Hail Jon Shafer
- Thread starter lemmy101
- Start date
Stefanskantine
Angry Partisan
signed, Civ V is awesome.
I have to echo a lot of the positive sentiments in this thread regarding the design direction of this latest iteration. I can see why longtime fans of the series (and IV in particular) are displeased about certain things but on the whole I'm having a great time with V, maybe even more fun than I had with IV. It's a different experience, so hard to compare them directly.
It's easy to write off the removal of aspects like health and the resource sliders and governments as dumbing down the game, but I feel like they did a great job of creating interconnected dependencies on the different resource types to make it just as engaging balancing everything in V as it was maximizing productivity in IV, if not even more so.
Having to actually think about what buildings you can afford to support with maintenance costs, desperately searching for a nearby luxury to keep your population happy, weighing culture and science improvements against productivity, I find this incredibly more interesting than "build everything in every city" and "make sure my research slider is positioned for maximum efficiency at the end of every single turn."
Combat can't be said enough about. Terrain matters, positioning matters, units matter, they've taken so many of the annoying time sinks out of combat (I, for one, do not miss transport ships). I can't recall anyone raving about the legendary "stacks of doom" from Civ games past, it was a clunky and boring system and took a great deal of thought out of what should have been a HUGE aspect of the game. Going to war in V is risky and exciting and so much more engaging.
Diplomacy I can see the complaints, maybe it's just more of a situation where the new style fits some people better than others. I was never a huge fan of the IV diplo game, it was easy enough to game them and make permanent underlings who did your every bidding. I'm still learning the V diplo, but I like the relations being more unstable. I like not knowing exactly how England feels about the Chinese. And the city-states do add an interesting wrinkle, they can be very potent allies and considering how the Computer AI interacts with them attacking one can shift the political landscape of the whole world. Maybe it's just preference.
I loved IV, played it up until the launch of V. It's still a wonderful game and definitely still has a place where it deserves to be played and will still have legions of fans. I just think V is a great extension of the series and I'm really excited to see where it goes next.
It's easy to write off the removal of aspects like health and the resource sliders and governments as dumbing down the game, but I feel like they did a great job of creating interconnected dependencies on the different resource types to make it just as engaging balancing everything in V as it was maximizing productivity in IV, if not even more so.
Having to actually think about what buildings you can afford to support with maintenance costs, desperately searching for a nearby luxury to keep your population happy, weighing culture and science improvements against productivity, I find this incredibly more interesting than "build everything in every city" and "make sure my research slider is positioned for maximum efficiency at the end of every single turn."
Combat can't be said enough about. Terrain matters, positioning matters, units matter, they've taken so many of the annoying time sinks out of combat (I, for one, do not miss transport ships). I can't recall anyone raving about the legendary "stacks of doom" from Civ games past, it was a clunky and boring system and took a great deal of thought out of what should have been a HUGE aspect of the game. Going to war in V is risky and exciting and so much more engaging.
Diplomacy I can see the complaints, maybe it's just more of a situation where the new style fits some people better than others. I was never a huge fan of the IV diplo game, it was easy enough to game them and make permanent underlings who did your every bidding. I'm still learning the V diplo, but I like the relations being more unstable. I like not knowing exactly how England feels about the Chinese. And the city-states do add an interesting wrinkle, they can be very potent allies and considering how the Computer AI interacts with them attacking one can shift the political landscape of the whole world. Maybe it's just preference.
I loved IV, played it up until the launch of V. It's still a wonderful game and definitely still has a place where it deserves to be played and will still have legions of fans. I just think V is a great extension of the series and I'm really excited to see where it goes next.
Oh, and on thing I love from diplomacy - when an AI tries to antagonize you by attacking a city state you're allied with, and then they op-up and say "Oh, it looks like someone attacked your little friend. Are you going to do something about it?"
I never expected quirks like this from the AI. It makes the game so much more fun and it makes the AI feel more real. I've had a few leaders comment on how large my army is and they feel sorry for anybody that would mess with me. They would say things like "I've heard stories of your great army" or something along them lines. It's really cool that they say things like this. Or "So soon and you already threaten me again?", they know what you asked them and how long ago it was.
I've been playing for 8 hours and am on turn 300? I think. I haven't had enough diplomacy, even in 8 hours of play, to see something like this. I have alot more lines to discover!
I used to play CIV IV on marathon but so far the standard speed on V is perfect! It's long enough to experience each era and their units.
bjbrains
Man of U-235
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2007
- Messages
- 837
100% agree. This is a very fun, new game in the Civ franchise. I swear all the complaints are people who wanted Civ 4.1, people who don't understand how the game works, and the inevitable people who forget the AI in civ 4 when making accusations:
FYI: The BTS 3.19 AI (aka, the massively improved AI over the civ 4 launch AI), is almost incapable of winning on Noble (Prince in this version). Better AI have done a great job, but that's taking 6+ years of tweaking into account. Civ 5's AI is lightyears ahead of Civ 4's launch AI. It's not much worse than the BTS AI either.
FYI: The BTS 3.19 AI (aka, the massively improved AI over the civ 4 launch AI), is almost incapable of winning on Noble (Prince in this version). Better AI have done a great job, but that's taking 6+ years of tweaking into account. Civ 5's AI is lightyears ahead of Civ 4's launch AI. It's not much worse than the BTS AI either.
sghiminini
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2010
- Messages
- 55
Signed as well. I'm enjoying the game very much. I hope this thread stays on the first page for a long time.
Gorey
Prince
Burned
Beardy Dan
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2009
- Messages
- 150
Me too!
I agree entirely. Each iteration of Civ has done several things differently, some better, some worse.
Civ V is no different in that regard, but I am thoroughly enjoying it so far. In 3 & 4 I usually tried to avoid war at all costs, lowering difficulty, etc, always going for culture or space race wins. I'm not doing that so far in Civ V.
1UPT is such a massive improvement, it's almost unbelievable. Having to really think about what combination of units are going to be most effective, where to place them on which terrain, etc, is great. War is fun! Liberating city states is such a great thing!
Global happiness is also a huge improvement. No more just founding city, get religion, build temple, build courthouse, build colosseum, etc.
Now I actually have to think every time a city starts production, do I need happiness? Do I need money? Not just looking at the building list and seeing whats missing. It's fantastic.
Oh, and it definitely still has the "one more turn" problem. I lost about 2.5 hours last night because of it.
Civ V is no different in that regard, but I am thoroughly enjoying it so far. In 3 & 4 I usually tried to avoid war at all costs, lowering difficulty, etc, always going for culture or space race wins. I'm not doing that so far in Civ V.
1UPT is such a massive improvement, it's almost unbelievable. Having to really think about what combination of units are going to be most effective, where to place them on which terrain, etc, is great. War is fun! Liberating city states is such a great thing!
Global happiness is also a huge improvement. No more just founding city, get religion, build temple, build courthouse, build colosseum, etc.
Now I actually have to think every time a city starts production, do I need happiness? Do I need money? Not just looking at the building list and seeing whats missing. It's fantastic.
Oh, and it definitely still has the "one more turn" problem. I lost about 2.5 hours last night because of it.
Yeah I'm in favour of this thread - kudos to JS for a great game. I really like the direction he has taken the Civ franchise... I wasn't a huge fan of Civ 4 and the direction Soren took it.
edit: I would've loved the Mongols to be in it though (*crosses fingers for expanion pack to include them*)
edit: I would've loved the Mongols to be in it though
(*crosses fingers for expanion pack to include them*)ZXTT
Chieftain
Yes, glad we had someone streamline the thing so I could actually enjoy it again without having to understand some or other minutiae at every turn. Let me build some cities, research tech, build units and fight - without all the bizarre best practices that ended up in IV.
ZXTT
Chieftain
Yes, glad we had someone streamline the thing so I could actually enjoy it again without having to understand some or other minutiae at every turn.
UNIT 666
One of Many
Civilization V is a wonderful addition to a great series. I suspect that I will enjoy it for many years to come. Basically, I agree with the opening poster.
Gotta say that when the release got closer and closer I was pretty worried about V, but now I'm simply loving it. I love Civ IV and in another thread I actually wrote that I bet I'm going to play IV and V side by side for years... but I'm afraid there's no turning back to IV now!
Like previous posts say, now you really need to think more where to concentrate, you can't have it all. Also the world events and relationships of nations of Civ IV seem more.. statistical and shallow. I can't really explain what I mean, it's just that now I feel like controlling an empire with bigger and more important decisions.
I was actually sceptic about many things, like units embarking themselves, but after trying them I saw how things went for the better.
Also it makes me smile to know that the game hasn't been out for even a week, so we are going to get patches to control unbalances, add-ons, new civs and game mechanics etc. so things can only get even better.
Now back to prowling with my Songhai crew.
Like previous posts say, now you really need to think more where to concentrate, you can't have it all. Also the world events and relationships of nations of Civ IV seem more.. statistical and shallow. I can't really explain what I mean, it's just that now I feel like controlling an empire with bigger and more important decisions.
I was actually sceptic about many things, like units embarking themselves, but after trying them I saw how things went for the better.
Also it makes me smile to know that the game hasn't been out for even a week, so we are going to get patches to control unbalances, add-ons, new civs and game mechanics etc. so things can only get even better.
Now back to prowling with my Songhai crew.
Zero_Class
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2010
- Messages
- 4
Loved Civ IV and I love this game man. I don't see why so many people are bashing a game that's not even a week old. That's like kicking a newborn just for being born. Great post by the way, couldn't have said it better myself.
Similar threads
