Civ5 PDF manual is here!

[cembandit]

right click....save as

then find it on your computer and open it...i use win7_64 as well

 

[alanthreonus]

Hm, the screenshot I commented on earlier must be from an earlier build, because in the civilizations descriptions, Manifest Destiny has the effect we're all familiar with. This manual has a lot of contradictions.

 

[Maniacal]

Having now read through the manual the following two things concern me:

1. Why does the Warrior have a STEEL AXE in his picture? I mean ,seriously... he's supposed to be the pre-metal working warrior. Not Paul Bunyan.

2. Villages being changed to, and try not to laugh

Ancient Ruins
Ancient Ruins are the remnants of even earlier civilizations which rose and fell long before you came on the scene. Ruins provide a random benefit to the civilization of the unit that first enters their tile. The ruin is destroyed when it is entered. Ruins are cool. Find as many as you can before other civs get to them!

What? That is the dumbest thing I have read all day. I COULD see it happening, perhaps, in a map where a huge ice age just ended, but I can't think of ANY example in human history where EVERY civilization has collapsed so dramatically that everyone on the PLANET wandered around for 100s or 1000s of years as nomads before settling down.

Not even the Mayas did that, they all settled down in villages afterwards and did not disappear.

Sides, I liked finding the random villages, it made sense and I never once questioned it.

EDIT: Besides those two things everything seems pretty good!

EDIT2: For anyone wanting to have stuff printed out, pages 203-223 are reference tables which will be good for quickly looking up stats.

 

[Mathalamus]

ok... multilayer and in-game chat and achievements are in civ5 itself, like star craft two.

...whats the point in using steam then?

 

[Auncien]

Page 116 under subheading Destroying an Original Capital...

...the city will not be destroyed. Accept it and move on.

<3 you too guys. I would take that out though as it sounds a little defensive.

 

[Maniacal]

I don't see why you can't destroy capitals.

The Steam Community chat is with your steam friends list and not just to the people in the same multiplayer game as you.

Coincidentally, the only game(s) steam community hasn't worked for me were a few 15+ year old ones I launched via steam (you can add in non-steam game's shortcuts and use steam community ingame, its great!).

 

[Yosomono]

ok... multilayer and in-game chat and achievements are in civ5 itself, like star craft two.

...whats the point in using steam then?

Those things which are built into the game directly use the existing Steam infrastructure. They exist in the game because of Steam, not instead of it.

 

[krunsh]

Very interesting read, but something seems weird...

''Destroying the City
If you destroy the city, it&#8217;s gone. For good. All of its buildings, wonders, and citizens are no
more. We hope you&#8217;re proud of yourself, you big bully! While there are some good reasons
for destroying a city, mostly to do with your population&#8217;s happiness (see below), this extreme
behavior does have significant diplomatic consequences &#8211; i.e., other civs and city-states
may be less likely to ally with you if they think you&#8217;re a bloodthirsty maniac. You can destroy
the city immediately upon capturing it or at any point after that.''

I guess this is a mistake.. That would not make much sense. ''the ennemy is one turn away from getting is city back so... Destroy city''

Unless I'm not far enough in the manual and that it take multiple turn to destroy a city like some peple had said I don't know where/when on this forum. But so far, not a word about such thing.

 

[Thormodr]

Apparently, above Prince difficulty level, the AI gets bonuses to happiness and production. They also get free units and bonus techs.

I thought I heard that the AI was not going to "cheat" anymore.

 

[Auncien]

I don't see why you can't destroy capitals.

As much as this OBVIOUSLY CONTRIVED AND IMMERSION DISRUPTING mechanic has irked me, I think I understand why they're doing it. It creates a 'will rise again' type possibility for every civ so that your enemies can potentially come back to haunt you even after you think they're gone. If you're really terrible to Russia and you wipe them out and their buddy comes along and sets things right they're back, they're a world civ again and they're angry. Might be interesting.

It's kind of a cool thing to do in a way. I just wish they had laid it out earlier and maybe actually explained the rationale a bit instead of just commanding acceptance of the mechanic in the manual

 

[app]

Domination
...In other words, it doesn’t matter who captures what: it’s the last player holding onto his original capital who gets the victory....

I don't think i like this new victory condition. Wouldn't it mean that it would be possible to win the domination victory without fighting a single battle? If civ E get island start far away from everyone else, and the rest fight each other such that they all lose their capital (e.g. A capture B, C, and D's capital, then B captures A's capital), E will suddenly win the game? Perhaps without encountering even a single other civ, and even if E has the lowest score, tech, and military might? Isn't the domination victory supposed to be the military route to victory (as opposed to the cultural, science, and diplomatic victory conditions)? If we still have to at least get the last capital ourselves is still somewhat acceptable, but to be suddenly declared the world's dominant power randomly like this is just wrong.

 

[krunsh]

I don't think i like this new victory condition. Wouldn't it mean that it would be possible to win the domination victory without fighting a single battle? If civ E get island start far away from everyone else, and the rest fight each other such that they all lose their capital (e.g. A capture B, C, and D's capital, then B captures A's capital), E will suddenly win the game? Perhaps without encountering even a single other civ, and even if E has the lowest score, tech, and military might? Isn't the domination victory supposed to be the military route to victory (as opposed to the cultural, science, and diplomatic victory conditions)? If we still have to at least get the last capital ourselves is still somewhat acceptable, but to be suddenly declared the world's dominant power randomly like this is just wrong.

You know it will not hapen right?

... And if it ever does (yeah right...), it's gonna be quite awesome.

 

[Pragmatic]

It's the domination victory and diplomatic victory things, I'm guessing.

You can't just stage a daring assault into enemy territory to wipe out their capitals, leaving you with the last remaining capital.

Similarly, if the DO get rezzed, the civilization that does so gets permanent votes in the UN. Since it's each nation, and not based on population, that adds a great deal of power.

 

[Stalker0]

One of the big things I noticed is that cities can only be captured by melee units, not ranged ones.

I would assume since modern units only have a range of one they count as melee for this purpose.

 

[krunsh]

One of the big things I noticed is that cities can only be captured by melee units, not ranged ones.

I would assume since modern units only have a range of one they count as melee for this purpose.

Yes, after the crossbow, only the siege weapon are considered range unit (and boat and flying unit of course).

 

[Slinko]

yay! the manual is here!

 

[SirTurtle]

There's no info in the manual on unit upgrade paths, right? At least I'm not seeing it.

 

[Auncien]

On page 172 it states that a city cannot build a windmill building if the city is on a hill. That seem like a misprint to anyone else?

 

[AriochIV]

Thanks Greg.

 

[SirTurtle]

On page 172 it states that a city cannot build a windmill building if the city is on a hill. That seem like a misprint to anyone else?

This matches the info in the strategy guide.

I guess we'll have to wait for the Civilopedia for the final answer.