better than the rest, .. but not in civ4, especially with the national wonders and the limit to 2 per city
.....
boring

 

[Dreadnought]

The Good:

-- One unit per tile.
-- Hexagons.
-- Wide variety of Civs with different abilities.

The Bad:

-- Need to focus on culture in all victory types.
-- No flexibility in victory types; you need to know what victory type you're going for in the first few turns of the game.
-- Social policies cannot be changed, meaning you need to go "all in" for a certain victory type.

The Ugly:

-- Severe multiplayer bugs.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

pros
hexagons - no more unit movement cheating*

cons
1upt - fails, maybe you play battle isle I or history line for good 1UPT
global happiness - even worse to civ3's incredible production corruption to stop from expanding like hell
sp - they stack and no real decision, tied to culture is also worse in some ways
culture spread - it's lame
diplomacy - War, and feed CS with gold
lack of religion
lack of cottages - CE or SE was very nice
lack of espionage
CS - if you play civ5 without it, it feels even more like a civ
trade system
nice graphics - but not functional
less units to control - I don't feel controlling an empire
decisions - there are none
Unit promotions - less decisions
Seperation of ressources - and sowith nothing to decide - boring
lack of specialization of cities - Bigger, the best, better than the rest, .. but not in civ4, especially with the national wonders and the limit to 2 per city
.....
boring

-.-.... Sorry to say but you didn't not play with the rules of the thread

Seriously, is there nothing more you like about the game , you had pretty much the whole post about negatives, and no positives (just one... no more, just one).

 

[NicTeos]

-.-.... Sorry to say but you didn't not play with the rules of the thread

Seriously, is there nothing more you like about the game , you had pretty much the whole post about negatives, and no positives (just one... no more, just one).

Sadly there isn't that more pros imho, only maybe neutral

neutral
embark of units,
the variety of civs,
limited ressources

So what do you find the PROS and CONS personally in Civ 5? Post BOTH of them, don't just post positive without negative and negative without positive, post both!

I can't deliver more pros .... sry ( and even about that one, I had to think some minutes )

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Man, you really hate the game

I'm starting to slowly leaning towards "negative" too however, i now find the game somewhat repetivive, since the Victory Conditions aren't that "complicated".

 

[bitula]

Pros:
Social Policies: I like the aspect of the unlocking mechanism, and that the policies themselves are arranged in a hierarchy. However I dont know if these are well balanced or not, but the Idea is good.
Locking city tiles: its good that you can lock them, so the game wont rearrange them, but when I played it was somehow bugged, it really unlocked sometimes my locked tiles.
Ranged combat: unrealistic, but an interesting possibility.
Leader animation: good for a while, but hard to mod, so I hope it will be possible to replace these with a 2d picture.

Cons:
1upt: doesnt work out the way it is, doom of carpet
City States: childish rpg
Puppets: terrible, similar to an autoplay button
boring: I mean very boring
Graphics: lack of idle animation, ugly and unnatural cities, overall lack of vividness, units are too small, like ants
Global happiness: terrible (known issue)
No health: I put it here because it may be because of global happiness concept
Buildings: lack of functionality and reason to build them
Tactics vesrus empire management: well known issue
Deterministic: much less open ended than Civ4.

Neutral:
Hexes: who cares? I mean really...
lack of religion, corp etc: I just put it in neutral since I hope something alike will be added in expansions
Diplomacy: not worse than in civ4, but not better, it seems to be a general shortfall in all Civ series
Quantifiable resources: didnt improve anything, althoug its probably OK
AI: dumb, but I could live with this, if this would be the only problem

Everything else I forgot to mention goes probably into CONS, this game was a huge dissapointment for me, but note, I do not hate the game, I dont regret buying it, I just dont play it any more, thats all. This is a quite neutral feeling...

 

[Rub'Rum]

What I can think of on the spot...

Like:

- The feel of the game. It's quite sleak, feels shiny, the UI is improving but has good looks. The leaderheads are superb and the civs look amazing on the map, I dunno, I like how the game looks and feels. The map itself and the units though can be a little bland...
- 1 unit per tile; even if the AI is not great at it, it's still a lot more fun than stack wars. I actually kind of like going to war in this game, a first.
- The Civs UA, UB, UU... Hard to balance and create new ones, but makes them feel a lot more different than sharing generic traits. I like it a lot more.
- Finite resources, creates very fun scenarios where we fight for "more iron" and such


Dislike:

- Diplomacy, deals constantly having to be renewed, no real alliances (always have to renew defensive pact as soon as a city state declares war because the pact is "used up"), seemingly random declarations of wars, can't I have loyal friends?
- I'm not sure "AI acts like it's trying to win a game" is something I actually want. Breaks my immersion. See "diplomacy" above. I want to feel part of a "real world" where I can expect certain things.
- Trade routes only within an empire? No trade routes to other civs?!
- Social policies feel disconnected from what they actually do. They are kind of bland, I can't even remember the names of them. I know I'm on a specific tree, but I can't remember where "aristocracy" is and what it does exactly.

 

[NicTeos]

Man, you really hate the game

That's probably true, but more I'm disappointed.