Civilization V Announced!

[kivanc]

These where all in Civ1 too.

no. resource came with civ3. in civ2, there were some "resources" which only gave food/shields. and they were very very common. 2-3 in each BFC maybe. else than their extra food/shild, they were just symbols of wheat, fur etc. for example, when you chop a forest with fur, you could get a plains with wheat

in civ2 also you could transform plains to grassland loosing the resource bec grasslands couldn't have resource on it. grasslands were just either "empty" or" with circle" with our terminology. (either2Food or 2Food1Shield)


but resources in that matter of civ4, came only with civ3. resource obligations for strategic resource for training a unit, railroad, fastening of building spacehip parts etc.

great persons came with civ4 and it is 1of the most important changes from old civs to civ4.
yes, there were some specalists in old civs and SMAC, but you didn't get any points by them and no GP was born.

 

[Athmos]

Culture from civ3 onward and religions from civ4 were very important introductions too.

As religions are not to be in the game, I really hope there will be a mechanism with similar gameplay effects to compensate (something which create "factions", with a kind of "leader", and strongly affects diplomacy).

I am also wary of the new resource system. Will it work as well as the current one ?

It's probably going to make me think countless hundreds of hours of my life AGAIN, anyway.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

no. resource came with civ3. in civ2, there were some "resources" which only gave food/shields. and they were very very common. 2-3 in each BFC maybe. else than their extra food/shild, they were just symbols of wheat, fur etc. for example, when you chop a forest with fur, you could get a plains with wheat

in civ2 also you could transform plains to grassland loosing the resource bec grasslands couldn't have resource on it. grasslands were just either "empty" or" with circle" with our terminology. (either2Food or 2Food1Shield)


but resources in that matter of civ4, came only with civ3. resource obligations for strategic resource for training a unit, railroad, fastening of building spacehip parts etc.

great persons came with civ4 and it is 1of the most important changes from old civs to civ4.
yes, there were some specalists in old civs and SMAC, but you didn't get any points by them and no GP was born.

Also, there were spies in Civ II.

 

[HypnosTene]

Some other changes worth mentioning, plus some corrections to the previous list:

Civ2: solved the tank v phalanx problem (thank you, hidden firepower stat), introduced terraforming, unit upgrading (we all wanted Leonardo's Workshop...), wonder movies etc. One of its greatest achievements was its integration with Windows and the ability to work under any resolution.

SMAC: introduced civics, tech quotes, individualised leaders (a much more interesting system than civ4, I guess) and state borders, as well as evolutive improvements and bombardment/ranged combat, psi combat and so many different things my head hurts. Very advanced diplomacy, which sometimes ever worked. Vassalisation. And lots of clunky code. Afair, it was mostly based on civ2 code.

Civ3: broke the tank v phalanx problem again (and made it stronger than ever), reverted to civ1 ideas in most cases, but strived towards a competitive model of gameplay. Culture, as mentioned, was the greatest addition, apart from an interesting music selection, which paved the way for civ4. Small wonders and the Forbidden palace? Splendid idea too.

Civ4: too many changes to be mentioned. Firaxis approach to health/polution, unrest etc probably made the game into the most well thought-out part of the series. I still cry when I see the leaderheads, though.

I am surprised by people complaining that hexes are the only new thing. Come on, we've been given some marketing information and three screenshots, what do you expect. Knowing Firaxis, we'll get more.

Myself, I have high hopes.

 

[Corvak]

I agree. Looking at three screenshots of Civ4, coming from Civ3, you basically just notice a graphics upgrade...and dont see all the massive sweeping changes that made Civ4 one of the best games in the series.

Hexes, and war changes are probably the most visible change, but not close to the only change. It's obvious the game's been in progress behind closed doors since BTS or Colonization came out.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

I agree. Looking at three screenshots of Civ4, coming from Civ3, you basically just notice a graphics upgrade...and dont see all the massive sweeping changes that made Civ4 one of the best games in the series.

Hexes, and war changes are probably the most visible change, but not close to the only change. It's obvious the game's been in progress behind closed doors since BTS or Colonization came out.

I wonder if they'll implement such a simple thing as the ability to dismiss a suggested city name and not have it recur again during that game. That was possible in Civ II and should be very easy for them to feature in Civ V too.

Also, please respell the Great Person Franz Kafka's name! He was never, anywere, known as "Frank Kafka".

Small things, perhaps, but worth mentioning all the same. Well, to those of us who don't want to rule the Roman Emnpire from Rome, but from Roma, and who dislike some of the names for the Zulu civilization (to mention but one example), it would give much relief.

 

[Arakhor]

I'm fine with Rome, but the administrative capital of the Netherlands is Den Haag, not The Hague!

 

[killmeplease]

Also, please respell the Great Person Franz Kafka's name! He was never, anywere, known as "Frank Kafka".

I was surprised Kafka's name is spelled "Frank" in english, thanks civilization
i'm a fan of this great writer btw.

 

[HypnosTene]

Also, please respell the Great Person Franz Kafka's name! He was never, anywere, known as "Frank Kafka".

Small things, perhaps, but worth mentioning all the same. Well, to those of us who don't want to rule the Roman Emnpire from Rome, but from Roma, and who dislike some of the names for the Zulu civilization (to mention but one example), it would give much relief.

Well, if we are to go into things like this, I'd point to:

Holy Roman Empire under Charlemagne with a Landsknecht as an UU. This is just so stupid that I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Native Americans civ with Sitting Bull. Yeah, we've been through this hundrends of times. The worst solution possible.

Hagia Sofia with minarets, as mentioned above and literally dozens of such small annoying things.

There's also a deeper thing, which has been going on since Civ1 - the supposition that communism has low corruption (up to State Property = no upkeep in civ4). It's really rather hilarious, considering that a) corruption can be said to have been one of the main factors behind the inefficiency and subsequent demise of the communist regime in the Soviet blok and b) it is still a plague in post-soviet countries.

But all these issues are secondary - good gameplay mechanics should take precedence. Still, a historian by trade, I just hope that Firaxis would, for once, hire someone competent for all the historical stuff.

 

[Yared]

There's also a deeper thing, which has been going on since Civ1 - the supposition that communism has low corruption (up to State Property = no upkeep in civ4). It's really rather hilarious, considering that a) corruption can be said to have been one of the main factors behind the inefficiency and subsequent demise of the communist regime in the Soviet blok and b) it is still a plague in post-soviet countries.

This is so true.

 

[toft]

Where does it say that religion isnt in the game?

 

[HypnosTene]

Where does it say that religion isnt in the game?

We got it here as a copy/paste from a thread on Apolyton (afair), which itself links back to some thread on Paradox' forums, which I couldn't check, as they required registration. All in all, probably baseless rumours, or something related to the Facebook project. I wouldn't believe it too much.

 

[civ_king]

eeerr... what?

What component, artillery, tanks, that kind of stuff

Where does it say that religion isnt in the game?

it says it isn't involved in diplomacy which many read as not in game

 

[Fr8monkey]

I've heard a lot of the same arguments for Civ 4 I've been hearing for Civ 5..

I wouldn't believe it too much.

I didn't believe them now, so I will wait for an official release of the contents.... Rumors are Treason!

 

[Yared]

It said it wont be a factor any more.

 

[Mustakrakish]

Perhaps all of you would like this thread:http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=354175

Thanksfor the link. Yes I know what soccer ball looks like, I thought of it. Perfect sphere would require pentagons (which I don't believe will be used in civ5, I refuse to believe in speculations), but I still think it would be easier to make it sphere-like with hex than with squares.

What component, artillery, tanks, that kind of stuff

I didn't really got into that matter that much. Kind of signed somewhere with "whatever" attitude. Some infantry as far as I know

 

[Logitech]

We got it here as a copy/paste from a thread on Apolyton (afair), which itself links back to some thread on Paradox' forums, which I couldn't check, as they required registration. All in all, probably baseless rumours, or something related to the Facebook project. I wouldn't believe it too much.

ok, but this is from the source, and under Information-Features, it's basicly what Thunderfall has writen. The lack of religions may be rumor, though.

 

[HypnosTene]

ok, but this is from the source, and under Information-Features, it's basicly what Thunderfall has writen. The lack of religions may be rumor, though.

Yeah? I don't see anything about there being no religions... I wouldn't argue ex silentio about anything at this stage.

 

[slashet]

Omg! The city has no name in the screenshot. Theyre removing citynames!!
That has to be the reason why theres no religion!

 

[Mustakrakish]

Omg! The city has no name in the screenshot. Theyre removing citynames!!
That has to be the reason why theres no religion!