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

Final Verdict: We want our stack back and other great cIV features!

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by NobleJms, Sep 30, 2010.

?

Vote for which feature you'd like to see back in Civ V!

  1. Stack (no more 1UPT): much easier to move armies around.

    76 vote(s)
    6.7%
  2. Local happiness instead of the shallow global happiness.

    117 vote(s)
    10.3%
  3. Multiple units for each strategic resource: makes more sense historically

    36 vote(s)
    3.2%
  4. The old slider system: makes for more dynamic gameplay.

    92 vote(s)
    8.1%
  5. No more purchasing units with gold.

    19 vote(s)
    1.7%
  6. Religion: what makes cIV the best in the series!

    169 vote(s)
    14.9%
  7. cIV's great graphics: current graphics in ciV is a joke.

    30 vote(s)
    2.6%
  8. The old map grid: hexes does NOT make CiV look deep!

    2 vote(s)
    0.2%
  9. Something else

    103 vote(s)
    9.1%
  10. Nothing, i like Civ5 how it is :).

    490 vote(s)
    43.2%
  1. DashieBaby87

    DashieBaby87 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    64
    The combat in Civ IV was broken and boring. Why on earth would anybody want to go back to it?

    You could literally set a fort up with a unit, and the AI would just commit suicide on it in the dumbest way possible. Or, they would put a bunch of sucky units in a stack that you could just catapult out, and then send in your own stack of doom. Bad system, imo.

    Also, the whole stack idea was ridiculous. Having a stack of 100 units in a small area (stack of doom) is probably the worst idea ever. Plus, I hated how Civ IV had no battle lines like Civ V does. It was just a stack of units mowing down city after city. It didn't feel like a real war at all. Battles were usually one-sided, and determined only by army size.

    When I played Civ IV, I thought the combat system was boring compared to Civ II. The whole 'whoever has the most units wins' element was pretty irritating.

    ♥
     
  2. DuseCutter

    DuseCutter Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    98
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    I could maybe go with bringing back religion in a more robust some way, shape or form than Social Policies. But spamming missionaries got old. But as for everything else, I say no.
     
  3. Ahriman

    Ahriman Tyrant

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    13,266
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    This thread is fail. There is no "none of these, I am glad they're all gone" option.
     
  4. Taygeta

    Taygeta Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    11
    Location:
    Finland
    Of course I know that fact. I have played Civilization since the series was born.
    Many things are pretty abstract, time goes like you need to close your eyes a bit if you dont want to ruin your suspension of disbelief.

    But still. Why not bind that city ability (to bombard nearby units) to tech tree (=archers)? :confused: Feels so out of place, and these guys have not even invented the wheel :rolleyes:

    My point was mainly about the hexes and stacking, nothing more.
     
  5. Venger

    Venger Give it a tumble, sport

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2002
    Messages:
    782
    I voted for stacks, but not unlimited. I prefer 2-4 max. It removes the ridiculous overstacking, but makes the game a little more sensible and manageable than just 1.
     
  6. Venger

    Venger Give it a tumble, sport

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2002
    Messages:
    782
    Ruined Civ for years? You mean, since it has existed?
     
  7. The_J

    The_J Say No 2 Net Validations Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2008
    Messages:
    31,098
    Location:
    Germany / Netherlands
    Moderator Action: Added 2 new options, i hope everyone is happy now.
     
  8. TheLean

    TheLean Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    14
    I have played civ for 16 years and I dont agree with the OP at all. People should be banned for lying if they say they represent the "core players" when they in fact do not. The things the OP have listed are the things that are good with civ5.
     
  9. NobleJms

    NobleJms Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2010
    Messages:
    33
    Haha, so someone is paying attention. ;)
     
  10. nekom

    nekom Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    189
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    You know what I want back? The actual time displayed. I don't have a clock in my office and I hate having to alt+tab just to check the time. So I'm voting `something else'.

    I do NOT want stacks back. I'm glad to see that go, and while combat isn't perfect and the AI leaves much to be desired, overall I think 1UPT is a move in the right direction.
     
  11. Emperor Peter

    Emperor Peter Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    159
    Location:
    Belgium (GMT+1)
    I voted for 1.

    I never liked the stack of doom, it's unrealistic (a tile does not have unlimited room to deploy troops) and offers not much tactical gameplay. So I understand the developers tried to fix that, however, my opinion is they failed.

    The one unit per hex is silly. It makes it more tactical then the SoD thing, but not enough. If you allowed say 3 to 5 (not sure what number would work best, maybe up to 10) units on a tile, battles would be more interesting and players would have more options. Also it would be less annoying to move units around.

    I've played some hex-based WWII wargames where they solved this problem very well. You could stack up to 10 units in a hex (so there was a limit, but the player still had enough flexibility in deployment) but the drawback of stacking units was that indirect fire attacks (in Civ: archers, artillery, ...) were more effective against the units in that hex which discouraged players from grouping too many units together.

    I think something like this would work well for Civilization and I don't really understand why the developers gave us this ridiculous restriction instead. And for workers too! :crazyeye:

    Just my 2 cents
     
  12. Onionsoilder

    Onionsoilder Reaver

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2007
    Messages:
    3,173
    Thanks for that.
     
  13. vandyr

    vandyr Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2007
    Messages:
    351
    Yea, thanks for the last option. Don't like any of the other options, but I'm most vehemently against bringing stacks back. I hope that never happens, aside from non combat units.
     
  14. jtwood

    jtwood Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    128
    I didn't want anything in the list changed on its own merits.

    I want a functioning AI that can aptly use the new system before I even think about asking for any of the old stuff back.
     
  15. edpovi

    edpovi Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Messages:
    74
    Nice Post!
    I agree that CIV 5 has a lot in common with the Civ series. I don't agree that "most fans want every sequel to be a purely additive affair". I for one see too many sequels that are really just more of the same old stuff, perhaps a new gun or a new map is the only change. It may be still be fun, but hardly innovative. Borderlands for example was a lot of fun to me as it wasn't the same old FPS.

    It was entirely possible for CIV 5 to end up as "spreadsheet Civ of uber micro management" or "Civ 4 now with hexes!". I'm for one glad they looked at the game design from the ground up and provided a new game experience that is very much CIV!
     
  16. TheBlackAdderBG

    TheBlackAdderBG Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Messages:
    56
    Location:
    Back in Bulgaria
    Voted for 1. Tactical rules for strategy map?Epic fail.
     
  17. CleverFool

    CleverFool Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    120
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    I have to say I have to disagree with all of the TC's points except maybe religion; and even then if it was to come back I'd want it modified. The problem seems to be that you want CiV+. But what's the point of having a game that's so similar?

    There's a fine balance between change and stagnation. And many don't realize that there would be a hell of a lot of complaints here if there were no changes to CiV's (albeit excellent) style of gaming. One can look at Bioshock 2, successor to one of the best FPS's in the last decade, to see just how well no change can come across. Sure it was an okay game, a slight upgrade (one could argue) over the first, yet its almost universally panned.

    Ultimately you can't please everyone, and as someone who has been playing Civ for 14 years, every game from Civ II through to now, I can say that change is a good thing. Is Civ V a great game right now? No. Was CiV a great game off the bat? No. Patches and adjustments will fix many of the problems. As is its still based off a pretty spiffy new system with a lot of potential.
     
  18. edpovi

    edpovi Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Messages:
    74
    How is it good to title a poll thread "Final Verdict we want our stack back.."?

    How can you have a "Final Verdict" when you are opening a poll? It wasn't designed well, as a key option "Civ 5 is fine as it" wasn't added till page 5 by a mod.

    And even then, that added option (as of this post) is doing better than all the other options except for "religion" and "local happiness". Hardly a final verdict, and it dosn't stack up.
     
  19. keweedsmo

    keweedsmo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Messages:
    24
    I'm sorry that Civ 5 isn't a glorified expansion to Civ 4 like you wanted it to be...People like you are truly more than welcome to go play Civ 4 again and stop polluting the civ 5 forums with "Wha Wha Wha I want this back" style posts.

    Exactly
     
  20. DashieBaby87

    DashieBaby87 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    64
    One thing I think they should have done for Civ IV was make it so that the more units you stack, the less combat strength your units have. Imagine trying to put 30 units together in a small area, and have them roll over a city all at once. It would be like suicide. :eek: I mean, you would overwhelm the city, but it's a really dumb idea because you have wasted thousands of needless lives against a tactical enemy that is probably just mowing row after row of the horde down.

    Plus, aiming for artillery would be real easy. No matter where you shoot, you're going to kill large amounts of people. :lol:

    ♥
     

Share This Page