Full Patch Notes for December Patch

[Öjevind Lång]

I really hope that modders can do something with rebels now that they're in.

something along the lines of: more unhappiness increases the chances and number of rebels appearing.

If modders don't do something with rebels, I fear we simply won't ever see them; unless the player intentionally ignores happiness. It's great that rebels are in; unfortunate that we'll never see them or even have to worry about them.

The rebels will appear if you reach -20 happiness, and the power of happiness-creating buildings has been nerfed to make that possible. That is to say, with this patch such buildings can not create more happy faces than the number of people in the city. This does not go for Wonders, of course. It should discourage the infinite city spread strategy which is such a pain at present.

 

[lschnarch]

Another situation is when you have a worker improving a tile that is in range of being captured by an enemy within your vision, regardless of the terrain or units between them. (If the unit is actually blocked but could reach the worker on flat terrain it will interrupt the worker.)

Unfortunately, workers interrupt their current task even when the threatening unit was destroyed or has no chance of taking the worker as hostage (due to blocking units, insufficient movement range and what not more).

 

[SMA333M]

The patch sounds great. Can't wait to get it

 

[Grimberht]

Sounds like a good step in the good direction!

But the turnoffs are still there for me... boring tiles, 1 upt, no flavor in buildings, boring policy "tree" à la Wow Spec. and boring tech 3 brench bonzai (not even a tree); they need to do a lot better if they want anymore money from me!


But now there's hope and that count for something...

**Before some of you start to "defend" the 1upt with your SOD arguments: I dont look to get rid of it (look like "some" people like it... so might has well keep it...) but why not having an option for a "limited UPT", or SOD build in! It would make everybody happy.

Those would think its fun to move units for hours or feel "tactical" when they happily place their Archer on a hill would still be able to have their "fun". But also let us, those who want to combine units and really get tactical have our fun + reducing the boringness of moving troops for 2/3 of the playing time in a game.

 

[BobTheTerrible]

**Before some of you start to "defend" the 1upt with your SOD arguments: I dont look to get rid of it (look like "some" people like it... so might has well keep it...) but why not having an option for a "limited UPT", or SOD build in! It would make everybody happy.

Those would think its fun to move units for hours or feel "tactical" when they happily place their Archer on a hill would still be able to have their "fun". But also let us, those who want to combine units and really get tactical have our fun + reducing the boringness of moving troops for 2/3 of the playing time in a game.

Try the Legions mod.

 

[Valkrionn]

Sounds like a good step in the good direction!

But the turnoffs are still there for me... boring tiles, 1 upt, no flavor in buildings, boring policy "tree" à la Wow Spec. and boring tech 3 brench bonzai (not even a tree); they need to do a lot better if they want anymore money from me!


But now there's hope and that count for something...

**Before some of you start to "defend" the 1upt with your SOD arguments: I dont look to get rid of it (look like "some" people like it... so might has well keep it...) but why not having an option for a "limited UPT", or SOD build in! It would make everybody happy.

Those would think its fun to move units for hours or feel "tactical" when they happily place their Archer on a hill would still be able to have their "fun". But also let us, those who want to combine units and really get tactical have our fun + reducing the boringness of moving troops for 2/3 of the playing time in a game.

I'm sorry, but I just don't think that's going to happen. The amount of AI work needed to handle either method individually is significant; But handling both, at the flip of a switch? It's not a reasonable expectation.

Hope for a future mod which does it, or do so yourself.

 

[Flak Fox]

This is all good and well, most of these tweaks/fixes are definitely supported by me, but I'm still waiting for...

1) Toggle animations in multiplayer.
2) Able to save/load games in multiplayer.
3) Able to use mods/scenarios in multiplayer.

Even after this patch, Civ V is still an unfinished game imo. If the Legends of Revolution Mod didn't bug out in multiplayer for Civ IV, I'd still be playing the hell out of that.

 

[Knut_Are_M]

with libraries giveing no specialist slots, and tradition changed to +50% growth and national college boosted to +5+50%, a single city start going for national college will get more science.( a lot more for a short time)
that will compete with rex or going for early stonehenge.
hm it will make starts a bit harder to pick what we should go for.

in a way you now have 2 competetive builds.
1: go for standard rex on lux.
2: go for stonehenge/library/national college/ironworks/grainery/watermill and then exspand/conquer.

it is now competetive to delay building a second city a bit and get a stronger capital.

it can also indirectly buff americas bonus, because tradition is changed to +50%, and growing larger cities requires less excess food. This will make buying tiles more important.

 

[blind biker]

Sounds like a good step in the good direction!

But the turnoffs are still there for me... boring tiles, 1 upt, no flavor in buildings, boring policy "tree" à la Wow Spec. and boring tech 3 brench bonzai (not even a tree); they need to do a lot better if they want anymore money from me!


But now there's hope and that count for something...

**Before some of you start to "defend" the 1upt with your SOD arguments: I dont look to get rid of it (look like "some" people like it... so might has well keep it...) but why not having an option for a "limited UPT", or SOD build in! It would make everybody happy.

Those would think its fun to move units for hours or feel "tactical" when they happily place their Archer on a hill would still be able to have their "fun". But also let us, those who want to combine units and really get tactical have our fun + reducing the boringness of moving troops for 2/3 of the playing time in a game.

Glad to see I am not the only one advocating the removal of 1UpT. Yes, we could have limited stacks per tile - which is quite logical and natural, I think.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

Anyway, my original question stands: In your (or any other experienced modder's) opinion, is there any indication that Culture will become a typical yield, given that Natural Wonders will now be giving Culture?

Sure... somehow indirectly though if need be.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

Glad to see I am not the only one advocating the removal of 1UpT. Yes, we could have limited stacks per tile - which is quite logical and natural, I think.

I love the 1 unit per tile feature. And with all respect for a previous poster, I do emphatically not wish the dread Stack of Doom back. It's annoyed me ever since it first made its appearance in Civ III. Now you actually have to think a bit when you deploy your units or set up your defence. I think wars are much more exciting now, and I look forward to them being even more exciting when the AI has learned to use its units properly.

Another good piece of news is that now the cities heal faster. Above all, the city states must learn to defend themselves more efficiently. Though I remember one early game I played when Elizabeth went on a rampage, conquering most of the continent, and then made the mistake of attacking Belgrade. Belgrade had an excellent defence position, surrounded by mountains, and slaughtered Elizabeth's units one by one. Then Belgrade went on a rampage, captured one of Elizabeth's cities and razed it. That could never have happened if the Stack of Doom had been in the game. It ended with Elizabeth having to sue for peace. Then Catherine attacked Elizabeth and made mincemeat of her.

 

[Dralix]

This.

I only use the dancing banana emoticon, if something truly amazing and worth of praise has happened. Fixing the science overflow is just way overdue, a bug that should have never happened in the first place.

The problem is that you aren't using nanner enough.

 

[Morningcalm]

If they made moving large armies (esp. of flying units) more manageable and less buggy, 1upt would be both a great idea and a great execution. As it currently stands, it remains a pain, though maybe if the AI are more competent in combat we won't be able to make legions of longswordsmen or suchlike to just sweep them away.

 

[Toulouse]

Glad to see I am not the only one advocating the removal of 1UpT. Yes, we could have limited stacks per tile - which is quite logical and natural, I think.

Count me in as well. I would like Firaxis to introduce limited stacking.

 

[CTH]

just making 1upt so that you can stack several units at the same time but if you loose one all is lost, solves the problem when transporting but you wouldn't want to have them in the same spot in a war. Perhaps to defend a wounded unit but that seems a bit realistic at the same time dont it?

Just a small suggestion, otherwise I am quite happy with the 1upt system

 

[ohioastronomy]

For me, the 1upt idea is the fatal flaw that torpedoed this version. In particular, any stacking limit induces a lot of pathing difficulties - 1upt is the main reason why this game is so painfully slow. I'd prefer a soft stack cap, as in Europa Universalis 3 (you can stack whatever you want, but if you exceed the supply limit for a hex your units suffer severe attrition.) Hard stack limits are just too difficult for movement.

Radical though it may be, a unit density between 4 and 5 would be a better idea than either.
I hope that it can be salvaged by moving back to stacks on a strategic map and tactical battles (or an option to autoresolve) in the hexes in question.

 

[CivFart]

Stealth bombers cannot use carriers.

I know stealth bombers like the b2 spirit cannot use carriers, but this is just a game after all.

No more far inland bombing from carriers

 

[player1 fanatic]

Call to power series already had "limited UPT" system. Yet, it still had lots of path-finding problems. Like two stacks getting stuck D) near the road, since both want to go in opposite direction, using roads, and both are filled with less then maximum number of units, but more then can get on single tile.

 

[lschnarch]

For me, the 1upt idea is the fatal flaw that torpedoed this version. In particular, any stacking limit induces a lot of pathing difficulties - 1upt is the main reason why this game is so painfully slow.

I couldn't agree more.

Not only causes this the need to reduce building speeds, not only makes it the whole process of moving units slow and tedious, it also limits the already dumb AI even more.

Sure, some players will praise it as shooting down some stupid AI units without the need to put much thoughts into it because by this they are allowed to think of themselves as tactical genii.

The sad truth is, war has become so easy that any previous version almost seems to be a military simulation in direct comparison.

 

[lschnarch]

Call to power series already had "limited UPT" system. Yet, it still had lots of path-finding problems. Like two stacks getting stuck D) near the road, since both want to go in opposite direction, using roads, and both are filled with less then maximum number of units, but more then can get on single tile.

I agree. But in CtP you only had to manage 2 stacks to avoid the traffic jam, and it only took place once they met.

In Civ5, you have to manage like 8 different units, stopping without announcement and constantly blocking each other.