1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Civilization 5 Rants Thread

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by ori, Dec 3, 2010.

  1. Tatran

    Tatran Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    4,184
    I was really bored with civ5, so I had to look for something civ related to fuel the addiction.

    There's hope for civ5, because CivWorld needs a lot of changes.
    Civics are a complete waste, except the Closed Borders civic.
    It sounds cool to become minister (interior, finance, defense, science, culture or political), but the effect of ministeries is close to zero.
    Only the science + interior minister have some value.

    A current CivWorld game, where the top 5 players are all from one superior civ, has gone into the very ugly mode.
    Those team players are now competing with each other instead of competing with other civs.
    Means they won't contribute anything to achieve an era victory if their ranking is too low. (king -> prince -> duke -> lord)
    And in the worst situation, those players will sabotage the game by delaying an era victory at all costs trying to win time to improve their ranking.
     
  2. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    Maybe if Civ World is a colossal disaster, they'll seriously think about making a quality Civ VI. :goodjob:

    Somehow I doubt that, though. :sad:
     
  3. Iranon

    Iranon Deity Whipping Boy

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,214
    Location:
    Germany
    What about re-releasing a prettified Civ1? You could spin it as streamlining to those who don't know the original, and in a way Civ1 did more for the 'experience' than later titles (palace graphics. city view with cute details, animations and population graphics. Events told via tongue-in-cheek tabloids headlines. Tech discovery screens).
     
  4. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    I'd definitely pay $20 for that kind of product. :)

    Ahh...nostalgia.
     
  5. pazmacats

    pazmacats Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    108
    The game is still in an embarrassing state.

    I played once more with the new patch. Here's what happened.

    Normal settings, difficulty not very high, 3 below hardest. I play the Aztecs with the plan to build Hanging Gardens and have a huge capital.

    Rome is close to my start and I culture bomb Rome 3 times to get all the tiles of my capital back. Rome grows huge and "neutral" and denounces me repeatedly. I sell some resources to everyone. 100 turns later, out of the blue, Darius declares war on me. He is on another continent, he is friendly and sends one pikeman and 2 caravels.

    10 turns later, Hiawata who does not share a border with me, declares war on "friendly" after our "declaration of friendship" has run out. I was trading with him and he is far away (though on the same continent). He needs to enter my territory through a mountain pass which is one hex wide. His efforts are as pathetic as expected and we sign peace 30 turns later.

    Some turns later Darius wants to make peace too. He has 38,000 gold at that point... Awesome. I am too lazy to figure out where Darius is actually located and way too lazy to kill him. He seems to be very far away and ferrying troops will be a nightmare. Game is starting to be laggy, so moving units isn't fun anymore.

    THEN, on turn 300, Rome finally declares war on me. Rome is huge and its capital is 10 hexes from my capital. We have a long border and he hates me since an eternity (since I culture bombed him for the first time). It is turn 300 now. He send 1 infantry, 1 artillery, 2 crossbowmen and 1 warrior. Everybody else declares war on me a couple of turns later. Some sign peace after losing some units. Rome is trying to take my capital (which indeed has grown huge (41)) but it's obvious that the AI doesn't have a clue what it is supposed to do. I kill his first wave by using 5 pieces of artillery, then I press Alt+F4 and click "ok".
     
  6. shihuacao

    shihuacao Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    60
    Location:
    Sydney
    Have fun in CIV.
     
  7. ShadowNX

    ShadowNX Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2010
    Messages:
    303
    Location:
    South Africa
    Sounds weird, do you have a save file by chance?, i would love to check it out.
     
  8. civnoob13

    civnoob13 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2010
    Messages:
    713
    Location:
    Nottingham
    There's nothing that weird about such a rubbish combat AI. In my latest game, I was the victim of an early rush for the first time ever. Needless to say, with only warriors it failed. I got a good amount of money in the peace treaty. About 30 turns later, I was DOWed on by the same player again. I won, again, and got lots of money, again. And then, after that, I was DOWed on by her AGAIN, and won, AGAIN. At this point, I just got sick of her and took her 3 best cities. When I then got negative modifiers from everybody for expanding too aggresively, I just gave up. (Washington, the b****rd was still friends with the AI who DOWed on me 3 times, ever heard of a warmongerer?)
     
  9. Brichals

    Brichals Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Messages:
    775
    Location:
    Berlin, D
    I've never really encountered one of these bizarre games but maybe I was just lucky. Maybe Rome was going for a non military victory but hated you obviously so bribed the others. Even if they are not a military threat, at least they won't trade with you which can hurt. Either way the AI won because you quit. I would also like to see a save game.
     
  10. NicTeos

    NicTeos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    190
    Gender:
    Male
    My darius also have had something about 8k cash at turn ~350 ( epic speed ), renaissance. We had for a long time a friendship treaty and then declared war on me. They even had some military power more than me- and It took me about 7 turns to get my attack army to the front. The main front, was rather small - about 6 tiles on our ~ 30 tiles border - and darius wasn't able to field his troops fast enough. There were 4 cannons, some LSM, some crossbows, some pikes. He killed no of my units, and only was able to shot one time with a cannon at one of my city. I had 4 rounds after dow, enough troops to kick them off and it seemed that darius didn't know, if he shall retreat or attack. round 4 - att moves, round 5 -def moves, round 6- att moves, round 7- my att army arrived and started the conqest of persia.

    Ai is still underwhelming.
     
  11. ShadowNX

    ShadowNX Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2010
    Messages:
    303
    Location:
    South Africa
    I also never get these weird events in my games, maybe its because i like to play on setting 4, though i also had an early rush, but even though i beat them back and they sue for peace ive never seen such huge amounts of gold in my games.

    Thats what makes it so weird for me :D
     
  12. Brichals

    Brichals Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Messages:
    775
    Location:
    Berlin, D
    Yes I've seen some bad attacks, in my current game my scout is watching England bomb the daylights out of Cuzco with cannons and longbows but no melee units to take the 1 health city. But then I also see much better attacks.

    As for the gold reserve, I guess there is a code which limits the AIs spending or it could get ridiculous with their bonuses. I don't pay too much attention to the cash or happy rating of enemies, it's not reliable imo. But 38,000 gold wow.
     
  13. glaivemaster

    glaivemaster Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    458
    Location:
    Lancaster, United Kingdom
    The couple of games I've played since the patch have had some of the most fun wars yet. In the first, I got all the way to the modern era before Gandhi decided to declare war, and having expected it for a long time I'd settled next to the mountain choke points and fortified units in the area. He focused on killing a single fortified unit at a time, trying to break through points in the line. In the end it was unsuccessful, but that felt more like it was because I had a ridiculously defensible position than because he couldn't figure it out.

    The second game Wu Zetian declared war on me as soon as she got machinery, to test out her unique unit. I hadn't really been expecting it, but I had been sensible enough to build some knights, and I had to really focus on killing units that were protecting her great generals in order to not get smashed.

    What really impressed me about China though was that having found one particular place of attack unfeasible, she moved her units to different areas, and made sure to keep Cho-Ku-nu out of range of attack when possible, skirting round the edges of my cities to come in later, when the melee units advanced. Even more impressive, she would fire one shot from a Cho-Ku-Nu, then move flankers in to position, then attack it in melee. If it was still alive, her Cho-Ku-Nu could take a second shot (usually finishing it off). Otherwise, the shot would go elsewhere - never a shot wasted, and strong strategic maneuvering. Once again, I won not because the AI couldn't play, but because attacking can be very difficult, especially when the player you attack pulls infantry out of his backside while you're still using muskets. :p
     
  14. Becephalus

    Becephalus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    725
    A) It sounds like your understanding of the game is still in an embarrassing state. Learn to play a bit and you might enjoy it better.

    B) Programming an AI is very hard, the Civ 5 AI is definitely better than the Civ 4 AI right now. Civ 4 AI just has a 1000X simpler combat system to deal with (assemble stack, move stack). Not sure what you are complaining about. Almost no TBS have an AI worth mentioning.

    GalCiv 2 AI is easily as bad as this or worse, and that is the one everyone likes to point to as "good".

    If you want a challenging game you shouldn't be playing TBS. Go play something with human opponents. TBS is about role playing and building.

    Playing Maximin TBS you will crush the AI easily if the resource situation is remotely fair, and might still win even if it is hugely unfair. (i.e. don't horde artillery and then complain about how the AI cannot break your line)
     
  15. Camikaze

    Camikaze Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    27,012
    Location:
    Sydney
    Moderator Action: Merged the 'post patch still embarrassing' into this thread. If you're wanting to have separate threads, the OP needs to provide for discussion.
     
  16. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    Ah, yes...it's the players fault. :rolleyes:

    Sorry to break it to you but the Civilization 5 AI is horrendous and the only way it even competes at all is through massive cheating.

    Telling someone to play another game or just quit is neither productive, constructive or useful. There are many accomplished players and Civ veterans who know how to play and they know how sub par the game really is.

    The AI isn't likely to get better either. That would require $$$ and 2K Games would just put their foot down.

    Don't count on modders correcting it either. It's extremely unlikely that we'll ever see a SDK.

    This is as good as it gets, sorry to say.
     
  17. gaiko

    gaiko Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    219
    See any contradiction between statements 1 & 2? If a TBS like Civ is about building and role-playing (a pseudo-historical civilization), then why was the most prominently advertised feature "innovation" in CivV pre-release an essentially wargame consideration, 1UPT? Furthermore advertised as a la Panzer General - what does that have to do with a builder game? I tell you it struck me a bit strange to see this especially ballyhooed pre-release. This design mis-decision (if not a deliberate decision to decisively transform the Civ series from a role-playing builder into a wargame) produced two major problems for CivV, one minor and the other major:

    1) 1UPT, by requiring AI to "think geometrically", also geometrically compounded the task of producing an AI adequate to this new combat situation. As we all know by now, commercial games simply do not have the cycles to produce truly competitive AI. Allowing some sort of reasonable stacking would have simplified this task, freeing developer resources to work on what the game is supposed to be all about - and that leads into the secound and major issue with CivV:

    2) Giving priority to a solution to a purely wargame consideration - stacking = 1UPT - resulted in "flattening" and "containing" the builder/role-playing game to conform with this restriction. Note that, given the fact that the game board geometry is *finite*, 1UPT is an ABSOLUTE restriction on the potential scope of the builder game. The builder game cannot be allowed to flood the geometry of the game space, or else the game will literally grind to a halt, and not simply due to increased tedium - not to mention 'geometrically' complicate the combat AI's task. The result has been the "you can't do that" builder "role" that has driven away virtually all of Civ's historic fan base.

    Unlimited SODs, for all their faults - and I was never a fan of this mechanic - at least never posed such an absolute limit on what the game was supposed to be about. The correct way to tackle the issue in design would be:

    1) Give priority to the builder game. Develop a game both immersible and balanced as a pure role-playing builder game, including inter-AI/SP 'diplomacy', tech structure, etc. When that is done..

    2) Then design the military game as "the combat arm of building". Set stacking limits *as an appropriate result* of the economics of the builder game already developed. My own druthers would be: a) Before an "industrial age" everything would appear in (limited) single stacks, no zocs, no missile/siege ranges, emphasize combined arms stacking; then beginning in the "industrial age", key techs introduce zocs, ranging, etc., making it advantageous to "stack out". Being more "historically accurate" adds required immersion in what is after all a "pseudo-historical" role being played. All of these military mechanics were created decades ago in the cardboard wargame age. This should have never been a big deal.

     
  18. DrewBledsoe

    DrewBledsoe Veteran QB

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,634
    Location:
    Cheering For Mr Sanchez
    Civ used to be, and always should have been a God game. You are the God, and are basically getting the thrill from recreating man's alternative history, albeit from a single nation's point of view. This concept seemed to be entirely misunderstood by Civ V's creators.
    Someone mentioned the ais going for a particular victory type from the very first turn. This is such a bad idea, even in the most basic concept. Nevermind that most players have no idea what victory they may be persuing for quite a while in a game, that really shouldn't ever be what Civ is about. Chess yes, Formula 1 yes, Football yes, Civ no.

    Have ai nations decide on a "victory" path, in what should be a computerised game of life, is as redundant as deciding that your new born son is going to be an NFL QB and absolutely nothing else whatever (unless your family name is Manning ;)) or your 3hr old baby daughter is going to be President of The USA, and nothing else will do....
     
  19. blasto

    blasto Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Messages:
    424


    This isn't true, and if this is what people are thinking then that's why they don't get it.

    You play as the leader of a single Civ... and whatever feedback you get from other Civ's is what they want to allow you to see. (other than stat windows) So there is plenty of annimosity and conniving, just like in real life.
     
  20. DrewBledsoe

    DrewBledsoe Veteran QB

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,634
    Location:
    Cheering For Mr Sanchez
    Which bit of my post isn't true, if you wish to discuss it?

    I noted that you play as the leader of a single nation, but it's still (well it used to be) a god game. Trying to reduce Civ, which was all about the journey, to a simple win/lose mechanism, where the end result is really all that matters, was a very poor design decision.

    I'm afraid the designers were the ones who just "didn't get it".
     

Share This Page