Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Antmanbrooks, Oct 3, 2010.
I guess we can't have Rise Of Mankind fix for Civ5 ?
Wow. The original poster got it all right!!! Great post. I would pay another $50 to turn Civ5 into Civ5:ROM.
And bring back stacks!!!
RoM took years hundreds of man-hours for modders to develop. It's not like RoM was released two weeks after launch. And if you're paying attention, you'll notice that Zappara's already on the scene, learning the game.
You can't blame Civ V developers for not already having the many expansions and mods that makes Civ IV/RoM so complex.
That doesn't make sense? Firaxis has a PAID staff who put in 40 hrs each per week. Why couldn't they release a game that would meet the expectations of those that came before it.
When a new video card is released you don't find a lot of threads saying man the old ones were so much better. Or a new car. Most people expect the new version to be bigger, better, faster.
CiV is smaller/buggier/slower. There are some companies who release quality products and you can tell they did everything they could to release a good product. I don't get that from Firaxis. There are soo many simple 1 or 2 lines of code bugs that weren't fixed that leads me to believe this was a rush job and no one stood up and said this isn't ready, we can't realease this and say we did a good job.
I tend to agree -- 1UpT is basically the one thing V has that I see that could be an improvement (too bad the AI is so addled in dealing with it that I'd almost rather just let the AI stack to its heart's content so they'll stop being such pushovers).
However, what RoM/AND added to deal with stacks -- opportunity fire, archery ranged attack, better collateral and flanking damage, surround bonuses -- made stacks less dumbed down and a lot more tolerable.
Ultimately, given a choice between the V 1UpT w/stupid AI vs. RoM/AND stack implementation, I'd prefer the latter.
The former could be made to work and work better, but right now -- it doesn't.
I certainly agree! ROM is a nice mode for some, but has way too many techs, units, etc for me.
I much prefer Legends of Revolutions which makes significant changes as well. However, these changes seem to be better thought out and each one has more impact for me.
Why would Firaxis pay a bunch of people to make a bunch of units, techs, buildings, etc. many of which are arguably superfluous, when dedicated fans are going to do it for free?
Especially when if they had done that, they would have gotten far more grief for making it too complicated, and that they should have left that sort of extra stuff for the modding community?
So what is wrong with RoM that you would want Civ 5 to be like that? It seems like you want the game to be remade and I don't understand why. Some of the features in RoM are secondary or tertiary in importance because there are so many. Why add even more?
If nothing else, Firaxis at least tries new things. Maybe next game they will try coding AI.
[..] for Semi-amateurs to develop, in their spare time, for free [..]
There, I fixed it for you, mate.
They are hired, paid, trained professionals.
I can blame them for the blood boilingly stupid enemy player AI and worker AI, the lack of features, the elimination of previous good features, implementing bad ones and the boring gameplay.
Two good things came out from Civ5: graphics, 1 unit / tile combat system (although, I understand if someone likes the stack of death playstyle better), but after 6 games (and beating the second hardest ai on my 3rd game with one hand in my nostrils) I angrily discarded it for Civ4+BtS+Warlords+RoM.
RoM is a great mod and the only reason I might one day buy Civ5 (probably, who knows what other mods will have to offer).
Vanilla games are supposed to be vanilla. If I order vanilla ice cream, it should be vanilla, it shouldn't have a bunch of nuts and fudge chunks and gummi worms in it.
If you want a harder game, play a higher difficulty. If you want an intelligent opponent, play multiplayer.
@ Opening post: Did you ever tried to sell cars? :>
Well, I agree to certain points in a certain way, as it's just that... vanilla right now. But it's okay, it's a new game in it's on way.
On the other hand, one should not forget the bad things, you will never miss:
1. Tedious micro vs. stupid automation: At some point (mostly around rennaissance age) RoM just get's tedious micro managemend of countless workers, overdeveloped tiles and even on marathon and beyond, you get in late game 3+ popus to change the production in a city. It's just not fun. And don't you dare to try automate your cities or workers... have fun :x
2. The naval horror: When you board your first fluyt/galleon with a settler, musketman and worker to build your first settlement you are proud and it's all fun and games, it's adventure. But later, you need to ship units from continent to continent, or you want to expand more, build more settlers... soon you get countless of transport ships, units which take 10-20+ turns to travel between the landmasses, get lost on the square tile maps... aaaaand AI never even managed to invade over sea. They just can't do it.
3. Production and tech horror: It's just too much of all. When you found new cities you have to build dozens of buildings to get them up and working, all requiring micro managment, as your governor won't build food/production buildings first, no... he starts with a stadium/barracks.
4. Failed espionage and religion: Espionage is just like this: You get to see through the fog of war sometimes later, when you invest enough into espionage points. You can micro manage single superagents to start almost useless missions. (For example: lowering happiness/health in an enemy city, won't do anything as the Ai cheats on the production and happyness anyway... :x ) And religion, as it was implemented, did do 2 things: screw with diplomacy and gets you lots of gold, if you have the holy city buildings of the religion...
I'm too lazy to go on, it doesn't matter anyway.
And sure, I miss some things in CiV from RoM, especially civic/politcs was better implemented. Although I like the idea of talent trees.
Just my 2c, take them or not
Eh, that'd be a dream come true... A Civ5 graphics with RoM complexity... Seriously, same way I can't play Heroes of Might&Magic III without Wake Of Gods, I can't play Civ4 without RoM/AND.
The content of win in these modpacks makes them viable for sale - I totally wouldn't mind to pay money for such craftsmanship. Especially when in the meantime Jon Shafer comes to us and says "heey lil boy, here's candy!". Yeah, we all like sweets, but we did come to play in Civ and have some challenge...
Rise of Mankind is just way too bloated and enormous to ever be a vanilla civ game. There would be LESS money made releasing a game like that mod than something like Civ5, so I disagree with every single one of your points. Let the modding community tackle Civ5 and make their own RoM, because honestly, I can only stand RoM for so long before it gets dreadfully long and boring, and know many who agree.
...and with the expansion packs you'll get to!
Rise of Mankind (RoM) is a mod for Beyond the Sword. IT also has it's own ModMod called A New Dawn (AND) and the latest version can he found here.
RoM did have some of these problems early days, but the latest version has more or less cleared up these issues. I disagree that RoM breaks the back of the AI. In my experience the AI was 10 times better. However I haven't tried LoR but I'll give it a go now.
Because it seems CiV has only taken away, rather than gifted anything new? There is no discernable religion, the 1UPT AI is broken and the map just gets cluttered with units sat in a traffic jam. City States are a poor replacement for barbarian cities, only they are pointless and offer no threat. They were designed to add trade value and diplomacy. They don't attack anyone, threaten your culture or trade anything you can't trade with the other civs for much less gold. CiV V has too few units, tech, building, wonders and the majority of what is there is useless and badly balanced.
LMAO! Play Multiplayer! Have you tried a game of CiV on multiplayer? No unit animations, no direct IP connection, no SAVE GAME FEATURE FFS! These are basic features, it's not like I'm asking for much.
If I want a harder game... please explain how a harder difficulty will improve the flaws I have pointed out. Of course I know you won't, because that's a gut instinct reaction to the faults I have brought to your attention that you disagree with.
I can't agree with your analogy either, if I order "New Improved Recipe Vanilla Ice Cream" I expect it to have improvements and not take away some of the core ingrediants of the previous version.
Thanks for your 2c. I'll take them.
1. You can't automate anything in CiV either. I'm not sure what you mean with 3+ popus to change the production in a city? And I don't know what you mean by overdevelped tiles? They have a "road" and an "improvement" generally, which is admitedly one more thing than most tiles in CiV.
2. Ships are easy to manage. You set a rally point on your coast, usually just outside a city and load up however many units you want to ship across seas, click and drag and it's all automated for you! As for the AI not knowing how to attack over seas, then you clearly haven't experienced the same RoM as I have. In the very game I mentioned on my first post the Carthaginians have taken 4-5 Malinese cities and have a Navy the Colonial British Empire would be proud of. Not only have they successfully taken cities on a foreign continent, they have kept them well supported for 400 years or more, defeated rebellions, countered my attempt at Naval defense and retaken cities I liberated.
3. Generally real historical cities needed an assortment of buildings to grow and trade and build an army. Can't comment on the AI here as I never use it anyway, but I bet the AI on CiV handles this no differently. The AI cities of the other players don;t seem to have a problem keeping pace with me though and they seem to queue buildings just fine. Not sure why the governer would be any differnet unless you prioritise Military or happiness and expect it to build a granary.
4. Religion in real life does only 3 things, keep people happy, cause strained diplomatic situations and make lots of gold for the nation that holds the holy city/relic site. As for espionage, it's been key to political history since time immemorial, why remove it? States have been overthrown using elements of political espionage, assassination, stealing technology etc... it's a big part to take away.
Oh and no I never sold cars, but I did sell kitchens amongst other things.
Isn't the whole point of the modding tools that RoM for Civ 5 would exist? Why would they or should they implement the amount of stuff RoM has in it into the base game? What would they do in the RoM mod for Civ 5? Add another 288 techs to make it up to over 500?
I really admire what RoM has to offer, but the sheer amount of stuff in it is too much to be the 'base game' in both terms of performance (a few people I play with who have older machines simply couldn't run the late game of RoM because it was way too much performancewise) and preference for game speed settings and amount of content.
It's a lot better for modders to add extra stuff than to have take it away. I love that Civ 5 seems like a very nice foundation for lots of mods that add new features to the game.
I agree with your point actually. It is difficult to add the host of things that RoM offers and it's unreasonable for me to expect it all. In truth I don't expect it, but I would have been blown away if they had just included half of it.
I agree that performance-wise, older machines chugged along with RoM, but those same machines would surely be worse off running CiV and any mods people add? So I'm not sure that's a reason to take successful content away and release a game that is basic to the point of boredom.
Finally the saving grace that CiV offers is it will be modded and extra stuff will be added and for this I am eternally grateful to the people at Firaxis.
I am however still disappointed that their vanilla release didn't include religions, a slider system, espionage, revolutions and to a lesser extent stacks. In truth the stacks are not the main issue with combat, it's the fact everything gets so bogged down and congested. My point on stacks vs 1upt is that 1upt solves nothing and creates more problems.
I'm also not stupid and fully undertand why these features were left out. Religion and espionage, amongst other things will be included in the money making future CiV 5 extra content packs they release.
not sure i understand the point of the thread
some people don't patch a game, many do not buy expansions, and few play mods
how could Civ5 benefit from a complicated mod of an old game when they went out of their way to create a new dynamic
that would be counter productive at worse, and from a business position - unfeasible
the evidence is clear
RoM: AND is fun but has so much that it would be impossible to "expand" through expansions. The only thing about it is that the AI in AND (thanks to the work of several unpaid modders) is several times more challenging than the AI in Civ5.
Separate names with a comma.