Is the 7-1 patch playable?

[Estebanium]

Can we seriously just NOT be hostile here, guys? Take the banter elsewhere.

+1! I really have to admit, that the atmosphere became a bit rude in the forum. Constructive feedback is ok and very welcomed, but offending others is not ok and counterproductive for the project. You will not gain any advantages for offending others!

 

[saamohod]

Can we seriously just NOT be hostile here, guys? Take the banter elsewhere.

Hostility was the last thing I expected when I created this thread.

It makes me truly sad that some people whose talent and dedication I respect and acknowledge were upset by the straightforward question I asked. Gladly there were also those who share my concern on the topic in question.

Do I consider my question answered? Not really. But that's enough for now. Gazebo and Funak felt my approach was "demanding" and that my intention was to demonstrate "I'm not going play until you fix this -attitude".

Should I repeat again it was not my intention but to simply find out based on public's opinion whether I should start another dozen hours immersion into my favourite mod. And what I consider unplayable was followed by "IMHO". We set our own standards and preferences, and in no way I was going to impose my standards on someone from the public, not to mention to hurt someone's sensitivities.

Again I'm gonna be polite and sincerely thank the modmakers' team for the amazing work you've been doing. And i mean it.

On the other hand the sensitivities of some of them should be tuned down, IMHO.

And "let's stop it".

 

[Estebanium]

My post was not related to the opening post, but to the following somehow aggressive post that were made by the minority. In my opinion those minority rose in the last time, unfortunately.

 

[Gazebo]

Hostility was the last thing I expected when I created this thread.

It makes me truly sad that some people whose talent and dedication I respect and acknowledge were upset by the straightforward question I asked. Gladly there were also those who share my concern on the topic in question.

Do I consider my question answered? Not really. But that's enough for now. Gazebo and Funak felt my approach was "demanding" and that my intention was to demonstrate "I'm not going play until you fix this -attitude".

Should I repeat again it was not my intention but to simply find out based on public's opinion whether I should start another dozen hours immersion into my favourite mod. And what I consider unplayable was followed by "IMHO". We set our own standards and preferences, and in no way I was going to impose my standards on someone from the public, not to mention to hurt someone's sensitivities.

Again I'm gonna be polite and sincerely thank the modmakers' team for the amazing work you've been doing. And i mean it.

On the other hand the sensitivities of some of them should be tuned down, IMHO.

And "let's stop it".

I'll just say this: the word 'playable' is very loaded. It implies a state of brokenness that you may not have intended, but asking if something is 'playable' is comparable to saying 'how broken is this?' It may not have been your intent, but words are all we have on the Internet. I get lots of messages and whatnot asking these kinds of questions and many of them make demands on my time. Your question, even if well intended, comes off as negative. 'How is the 7/1 Version?' is far less menacing a question.

Edit: I should note that I'm not saying that you feel this way, but that your misunderstanding of responses to your questions stems from your initial choice of words. That's all.

G

 

[Magil]

I should note that this "game-breaking bug" is not as bad as some people are describing. I'm guessing people are just parroting information without testing it themselves. AI are still using diplomats and great diplomats, still sending them out and stealing city-states away from me. Believe me, I'm playing a game as Venice with the 7/1 patch and focusing heavy on city-states, and have a few rivals for their alliances.

It just seems to be when the AI feels threatened or is at war that they produce diplomats and then fail to utilize them. When totally at peace they use them quite effectively.

 

[Asterix Rage]

(...) 'How is the 7/1 Version?' is far less menacing question.
G

That's the point
It's why i suggested Seemohod to play Tetris instead, ironicly. stand for that

Now, in my current game i focus my attention on AI diplomats and i must say that they do the job. They do well. I rule the 20 CS just because i focus hard on it. With tons of diplomats, statecraft policy, and trade route to CS. If not, i'd rule myself only.
I don't see any issue about it.

To end, we all must be nice, humble and greatfull toward modders.
Does civ5 without Vox Pop is "playable" when a bunch of gold is enough to rule any CS?

 

[glider1]

It just seems to be when the AI feels threatened or is at war that they produce diplomats and then fail to utilize them. When totally at peace they use them quite effectively.

Ok thanks that explains what happened to me. I was at war with Atilla, he had one city left and five parked GD's! I think Gazebo also said the AI aren't using GD's for embassies right now. Does that depend on peace status too?

I ask these questions because I am in the middle of a 20+20 huge map game at the moment with diplomacy the only victory condition.