CiV at PAX East, let's wait!

[Dale]

You realise knowing exactly what the diplo modifiers are makes you game-the-game? Knowing the modifiers changes how you play, or you focus on certain actions you know will alter the modifier in the direction you want. I'd rather not knowing exactly and getting an impression of how the AI feels, such as clicking on Bismarck and seeing his face in anger screaming at me in stuttered German I know he's not Pleased.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

deanej, I really do not see how it will hinder you. Civ 1 through Civ 3 had no visible diplomacy modifiers &-indeed-none such diplomacy modifiers were even in operation. As I understand it, the modifiers from CivIV will still be largely in CivV, but now they will also be impacted by the various flavors too.
Oh, & I will bet you dollars to donuts that those of you who would rather play against an AI you can ruthlessly exploit (by knowing *exactly* what their opinion is of you) will get your wish-in the shape of a mod-within a few months of the game being released! Meanwhile, those who enjoy a good dose of *realism*, get to enjoy the hidden nature of diplomacy modifiers!

Aussie.

 

[Thyrwyn]

Aussie Lurker and Dale have essentially said what I was trying to say. If the overall game experience is mathematical and "solvable", that will do more to break any sense of immersion than some Archer shooting over a lake hex ever will.

For me, the most interesting parts of Civ are those that center around uncertainty: exploring the map in the early stages (really wish there was some way to drag that out longer); managing my economy vs the need to expand and acquire new resources (or adapt to ones I don't have) discovering which Leaders I have to share the world with; which events and quests I get. . .

I can count the number of games I have actually finished in the last year on both hands - but I have stopped playing more games in the Renaissance era than I can even begin to count. If I am still alive at that point everyone's religions and alliances are set, and the game becomes a grind. Now, I am by no means a master of civ - I play on Monarch - so others' experiences may vary. In my experience, moving up a level won't change the equation, just the amount of attention I have to pay to the details along the way.

When I play a game over and over (and over. . . and over. . .) I want a game experience that is new without being random. If I can solve my relationships with the other leaders (like we can in IV), than that "new" experience becomes less and less likely.

That is the experience I am hoping for with Civ V.

 

[roberteriksson]

For me, the most interesting parts of Civ are those that center around uncertainty: exploring the map in the early stages (really wish there was some way to drag that out longer); managing my economy vs the need to expand and acquire new resources (or adapt to ones I don't have) discovering which Leaders I have to share the world with; which events and quests I get. . .

I can count the number of games I have actually finished in the last year on both hands - but I have stopped playing more games in the Renaissance era than I can even begin to count.

Amen to that.

 

[The Almighty dF]

So were any of the last two non-confirmed civs shown?
Inca, Persia, Siam?

 

[Tamed]

Nope, like I posted earlier the only ones they showed were Russia, Greece and France.

 

[The Almighty dF]

Nope, like I posted earlier the only ones they showed were Russia, Greece and France.

They showed Japan and Germany as well, judging by the two leaked videos (Oda Nobunaga looks -awesome-. He's in full Samurai armor.)
Sadly, those seem to be the only 5 shown in actual gameplay.

 

[thunderflush]

Hi,

If any of this info is old, sorry, I haven't read this forum at all. I only lurk in the Noble's Club threads.

I saw the first showing Saturday morning. Culture borders don't pop as in the past. The city will decide what tiles it needs next, so if you set the city to emphasize growth, it will try and extend the borders along rivers and plains to get all the fertile land it can. If you set it to production it will try and grab hills and... whatever else has production I guess.

Buying up land (as Sam alluded to) can make the AI upset if it is near their borders. Also the AI will get upset with you if you have a lot of army units marching near their borders and they may ask you to move along a different route.

City states don't just flip straight over to a conquering civ, you can liberate them and re-establish their independence. This of course nets you a diplomatic bonus with them. Trade agreements with city states net you bonuses like +2 food in capital, +1 food in all other cities or something along those lines. It depends on the city state and their placement. I also imagine those numbers aren't finalized.

I noticed the catapult used in the combat demo had 6 lightning bolt icons in the lower left of the screen when selected. I asked about the icons and those are promotions. He couldn't say more than that but the catapult had 6 icons in a row. Maybe they only have one placeholder image for promotions or maybe it was combat 1-6 or whatever the equivalent is for ranged units.

Combat doesn't automatically lead to the destruction of one unit or the other, they can just weaken one another and withdraw. You can swap units in adjacent tiles and there are attack penalties for going across a river/attacking a unit on a hill.

edit: Oh, someone else in my showing asked about console versions like civ rev and the Firaxis guy said civ 5 will be PC only and there aren't any plans for console versions yet.

The graphics are scalable. You can run the game in directx 9 mode and with a lot of animations and what not turned off. They are very aware that a lot of fans play it on their laptops at airports or on old PCs so they want to make sure it runs simplified and everyone has a good framerate/load time. The fog of war look isn't finalized yet but it looks like actual fog instead of grimblack darkness right now.

oh the ruins! Instead of just huts there are also ruins you can discover. They didn't actually explore any of them in the sneak peek I attended but I imagine they will have similar bonuses to the huts.

 

[V. Soma]

Hi, glad to read info from a - EDIT: new! welcomed! - CFC member

Culture borders [...] The city will decide what tiles it needs next, so if you set the city to emphasize growth, it will try and extend the borders along rivers and plains to get all the fertile land it can. If you set it to production it will try and grab hills and... whatever else has production I guess.

this is important clarification on the topic

Trade agreements with city states net you bonuses like +2 food in capital, +1 food in all other cities or something along those lines. It depends on the city state and their placement.

Again, nice bit of info.

 

[Shurdus]

Hi,

If any of this info is old, sorry, I haven't read this forum at all. I only lurk in the Noble's Club threads.

I saw the first showing Saturday morning. Culture borders don't pop as in the past. The city will decide what tiles it needs next, so if you set the city to emphasize growth, it will try and extend the borders along rivers and plains to get all the fertile land it can. If you set it to production it will try and grab hills and... whatever else has production I guess.

Buying up land (as Sam alluded to) can make the AI upset if it is near their borders. Also the AI will get upset with you if you have a lot of army units marching near their borders and they may ask you to move along a different route.

City states don't just flip straight over to a conquering civ, you can liberate them and re-establish their independence. This of course nets you a diplomatic bonus with them. Trade agreements with city states net you bonuses like +2 food in capital, +1 food in all other cities or something along those lines. It depends on the city state and their placement. I also imagine those numbers aren't finalized.

I noticed the catapult used in the combat demo had 6 lightning bolt icons in the lower left of the screen when selected. I asked about the icons and those are promotions. He couldn't say more than that but the catapult had 6 icons in a row. Maybe they only have one placeholder image for promotions or maybe it was combat 1-6 or whatever the equivalent is for ranged units.

Combat doesn't automatically lead to the destruction of one unit or the other, they can just weaken one another and withdraw. You can swap units in adjacent tiles and there are attack penalties for going across a river/attacking a unit on a hill.

edit: Oh, someone else in my showing asked about console versions like civ rev and the Firaxis guy said civ 5 will be PC only and there aren't any plans for console versions yet.

The graphics are scalable. You can run the game in directx 9 mode and with a lot of animations and what not turned off. They are very aware that a lot of fans play it on their laptops at airports or on old PCs so they want to make sure it runs simplified and everyone has a good framerate/load time. The fog of war look isn't finalized yet but it looks like actual fog instead of grimblack darkness right now.

oh the ruins! Instead of just huts there are also ruins you can discover. They didn't actually explore any of them in the sneak peek I attended but I imagine they will have similar bonuses to the huts.

Welcome to civfanatics, thunderflush!

 

[kdr777]

Aussie Lurker and Dale have essentially said what I was trying to say. If the overall game experience is mathematical and "solvable", that will do more to break any sense of immersion than some Archer shooting over a lake hex ever will.

For me, the most interesting parts of Civ are those that center around uncertainty: exploring the map in the early stages (really wish there was some way to drag that out longer); managing my economy vs the need to expand and acquire new resources (or adapt to ones I don't have) discovering which Leaders I have to share the world with; which events and quests I get. . .

I can count the number of games I have actually finished in the last year on both hands - but I have stopped playing more games in the Renaissance era than I can even begin to count. If I am still alive at that point everyone's religions and alliances are set, and the game becomes a grind. Now, I am by no means a master of civ - I play on Monarch - so others' experiences may vary. In my experience, moving up a level won't change the equation, just the amount of attention I have to pay to the details along the way.

When I play a game over and over (and over. . . and over. . .) I want a game experience that is new without being random. If I can solve my relationships with the other leaders (like we can in IV), than that "new" experience becomes less and less likely.

That is the experience I am hoping for with Civ V.

For me, you at least need to know what the AI thinks about you: why he is happy or why he is angry, if not how can I know what actions of mine are effecting his mood.

I do not need exact details but a general feel (i.e. an imitation of a human converstation would be great )

 

[Chalks]

oh the ruins! Instead of just huts there are also ruins you can discover. They didn't actually explore any of them in the sneak peek I attended but I imagine they will have similar bonuses to the huts.

That sounds interesting, I wonder if there will be a distinction between what you get from them and what you get from huts. I assume that ruins of ancient dead cities aren't going to be teaching you new technologies or giving free units, but maybe a cultural bonus or currency bonus (treasure!) might be gained.

Thanks for the info thunderflush.

 

[Shorlin]

I would expect the clever people in the community to work out all the modifiers and coding of the AI behaviour before long, so I don't see what difference hiding it makes in the long run. Instead of a quick reference in game you will have to alt tab, and pour over a spread sheet to decipher what impact your interactions with AI have had on your relations over the course the game .

 

[Wolle68]

For me, you at least need to know what the AI thinks about you: why he is happy or why he is angry, if not how can I know what actions of mine are effecting his mood.

I do not need exact details but a general feel (i.e. an imitation of a human converstation would be great )

I suppose the difference is whether you want to see the other civs as an integral part of the game, or as computer opponent that's a separate entity just playing the game.

If the civs are a part of the game, then not knowing the modifiers is like playing a game with secret rules.

On the other hand, if the other civs are opponents, then having them broadcast their intentions and how they can be manipulated is silly. Why give them such a handicap?

In all versions of Civilization, the other emperors have been a part of the game: an obstacle for you to overcome rather than a competitor in a level playing field. I'm not sure about the move away from that formula. It wasn't broken; why fix it? As someone said, if that's what you want, why not just play multiplayer?

 

[Civ Revisited]

I for one will be delighted to see roads tidied up in Civ 5
Has anyone spoted railways yet? Will they act like roads?

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

They showed Japan and Germany as well, judging by the two leaked videos (Oda Nobunaga looks -awesome-. He's in full Samurai armor.)
Sadly, those seem to be the only 5 shown in actual gameplay.

Where have you seen Oda Nobunaga? I want to see the samurai awesomeness!

 

[Ahriman]

So tell me this-can the AI civs gauge when *you* are angry with them? When *you* like them? When you're about to DoW? No, of course not-because you're human. Similarly, when you're playing MP, you're going to have no idea how your fellow players are going to behave-but you *do* hope they'll behave rationally. So why should this be any different for the AI (& trust me, this is coming from someone who actually *liked* the numerical indicators of diplomacy modifiers).

No, they can't. But they didn't pay for the game; I did. The game is supposed to be fun for ME, not for the AI players.

The AI can't effectively use diplomacy against a human player. A human player can't use diplomacy aganist another human player in multiplayer (giving them stuff won't make them any more or less likely to attack you, except in a psychological sense).
Making the AI act like a human for diplomatic purposes is the same as saying that you are going to remove strategic diplomacy from the game.

Multiplayer violates all of those conditions I described in post #55, which are necessary to make diplomacy strategic. Which is why we should NOT try to make the single player experience like a multiplayer game.

You realise knowing exactly what the diplo modifiers are makes you game-the-game?

Its a strategy game! We're supposed to game the game!
You could equally say that knowing how much extra gold a marketplace gives you lets you "game-the-game". So does knowing how many hammers you will get from building a mine. So will knowing the probability outcome of combat. Did real human commanders know the exact combat odds of winning a battle? No! So displaying combat odds is unrealistic! It must be removed!

Its a strategy game, we're trying to devise a strategy that is best for winning. To do that, we have to know what the in-game consequences of our actions are.

deanej, I really do not see how it will hinder you. Civ 1 through Civ 3 had no visible diplomacy modifiers &-indeed-none such diplomacy modifiers were even in operation.

Yes, and Civ4 improved diplomacy over those games. And one of the biggest complaints about diploamacy in those games was how the AI would sometimes DOW you for no apparent reason. That wasn't fun. If the AI hates me, I want to know why, so I can do something about it.

For me, the most interesting parts of Civ are those that center around uncertainty

So, you would enjoy the game more if you didn't know how much gold a marketplace would give you, if you didn't know whether or not the AIs were going to attack you, and if you couldn't observe combat odds before a fight?
What is the virtue of uncertainty?

In all versions of Civilization, the other emperors have been a part of the game: an obstacle for you to overcome rather than a competitor in a level playing field. I'm not sure about the move away from that formula. It wasn't broken; why fix it? As someone said, if that's what you want, why not just play multiplayer?

Precisely.

 

[Chalks]

I really hope the advisers at least will be able to offer you some information on what your opponents think of you. In the real world, your embassy to Greece would be able to say "the Greeks are pretty upset with you because of X". This is how you would know your international standing - making it just a blind guess based on things they have already done doesn't make any sense.

I hope that this change is simply an attempt to increase the utility of the advisers so that they are vital for gauging opponents opinions of you.

 

[kdr777]

I really hope the advisers at least will be able to offer you some information on what your opponents think of you. In the real world, your embassy to Greece would be able to say "the Greeks are pretty upset with you because of X". This is how you would know your international standing - making it just a blind guess based on things they have already done doesn't make any sense.

I hope that this change is simply an attempt to increase the utility of the advisers so that they are vital for gauging opponents opinions of you.

My point exactly, if you simply aggregate the civ 4 detailed list of diplo modifiers into a broader list you will still be able to estimate what impact your diplomacy has on the AI whilst maintaining a slight 'fog of diplomacy' (and imho the same idea could be applied to the output of farms and mines [i.e. they could produce between 1 & 3 but you would not know the exact amount until it is built])

 

[duckstab]

Once I started using the BUG mod I realized how much I hated having information hidden from me. Things as simple as the number of cities my opponents were building so I could tell if I were up against a crazed city spammer and needed to step up my own settlement. Or knowing if they were building up for a war so I could accelerate my own military production. I hope they don't make it impossible for someone to at least mod in that level of detail for those of us who want it.

I'll be interested to see how they handle getting the player useful intel with the BtS espionage system gone. I'm not looking forward to going back to having to have OB with every potential enemy and scouting their territory by hand to see if they pose a real threat.