Does anyone else miss animal barbarians?

[Kaosprophet]

The camps will usually spawn/respawn in one or two fixed locations. Plainly barbarians have to spawn somehow or they'd become extinct too soon. I envisage a camp representing an existing tribal settlement that only becomes visible to the player when it becomes a threat.

Obviously they do have to spawn 'somehow,' and doing it off in the fog of war (whether as a camp or a unit) makes it easier to abstract the process of where they came from. I just personally find it easier to imagine a bunch of uppity outsiders banding together into a 'unit' (much the same way your starting settler represents a band of nomads who decided to settle down) than an existing settlement that goes unnoticed until it becomes a threat. (Especially when the 'goody huts' of the past 3 versions I've played more or less represented minor tribal settlements that did get noticed.) But it's purely a personal perspective - objectively I don't think one is any better than the other.

 

[chazzycat]

God no, I always felt bad killing the poor bears and panthers...

 

[Milith]

Yeah, and that too. I always thought that it would have been really cool if barb cities eventually became a normal Civ if left alone long enough. (with option to disable of course) That would have added a neat element of needing to keep barbs squashed across the map.

Take a look at the mod Legends of Revolution for Civ4 BtS.

When a barb city hits size 2 or 3 (i don't remember), it can become a "minor" civilization which is at war with everyone until it discovers alphabet and meets two other civs, at witch point it works like a regular civ who's really behind in tech. But there's also a tech diffusion mechanism so they can catch up. Sort of. Well actually they will usually get mauled just like Native Americans were, but they offer a greater challenge when colonizing new lands than the usual barbs.
There's also the added concept of empire stability. If the right conditions are met, colonies can claim their independence and become a brand new civ, either peacefully or by war.

To enhance these phenomena i like to play huge earthlike maps. Game starts with 12 civs, usually ends with ~25 with lots of regional geopolitics and dynamics between ancient colonies and aboriginal nations. You really have the feeling that humanity lives, with continuous rise and fall of nations on various scales.

Sorry for the digression, i don't even play Civ5, keep up with your discussion.

 

[The_Quasar]

I never liked the animals in Civ IV, I much prefer how it is in Civ V.

I also like the Modern Armour etc that can spawn in late game if you go over -20 happiness. This is realistic and represents an armed revolt well, representing army units that have joined a rebellion.

By the time barbarians begin to spawn Destroyers the game has got to the stage where a Destroyer with no promotions and (possibly) a negative multiplier won't last very long, but can cause a nuisance. On a watery map this represents terrorism well, imho. They can cause quite a bit of damage, but only until they get stamped on.

I also think the above 2 types of units cause a bit more fun in the game, and I would certainly not like to see them nerfed!

 

[gozpel]

In Civ4 I once found Willem's city taken by barbs early, it had Buddism and Hinduism and it's borders were huge. Poor Rome had to deal with them until late 1600, when they finally overtook the city. But it was the biggest city in the world, unfortunately the barbs didn't build anything stronger than longbows. I think, they had some 12 of them stacked near the city.

Animals, I wouldn't mind it, as long as my scout get something out of it.

 

[Saxony]

I don't miss animales at all. They were even more annoying then Ghandi in late game.

And, on Earth maps do barbarians always spawn in loads in the Caribbien, Indoesia and Somalia?