Did they fix some of the problems which I had a half year ago?

[lordsurya08]

Hi, I am a former Civ player and a poster on this forum. I quit playing months ago because the AI was bad, there were lots of design issues, and Firaxis didn't give two horsehockys about what the community wanted.

However, I had fallen in love with the concept. It was such a great concept - develop a civilization, fight wars, build cities, explore vast lands. From the moment I looked at the cover of this game at GameStop I realized that this was the sort of game I wanted to play. The game, at first sight, did not disappoint: the graphics and sounds were beautiful: A+, 10/10.

To make a long story short, I soon realized there were flaws, and so I quit. I tried to make the game playable - I toyed around endlessly with the XMLs, I modded, poked around the LUAs. My efforts did not work.

Has Firaxis improved this game since I quit?

1. I've been unable to figure out what are the new patches. Are there any new patches beyond the February one?

2. How is the AI? Does the computer still build cities in ******ed places and suck at combat?

3. Has Firaxis released the source code, or announced that they will? This is the most important question as once the source is released, this game will be fixed up in no time. I for one would love to play around with the source and change it as I like.

Moderator Action: The language used in this post is not appropriate for this forum!
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Moderator Action: Edit: Changed the thread title.

 

[godotnut]

"Does this game still suck?"

Pretty much. The AI is still completely incompetent at just about everything, especially combat, where they still send random units at you randomly. There have been no new patches of any significance recently. The game is only really challenging on Deity or maybe immortal once in a while.

I still play it sometimes, because I'm a sucker for Civ, but it's no longer my main game, like it has been for so many years prior. I'm hoping the expansion helps the AI considerably. The rest is window dressing if this does not change.

 

[DemonMaster]

Dear troll(s).

Since the experience and enjoyability of a game is individual my advise to you is ... to play a game and find out for yourself.

Cheers

Moderator Action: Please do not call other members trolls.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Ajuga]

I'd say no, it doesn't suck.
But the game didn't really change all that much, while the AI pulls of some nice wars from time to time they still have issues with moving about units properly.
The AI also plops down cities in weird places just to get some more trade road income.

Though this is more of a 'you expect way more than you realistically should' thing than a 'the game is terrible' thing.
I play it a lot and absolutely love it.

 

[apocalypse105]

I sometimes play the game I wouldn't say it sucks..

However I sometimes just quit the game for months because of the biggest flaw that still isn't fixed : diplomacy.

Yes it has been improved a lot but it still flawed.

ANd combat AI well it will allways be bad every game with tactical combat has a AI that a human can easy exploit.

In the future expansion pack gods and king they said diplomacy and the AI will be improved

 

[Disgustipated]

I can play it in small bursts. Maybe one or two games a month. After that, I tend to get frustrated by the game.

When it first came out, I utterly hated it. I had less than 8 hours played. But I now have 172 hours played.

But it's just not addicting like past civs were. I'm not sure why.

 

[eris]

I seriously doubt it has changed anywhere near enough to change your displayed attitudes and perceptions. I seriously doubt such a change is possible, but you would be a better judge of that. Certainly not through patches. It's really hard to say if even an expansion will do it for you. The speculation on upcoming content is unclear to me. You might check after the release of Gods and Kings for the opportunity to complain bitterly again. Some people enjoy the game for that factor if nothing else.

 

[Lexicus]

I actually think Civ V has progressed pretty far from its release version.

You can argue that the developers shouldn't have released the game as it was, but they probably were working towards a deadline set by the high mucky-mucks. The patches, though, have been pretty good. The AI, i've noticed, has become much better at defense, though it is still extremely poor on the offensive.

 

[vibe96]

Does AI build cities in strange locations? Well....

Spoiler :

 

[DemonMaster]

Does AI build cities in strange locations? Well....

Spoiler :

Well ... in RL we have Svalbard.

Maybe the very intelligent AI here is planning a huge amphibious assault and needed to have this spot as a base (since we don't have airfield improvements ... yet)

or not

 

[Pisskop]

^For the Fish^ Before Global warming wipes them out!.... oh wait...

 

[Drawmeus]

It's a lot better than at launch. If you hate some of the core conceits (1UPT, hexes, social policies), steer clear.

I don't know what the newest patch is but Steam should auto update for you. They more or less stopped patching it mid-late last year; it's now clear that the reason for this is that they started working on the expansion pack instead.

AI is much improved but still capable of making some dumb mistakes, and because of systems like 1UPT, those dumb mistakes are exacerbated. In particular, the AI is incapable of effectively managing a navy, still; playing on an archipelago is something like -2 difficulty. Note that naval combat is a major focus for the upcoming expansion pack; we'll see if they succeed or not.

They have not said anything about the source code. It's one of the biggest outstanding issues to me. We'll have to wait and see but I am not optimistic, and yes, this will limit its lifespan relative to Civ IV.

 

[aatami]

If you hated it at launch, chances are you will like it now. At launch you would be bashed to death if you liked the game, but now those who think it sucks are a small, small minority.
Civ V has improved immensely (and will rise even more, maybe even above BTS, after the expansion coming this month). Compared to V's current state, I would never want to play release V, ever.

 

[Pisskop]

So is this the future of gaming? Release an ill-tested beta, then sell hit-or-miss patches until it works for the the masses? Sounds like piss-poor policy to me... And I thought the white house was the only place languishing in filth!

 

[Arnold_T]

I didn't hate it at launch, I actually liked it, and I thought it was an improvement on some of the things I didn't like about Civ4 (e.g. the Stack of Doom).
Yeah, the AI still sucks pretty bad, but hopefully it will have some improvements coming. I think the developers need to track down those old Panzer General programmers (who have some experience with hex-based maps, mixed ground, air, and ranged units, etc.) and get them on the team (not that the PG AI was really awesome or anything, but it was way better than the civ5 AI ).

 

[BobDole]

Hi, I am a former Civ player and a poster on this forum. I quit playing months ago because the AI was bad, there were lots of design issues, and Firaxis didn't give two horsehockys about what the community wanted.

However, I had fallen in love with the concept. It was such a great concept - develop a civilization, fight wars, build cities, explore vast lands. From the moment I looked at the cover of this game at GameStop I realized that this was the sort of game I wanted to play. The game, at first sight, did not disappoint: the graphics and sounds were beautiful: A+, 10/10.

To make a long story short, I soon realized there were flaws, and so I quit. I tried to make the game playable - I toyed around endlessly with the XMLs, I modded, poked around the LUAs. My efforts did not work.

Has Firaxis improved this game since I quit?

1. I've been unable to figure out what are the new patches. Are there any new patches beyond the February one?

The last patch was in December (primarily multiplayer) and there were ones before that. There's patch notes on 2K's forums.

2. How is the AI? Does the computer still build cities in ******ed places and suck at combat?

The AI is definitely better. I just finished a game (finally won as Germany, Emperor difficulty) where China managed to wage quite an effective war from me, and from a bit of a distance. There's been other games where the AI has launched effective attacks as well. My main issue with the combat AI at this point is they always seem to forget to bring enough melee units, or they set units up so it's hard for their melee units to get in position to finish off a city.
As for city-building, it depends on the civ. The ones that go for tall empires always end up building in good locations basically. The wide ones, yeah, there's some bad cities. But then again, almost any city can end up as half decent. In short, the AI is a lot better compared to launch. Not perfect (particularly when it comes to navies) but better.

3. Has Firaxis released the source code, or announced that they will? This is the most important question as once the source is released, this game will be fixed up in no time. I for one would love to play around with the source and change it as I like.
The last patch was in December, primarily for multiplayer. There's been patches before that one, and there will be one around the time G&K launches that will make a lot of changes.

It'll be released at some point, but it's unsure when. They want players to be able to activate/deactivate mods without having to relaunch the game, so there's still some technical hurdles I'm guessing.

Moderator Action: Please do not quote inappropriate language.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[headcase]

Yeah, the AI still sucks. This is bearable with certain mods (such as NiGHTS) but the AI definitely sucks still.

But I guess compared to before the last couple patches, it is better that it used to be, but still bad.

 

[Disgustipated]

The bad ai doesn't bother me. I'm not sure why it's such an issue. But I'd imagine it would be an issue for high level players. I'm a mid level player, and I actually don't want the AI to be better.

I have trouble managing my economy, and I cannot maintain as many units as the AI. I struggle to surpass the AI until the industrial age.

I sometimes go to the lower difficulty level, but then I'm in so much of a lead, the ai doesn't present a challenge to me. I like to be in #1 spot (and not have to wait until the industrial or modern age to get to #1), but I also like the AI to be a challenge to me (so they aren't a pushover militarily or scientifically). I just can't get that with this game like I could in Civ4.

And I'd like to see it so old units automatically update when you hit a new age. Get rid of spending money to upgrade units completely. There should not be pikeman around in the 21st century no matter what difficulty level you are playing.

 

[dcboy60]

I enjoy playing Civ V. I would like some improvement of Diplomacy, especially with the City States, where it seems only money talks. Apparently that is coming with the new patch. We will see. The AI at times is stupid at fighting wars, although at times I found some pretty good combat competition. I have found that I do not have to have a pre-determined win scenario except when I am going for a cultural victory.

 

[lordsurya08]

(OP Here) Thank you for your responses - I definitely will go checking out the mods suggested by some. Are there any that improve the AI? I don't think it is possible to directly improve the AI due to lack of source code, but suppose we made gameplay changes through modding to improve the AI.

Suppose we removed ranged units, so that the AI doesn't do stupid stuff like putting archers in front. Or we could remove 1UPT. Would the AI be able to play properly? I don't mind 1UPT but I prefer a competent AI at SOD over an incompetent AI at 1UPT.