Civilization 5 Rants Thread

[reddishrecue]

That seems like more pre civilization 6 talk.

 

[FlorbFnarb]

Civ V is not a step down from IV.

And how can you judge Starships yet?

 

[Thormodr]

Civ V is not a step down from IV.

And how can you judge Starships yet?

Starships looks anything but epic which was to be expected.

Bring on Civ VI with a new game engine that can handle truly epic games and don't bother porting it to iPads and other such devices.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Civ V is not a step down from IV.

No it's more like a whole staircase down.

 

[FlorbFnarb]

Starships looks anything but epic which was to be expected.



Bring on Civ VI with a new game engine that can handle truly epic games and don't bother porting it to iPads and other such devices.

That I agree with. I don't think any game which works on a tablet can be anything more than a casual game on a PC. It could end up being a very good casual game, but it would in the end still be a very casual game. I like Angry Birds, but if I'm playing Civ it isn't for a casual experience. Make Civ VI a PC-only title; TBS and RTS will never succeed on consoles or tablets; Bungie had the prestige of the Halo franchise to supply interest and they still couldn't really make it work.

But Starships? Is enough even known about the game at this point to make a sound judgement?

 

[reddishrecue]

That I agree with. I don't think any game which works on a tablet can be anything more than a casual game on a PC. It could end up being a very good casual game, but it would in the end still be a very casual game. I like Angry Birds, but if I'm playing Civ it isn't for a casual experience. Make Civ VI a PC-only title; TBS and RTS will never succeed on consoles or tablets; Bungie had the prestige of the Halo franchise to supply interest and they still couldn't really make it work.

But Starships? Is enough even known about the game at this point to make a sound judgement?

From previous posts, starships have had an couple of posts and videos about itself already. With these posts, there's plenty of information there to begin a whole thread of speculation.

 

[daft]

my point is that they don't let you get to the point of being a strong wide civ. They freak the hell out when you are going wide without realizing how gimped you are by going wide in the first place. It takes time to get strong as a wide player but they feel so threatened by the player when in fact in most circumstances in the games I play, I only have as many cities or less as the ai and an average of 4 less pop. per city and 5+ techs less than the leader, half the army, etc, etc. In my games they act like I'm the run away when I instead have a fragile wide civ- but you are aggressively settling cities. You must die. That's what annoys me. If I was actually strong enough to tag team it would make an interesting game but they just crush me into the dirt when I'm up to my 7th or so city, which I have to make huge sacrifices to get to that point in the first place.

If I were playing tall cultural or science the AI is like like yaaay I love this peace, we'll continue to allow you to breed like rabbits in your tokyoesque megacities and let's trade and give each other research agreements because this way I got to get all the land although you are running away with the game through a science victory. lol.

I was being sarcastic in my previous post, of course I agree with you, the design is flawed, to say the least. Whoever came up with the concept of "Expanding Aggressively"? If an empire is expanding rapidly but doing it in a peaceful manner why do others gang up on it? Makes very little sense.

What's with the Mohawk Warrior requiring Iron Working in order to become available for production for the Iroqua but not requiring Iron-the resource in order to be built?
A practical joke I guess.

Scouts should only be able to defend, not attack workers and settlers. Scouts are not melee units, they are recon units, just like in civ 4, another step backwards by the designers of civ 5.

Settlers, and especially workers should have a base melee defence, say 1 or 2, they carry tools after all which could be used in a fight, again, defence only.

 

[reddishrecue]

I was being sarcastic in my previous post, of course I agree with you, the design is flawed, to say the least. Whoever came up with the concept of "Expanding Aggressively"? If an empire is expanding rapidly but doing it in a peaceful manner why do others gang up on it? Makes very little sense.

What's with the Mohawk Warrior requiring Iron Working in order to become available for production for the Iroqua but not requiring Iron-the resource in order to be built?
A practical joke I guess.

Scouts should only be able to defend, not attack workers and settlers. Scouts are not melee units, they are recon units, just like in civ 4, another step backwards by the designers of civ 5.

Settlers, and especially workers should have a base melee defence, say 1 or 2, they carry tools after all which could be used in a fight, again, defence only.

I'm not joking and the whole Iroquois thing is manly because like all the other civilizations, the Iroquois have to research bronze working to reveal iron and to build the units that they're unique in. Unique units such as the Indonesia kris swordsmen also get uniqueness similarly. I dont understand why you must feel that the recon units get to have limits to their attacks just like they used to in civilization 4. If anything, that was an improvement and a way better recon unit than it used to be.

 

[FlorbFnarb]

I agree that it's better to have scout units have some minimal melee ability. No reason why scouts shouldn't be able to take out miners or farmers.

I can actually see the merit in having workers be an emergency military unit, however, up until the advent of firearms. In medieval times many weapons used by peasants were essentially adapted from farm and other working implements: hammers, flails, some pole arms, and so forth.

But after gunpowder, no. At that point conscripted peasants with improvised weapons wouldn't even be worthwhile as cannon fodder.

 

[daft]

I agree that it's better to have scout units have some minimal melee ability. No reason why scouts shouldn't be able to take out miners or farmers.

I can actually see the merit in having workers be an emergency military unit, however, up until the advent of firearms. In medieval times many weapons used by peasants were essentially adapted from farm and other working implements: hammers, flails, some pole arms, and so forth.

But after gunpowder, no. At that point conscripted peasants with improvised weapons wouldn't even be worthwhile as cannon fodder.

Right on dude, makes good sense, let workers be able to defend themselves, although pretty much in vain, but still able to inflict some damage on attacking enemy units early in the game.
The other part of your post also agrees with some of my earlier thoughts about creation of several types of worker units. Worker units could be divided into miners, farmers, road builders(construction) and hunters(toughest opponents). After they'd built their improvements and you feel you no longer have a need for them you'd recall them into one of your cities and merge them into existing population.

 

[reddishrecue]

Most scouts of the modern day era aren't even that powerful. Scouts are really powerful during the beginning eras because they could move on any terrain. I'm starting to see your point now particularly if you have to ask that your scout doesn't have to be so OP because it is already very mobile. Once civilizations get in the later eras though, scouts don't end up that powerful nor that upgradable because these recon units stay at the same scout way. When the scout tries to move away it is usually unfair for most stronger slower units because scouts shouldn't be available to defend themselves, you say. In the later eras, that does happen and units can easily kill units quickly. No one said you have to do your research to kill a scout.

 

[daft]

I'm not joking and the whole Iroquois thing is manly because like all the other civilizations, the Iroquois have to research bronze working to reveal iron and to build the units that they're unique in. Unique units such as the Indonesia kris swordsmen also get uniqueness similarly. I dont understand why you must feel that the recon units get to have limits to their attacks just like they used to in civilization 4. If anything, that was an improvement and a way better recon unit than it used to be.

I'm not joking either. Why do you need to research Iron Working in order to produce the Mohawk Warrior when playing as Iroqua?
Think about it, they use no iron! The design is right in that sense, historically. So why not let the Iroquois build Mohawk Warrior from the start? Replacing the generic Warrior unit? To illustrate:

Example: (generic) Warrior: research needed to build: none, resources: none, unit melee combat strength:6- unit movement: 1, cost 40.

Mohawk Warrior (Iroqua unique unit, replaces Warrior/replaces Swordsman) -research needed: none, resources needed: none, melee combat strength: 10, unit movement: 1, cost 60 (special abilities: movement +1 in forests, strength + 25% in forest, unit can withdraw after combat with a slower moving unit).

Swordsman: research: Iron Working, resources needed: Iron, melee combat strength: 12. Unit Movement: 1, cost 80. (generic unit).

Do you realize what such setup would mean?

An Iroquois Mohawk Warrior wouldn't be outmatched by the stronger swordsman, Mohawks would be able to withdraw if losing a melee matchup with a swordsman and if able to surprise a swordsman in a forest would be likely to win the battle.
Not to mention the fact that the Mohawk Warrior is cheaper to produce than the Iron Requiring Swordsman and twice as fast (and stronger) in forest tiles.

The setup is flawed, even an amateur player such as myself can come up with better unit designs/characteristics than the lectured game designers themselves, think about it.

 

[Tatran]

Civ V is not a step down from IV.

Oh yes, it is.
A civ4 AI with 60 cities is far more dangerous than a civ5 AI with the same amount of cities.
Just watch some of Marbozir's "let's play civ5 on Immortal/Deity".

 

[reddishrecue]

Oh yes, it is.
A civ4 AI with 60 cities is far more dangerous than a civ5 AI with the same amount of cities.
Just watch some of Marbozir's "let's play civ5 on Immortal/Deity".

I agree with this because I've seen it done in civ4 by AI many times.

 

[lockandload]

I just want to rant again about the auto select option for the next unit. It really speeds up play but it could be a lot better. It should be over ridden by selecting on an unit with moves left. I don't know how many times I have selected a unit and ordered it to move only to find out the selection, and therefore the move order, has switched to another unit.

Yeah, I really wanted my archers to go stand next to the enemy knights.

 

[reddishrecue]

I'm not joking either. Why do you need to research Iron Working in order to produce the Mohawk Warrior when playing as Iroqua?
Think about it, they use no iron! The design is right in that sense, historically. So why not let the Iroquois build Mohawk Warrior from the start? Replacing the generic Warrior unit? To illustrate:

Example: (generic) Warrior: research needed to build: none, resources: none, unit melee combat strength:6- unit movement: 1, cost 40.

Mohawk Warrior (Iroqua unique unit, replaces Warrior/replaces Swordsman) -research needed: none, resources needed: none, melee combat strength: 10, unit movement: 1, cost 60 (special abilities: movement +1 in forests, strength + 25% in forest, unit can withdraw after combat with a slower moving unit).

Swordsman: research: Iron Working, resources needed: Iron, melee combat strength: 12. Unit Movement: 1, cost 80. (generic unit).

Do you realize what such setup would mean?

An Iroquois Mohawk Warrior wouldn't be outmatched by the stronger swordsman, Mohawks would be able to withdraw if losing a melee matchup with a swordsman and if able to surprise a swordsman in a forest would be likely to win the battle.
Not to mention the fact that the Mohawk Warrior is cheaper to produce than the Iron Requiring Swordsman and twice as fast (and stronger) in forest tiles.

The setup is flawed, even an amateur player such as myself can come up with better unit designs/characteristics than the lectured game designers themselves, think about it.

At this point, the Mohawk warrior replaces the sswordsman but does their strength vary from the average swordsman? I believe it doesn't because the Mohawk warrior strength has the same strength as the average swordsman. Getting the Mohawk warrior unit itself would've been too specific for the programmers because all the other civilizations already have their swordsmen when iron working is researched except when a iron resource doesn't appear in their borders which doesn't make people allow them to build their swordsmen.

Moving the Mohawk warrior to bronze working, for example, is something that you would say because it doesn't need any iron to build. Another thing why not have the Mohawk warrior there by default since the beginning next to the scout and next to the warrior. Hey man, why not?

 

[LordBalkoth]

I just want to rant again about the auto select option for the next unit.

There's a menu option to disable that...

 

[Brian Shanahan]

It took them four years to fix the 'spinning icon on diplomacy' bug.

What do they do with all the money they make from these games? Spend it on hookers and blackjack?

Paying bribes to sites like here to continue to lie to people about how good that stinking piece of is.

 

[Brian Shanahan]

Civ V is not a step down from IV.

Of course it is. Final patched up Civ 5 is about the same level as beta Civ 4 for features working as intended, provided that you let the fact that 1UPT continues to break every other aspect of the game slide.

 

[daft]

At this point, the Mohawk warrior replaces the sswordsman but does their strength vary from the average swordsman? I believe it doesn't because the Mohawk warrior strength has the same strength as the average swordsman. Getting the Mohawk warrior unit itself would've been too specific for the programmers because all the other civilizations already have their swordsmen when iron working is researched except when a iron resource doesn't appear in their borders which doesn't make people allow them to build their swordsmen.

Moving the Mohawk warrior to bronze working, for example, is something that you would say because it doesn't need any iron to build. Another thing why not have the Mohawk warrior there by default since the beginning next to the scout and next to the warrior. Hey man, why not?

That's it dude, like I wrote in previous post, let the Iroquois build Mohawks from the start, make them replace both generic units, Warriors and Swordsmen. Whoever said a UU can only replace one Generic unit? Why not several, if applicable?

For example:
Warrior (Generic-not built by Iroqua) Strength 6, Cost 40 Move 2, Resources: none, Research Req: none
Mohawk Warrior (Iroquois UU, replaces Warrior, replaces Swordsman: Strength:9, Cost : 60 (special ability: + 30% strength when in Forest tiles). Res: None, Research: None (although I would say they should require Warrior Code before becoming available)
Swordsman: (Generic-not available to Iroqua) Strength:12 Move 2, Cost: 80, Resources needed: Iron, Research: Iron working.

This would really boost Iroquois chances in the game, from the beginning. The only drawback is the higher production cost for the Mohawk compared to Warrior. Could be addressed by introducing a 2nd UU for the Iroquois, BRAVE.
Brave (Iroqua 2nd unique unit-replaces Warrior) : Strength: 7, Move: 2. Cost: 50 Resources: none, Research: None.