Civ V Gameplay Changes

[cthom]

i like hex tiles, it's part of the grand tradition of wargaming. so is limiting troops per tile....

i would liked to have seen religion kept, but instead of historical, just by type (animism, poly/mono-theism, cult, etc), that would give bonuses and penalties of their own. oh well.

finite resources? so when copper runs out you need to replace your old axemen with proper infantrymen.....?

 

[Blahblahman123]

i like hex tiles, it's part of the grand tradition of wargaming. so is limiting troops per tile....

i would liked to have seen religion kept, but instead of historical, just by type (animism, poly/mono-theism, cult, etc), that would give bonuses and penalties of their own. oh well.I really liked religion in civ 4 (if you use it properly)could give you economic bonus

finite resources? so when copper runs out you need to replace your old axemen with proper infantrymen.....?

If you mean upgrade youre axemen to infantrymen then yes i guess its gonna be like that and that sucks

 

[OscarWildebeest]

it appears that the advisors are back.

I do hope they can be turned off. I found them really annoying in Civ2, and just ended up turning them off all the time. Especially Elvis (sorry, but I have this Elvis allergy).

 

[helpless_writer]

And i'm glad for finite resources since now wars can be more justified. Since i was getting tired of going to war just because i had a different religion...

 

[Mathalamus]

not really, since the AI will also have finite resources you can go to war just cause you dont like his face.

you are likely to have a much bigger empire than the AI from the start.

 

[kivanc]

I am also very curious about the "social policies", I thought Civ4's civic system was a big improvement over pre-definded governments but not as good as the system in Alpha Centauri.

yes. it's 1of the core issues for me as well.
i loved SMAC. it's government system was fine, so is civ4's civic system.
the main difference is that reading the civics of civ4 is harder than that of SMAC's.
in SMAC it was so easy, you could even learn in how many turns you would explore the tech before revolting into a new system and similarly you could foresee what the new system will bring by all means.
the civic system of civ4 is generally for the guys who know about game mechanics very well. it'S not a problem for me but i admit that it makes the game a little more complex.
hardcore civ fans will always be curious about game parameters and mechanics so for them it is not boring to explore & understand the benefits of each civic system. but i assume for beginners, it can be boring.

in civ4, some UBs, civics and traits are defined so cleverly that beginners might not understand what it would bring as extra to the empire, i mean they are a a little bit more "hidden" while it was so much more obvious in SMAC.
in SMAC, you just see that it will bring +1to growth and -1 to support and you say "ok, city growth is more important at this time and i don't need a large army, so let'S revolt". such decisions were much easier in SMAC.

if u ask me, i prefer civ series being complicated and designed cleverly instead of games which are more-oriented for beginners. on the other hand, companies might think for sales and prefer the opposite.

 

[BasketCase]

Ooh! Idea! I got a idea!

Civ 5 should have some kind of way for one city to export food and labor to another. In the real world, a new city doesn't farm all its own food, it receives imports. And it doesn't use its own labor to get that granary built--Nissin Foods brings in a construction crew to build it.

In all past Civ games, getting a one-hammer city going has always been a pain in the ass. And it especially makes no sense, when you're in the Industrial and later ages, when you're sending out a few more settlers to fill out your territory, to have to wait forever for those little towns to get going.

I saw a past outer-space strategy game implement it this way: a planet could build a "workforce unit" at a cost of two hammers. A transport ship could then carry a load of workforce units to another planet, which could then spend them as labor points for construction. The two-for-one cost being the catch, of course.

Additionally, the concept of hurrying production with gold needs some tuning. I have no objection to spending gold to accelerate production, but simply having a building pop up out of nowhere in one turn is a little iffy.

 

[Mathalamus]

Additionally, the concept of hurrying production with gold needs some tuning. I have no objection to spending gold to accelerate production, but simply having a building pop up out of nowhere in one turn is a little iffy.

that's the point of spending gold. do you for example have 60,000 gold laying around for the statue of liberty to be bought?

i say keep the rush buy ability, its one of the things that you simply couldn't alter.

 

[chongli]

As an atheist I can't say I will miss religions. Sure, I recognize how historically significant they are, but I found the gameplay to be less than compelling. It was very meta-gamey and had almost nothing in common with how religions work and influence the real world from a political standpoint.

I think Sid and Co. feared, as I do, that an attempt to portray religions in a more accurate, realistic light would not be favourable and invite unwanted negative attention from the political correctness crowd.

From an economic standpoint, I welcome the addition of limited resources. I hope they are employed in a realistic, intelligent manner. I also think renewable and non-renewable resources should be treated very differently from one another. It seemed so absurd to me in the past Civ games that one city could start with wheat and cows and that you had no ability to plant that wheat or raise those cows anywhere else.

If Civ became real time, I wouldn't play it anymore. I would play more computer games if most of them didn't require physical reflex skills to go along with the mental ones.

You should give Empire: Total War a try. The real-time combat is not what you'd expect. It is very slow-paced and methodical, not frantic. I've had battles last up to an hour because I moved my forces in such a careful and tactical manner so as to minimize losses.

Typically, when you do lose units, you are left with the feeling "I shouldn't have done that!" rather than "I wasn't fast enough!". This is nothing like StarCraft. Your chance of success cannot be measured in APM (actions per minute).

 

[BasketCase]

You shouldn't be able to pop the Statue of Liberty instantly, IMO. In Civ 1 you could do that by building a bunch of caravans, and then having them all "help build Wonder" at the same time. As far as I know, that feature did not make it into Civ 2.

By accelerating production, I meant something along the lines of spending X amount of gold per turn to increase production speed of stuff by some percentage.

As an atheist I can't say I will miss religions. Sure, I recognize how historically significant they are, but I found the gameplay to be less than compelling.

I'm also an atheist, but I like the Civ 4 religion model. The beef I have with it is that the programmers were frightened of pissing off radicals and put way too much kid-gloves treatment on the topic.

 

[chongli]

I'm also an atheist, but I like the Civ 4 religion model. The beef I have with it is that the programmers were frightened of pissing off radicals and put way too much kid-gloves treatment on the topic.

I think it was more the marketing folks than the programmers who were frightened.

Heh, maybe we could put together a religion mod for Civ 5. Allow you to do exciting things like become the pope and play kingmaker, start your own religion of convenience like Henry VIII.

Maybe even have special units like crusaders for the christians or suicide bombers for the muslims. Or how about a "great leader" whose special power is to start an inquisition like Tomas de Torquemada. I bet that would garner some attention.

In the modern era you could bilk the population with televangelists and faith healers and silly made-up scifi religions like scientology.