Civ V Gameplay Changes

Windsor said:
About ranged bombardment, I can see lots of gameplay improvements, but if an archer can shoot 2 tiles, how far can the units move? It would be stupid if a group of warriors needs 50 years to reach some archers shooting at them...
Click to expand...
Technically you can poke a whole bunch of holes in any Civ game from a realism perspective. For instance, in the early game you'd have group of Warriors travelling for 1000 years to invade your next door neighbour. Civ isn't meant to be a perfect historical simulator though, it's meant to be fun. As such, I welcome the introduction of ranged units that can attack tiles not directly adjacent to them. It sounds like great fun, and there'll be a whole lot of strategy that comes with it. :)
 
A built in webbrowser? I already see that in Garry's Mod through the use of addons. Plus people do alt-tab or run Civilization 4 in windowed mode.

The Hex tiles somehow would have a more Panzer General feel to it than a classic squared game.
 
I can’t see the different between earlier versions of Civs and CivV when it comes to game play :confused:
- What makes the game better when you get an Inviting Presentation?
- Each time I starting a new Civ game I get new epic history, especially if I play on a random generated map.
- Civ sucks when it comes to battle!
For example can elephant units beat attack helicopters.
Simple warriors can beat tanks. You have nothing for attack enemies from two directions, and so on.

At the first look I think CivV I a disappointment. I hoped fore more than just graphics. Hexagon system has been in games fore decades, maybe new for Sid’s staff?
 
My main fear is that with the added focus on combat tactics (Panzer General/Battle Isle-style), something else might have to go in order to make the game manageable for players (more depth in one area usually means less depth in another). And it is interesting and a little worrying that I haven't seen any mention of economy or other "peaceful" things so far. I am quite happy to play an entire game of Civ IV without a single war, because the main foundation of the game is the building of your nation. I hope added focus on combat does not mean this part is being neglected. Though the apparent loss of religion seems to suggest so.

Civ V is going to be an instant buy for me no matter what, and it is still early days for sure. But I am not as convinced as I hoped I would be.
 
niklas627 said:
For example can elephant units beat attack helicopters.
Simple warriors can beat tanks. You have nothing for attack enemies from two directions, and so on.
Click to expand...

Have you seen a spearmen beating a simple tank? :mischief:
:spear:
 
taking out religon? thats like taking out a sizable chunk of the game.

with the demise of religion, whats the point? we will all be one big happy family from the start.. no AI hating each other due to religious differences, no human hating the AI for the same thing, etc. obviously that makes war a lot harder.
 
Religions gone. I have mixed feelings about this. Of course, the religous alliances and such were realistic and had some interesting things, but after all, didn't all that feel just a bit... artificial?

I think religions should've been more like separate factions in Civ IV - they have demands to make, holy armies and a nice potential for violence if they are repressed/ignored/greedy, as in real life (crusades, islam extremism for example). On the other hand, religious communities, if treated well, would allow the empire to prosper - like Saladin did. He gave the people mosques, places of learning, markets, whatever they needed. And the religious community helped him do this.

Overall, I feel confident that removing religions won't do great harm to gameplay. I trust they know what they do. And probably some modder adds religions in no time after the initial release.
 
First and foremost, they MUST put more emphasis on smarter AI and not cheatier AI. I never enjoyed a game where the difficulty was ramped up merely by giving all the other players extra settlers. BOOOOORIIIIIING.

Second: the government model needs a much more fundamental change than they made from Civ3 to Civ4. What they need is to make the governments different, but not necessarily better. In Civ4 there was almost no excuse for not having the politically-correct civics (such as environmentalism and free religion) unless you played badly on purpose. What they need to do is make it possible to play the game as a maniacal dictator, because, let's face it, rewriting history and having Germany win World War II is part of what makes this game special. (That did actually happen to me once--I went to war against France, and in a hilarious twist on history it was ME, GERMANY, who built the Maginot Line and the FRENCH who ran around the Maginot Line to invade me. Also, France lost :D )

Edit: What the---did I just post in something besides Off Topic??? :dubious:
 
niklas627 said:
I can’t see the different between earlier versions of Civs and CivV when it comes to game play :confused:
- What makes the game better when you get an Inviting Presentation?
- Each time I starting a new Civ game I get new epic history, especially if I play on a random generated map.
- Civ sucks when it comes to battle!
For example can elephant units beat attack helicopters.
Simple warriors can beat tanks. You have nothing for attack enemies from two directions, and so on.

At the first look I think CivV I a disappointment. I hoped fore more than just graphics. Hexagon system has been in games fore decades, maybe new for Sid’s staff?
Click to expand...
You're judging the game an awful lot when only a couple of screenshots and a few tidbits of information have been released. Nothing has really been revealed about the gameplay yet, and yet you're already saying you can't see the difference between the gameplay of this Civ5 and the earlier versions. Doesn't really make much sense. :crazyeye: ;)

Oh, and I challenge you to beat a (not mortally wounded) helicopter with an elephant, or a (not mortally wounded) tank with a warrior in Civ4. You're not going to get it to happen in anything but a freak accident. :)

Mathalamus said:
taking out religon? thats like taking out a sizable chunk of the game.

with the demise of religion, whats the point? we will all be one big happy family from the start.. no AI hating each other due to religious differences, no human hating the AI for the same thing, etc. obviously that makes war a lot harder.
Click to expand...
That's not really true, and you know it. Religion was only one part of Civ4's diplomacy system. Sure, it sometimes polarized portions of the world, but even without it leaders would still grow to like or dislike you over time. If you've ever played a game on a continent where the early religions were not founded, you'll know what I'm talking about. Start next to Monty, Alex and Shaka without a religion a few times, and then try to claim that they're all like "one big happy family" with you.

I'm not really worried about the absence of religion from the perspective of diplomatic positive and negative points - I'm sure that other elements will be introduced that influence those things. I will definitely miss religion from a flavour point of view though. It was just a neat thing to have in the game, and I'll be sad to see it go. :(
 
Actually religion made happy families better to create, since it gave a bonus with such aggressive leaders. But I agree that its flavor will be missed :(
 
BasketCase said:
In Civ4 there was almost no excuse for not having the politically-correct civics (such as environmentalism and free religion) unless you played badly on purpose.
Click to expand...
Eh? You actually use Environmentalism most of the time? And Free Religion isn't exactly a great civic in most cases either. :huh:

I agree that some of the civics in Civ4 are much preferable to others for most styles of gameplay on most maps (e.g. Slavery, Bureaucracy, Free Market, Representation/Hereditary Rule), but I think you chose some odd ones to illustrate your point. ;)
 
Lord Parkin said:
Eh? You actually use Environmentalism most of the time? And Free Religion isn't exactly a great civic in most cases either. :huh:
Click to expand...

Actually he said that there was no reason to use them. Which is true, although I use free religion a lot (it's good in a diverse religion civ in LoR)
 
EsaKo said:
Actually he said that there was no reason to use them. Which is true, although I use free religion a lot (it's good in a diverse religion civ in LoR)
Click to expand...
No, he didn't say that... check it again.
In Civ4 there was almost no excuse for not having the politically-correct civics (such as environmentalism and free religion) unless you played badly on purpose.
Click to expand...
It's a double negative, i.e. he's saying they're the best civics. ;)
 
cybrxkhan said:
I really wished that religion stayed, even in generic form. It was one of the "big" additions to Civ4, like how culture was the "big" addition to Civ3. It really does give the game a much more "alternate history" feel.
Click to expand...

Exactly! Let's start a petition to bring religion back... at least in a generic form.
 
BTW, "Religion is not a factor anymore" is quite a vague statement. We can hope it means something else than its removal.
 
Lord Parkin said:
It's a double negative, i.e. he's saying they're the best civics. ;)
Click to expand...

No, my English teacher said that double negative either means a politician trying to wriggle out of something or someone who is typing in haste and is careless enough to overlook this mistake. :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Civ 5 is disappointing
Replies
5
Views
4K
Bonyduck Campersang
Bonyduck Campersang
C
Anno 117 - Gameplay Showcase Trailer
Replies
3
Views
477
Blake00
Blake00
sTAPler27
Is there a Gameplay Reason for Civs and Leaders being Assigned to Certain Attribute Paths?
Replies
2
Views
646
Evolena
Evolena
Solver
Example gameplay mod
2 3
Replies
41
Views
5K
Jeppetto
Jeppetto
Lazy sweeper
Things that should get done before launch that can benefit gameplay.
Replies
1
Views
478
Lazy sweeper
Lazy sweeper
Back
Top Bottom