June/July Patch Notes

[eric_]

Well the hanging gardens giving 10 extra food per turn in all of your cities

I think if it's a per turn bonus, it will only apply to the city that builds it. I can't possibly imagine that being an empire-wide bonus.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

It's basically the old school CiV discussion concerning features that are great in idea/design, but the implementation not so great.

Nothing will ever please everyone. Get it?

Whatever *THEY* decide to implement (good or bad) within CiV defines the gameplay - to me and plenty more people willing to tackle any new challenges in a solid strategy game.

End_Of_Story.

Not even worthy of critics. Opinions *DO* matter, though.

 

[Brichals]

Don't know if it's been said yet but natural wonders have been indirectly buffed as a result of the cheaper costs (maintenance, policy costs, hammer cost etc) and nerfs to everything else. And I think they needed buffing too.

Aswell as that, everything that wasn't nerfed in this patch (UAs UBs etc) is now buffed indirectly. Just a rebalancing. I will have to get stricter with the avoid growth button I think but I'm really looking forward to the new patch.

 

[Agent Cooper]

Nothing will ever please everyone. Get it?

Whatever *THEY* decide to implement (good or bad) within CiV defines the gameplay - to me and plenty more people willing to tackle any new challenges in a solid strategy game.

End_Of_Story.

Not even worthy of critics. Opinions *DO* matter, though.

No need to get upset or downright condensending.

 

[Drawmeus]

I pretty much agree with this, but we just need to keep in mind that for every one of us dedicated fans at forums like this, the Civ series also has a huge fanbase/casual player base out there, that essentially decide indirectly with their wallets, whether dedicated Civ games will continue do be developed or Civ World will be the future of this franchise.

Most people don't mind change if it comes at a pace where they are allowed to adjust. Most people don't like change if it comes all at once, becomes overwhelming and essentially will make you look after alternatives instead.

I would hate to sit here at this forum in a couple of years, realizing that Civ 6 will be dumbed down (or perhaps discarded altogether in favor of developing CivWorld Cashcow) because the developers misinterpret a potential, growing lack of interest in the game franchise from the casual players, as a sign that the game is too 'complicated'.

My point has nothing to do with whether you believe the patch makes the game better or worse. It's directed at the approach of making massive fundamental changes in one single patch to an existing game most have now grown accustomed to.

I want to see CivWorld become that cash cow before I start worrying about whether it's the future of the franchise, because frankly I haven't heard much good about it from either casual players or hardcore fans. The consensus seems to be "Well, Zynga still does it better" from almost everyone.

 

[eric_]

IMO the presumption that casual ciV players will be turned off by wholesale change is off. It assumes that casual players ever try let alone manage to internalize the game mechanics, the various details of each policy, building, unit, unique ability/unit/building, etc. Almost by definition, a casual player, even of intermediate skill level, will never attain this level of familiarity, so even massive changes will not turn them away from future engagement. I think it's true that casual players aren't willing or able (e.g., due to time constraints, as in my case) to become deeply familiar with the game, but that was true from the get go, so there's no whole-sale 'relearning' necessary.

I say all this from the perspective of a casual player. I *LOVE* ciV, but I don't ever have time to finish more than ~1.5 games between patches (invariably, I'm in the middle of a great game when a patch hits ), including maybe ~5 abandoned efforts. From where I sit, new patches do somewhat change the feel of the game, forcing me to focus slightly more on this or that mechanic (income, happiness, etc), and overall make it feel a little more fresh all over again. But, I don't ever develop go-to strategies or intimate knowledge of policies, so I'm never faced with the daunting task of retraining myself.

The upcoming patch will be interesting in that the changes seem to make a shift towards the synergy between various aspects of the game, rather than a reworking of any one mechanic. I think it will turn out to be fairly subtle in middle level play (Prince, King) and I find it intriguing and enticing, not daunting.

 

[Thormodr]

I want to see CivWorld become that cash cow before I start worrying about whether it's the future of the franchise, because frankly I haven't heard much good about it from either casual players or hardcore fans. The consensus seems to be "Well, Zynga still does it better" from almost everyone.

Brian Reynolds wins again.

 

[JT415]

Sorry if this has been discussed but 25 pages are a lot to read thru. I had a question about something from the new patch.

- Galley now upgrades to Trireme.

Are they adding galley's to Civ5?

 

[eric_]

I think that's just for Ottomans when they capture a barb Galley.

 

[JT415]

I think that's just for Ottomans when they capture a barb Galley.

Thats too bad. I was hoping they were going to add them. I prefer them for moving a group of units over an ocean.

 

[pjdodd]

I wish the never-ending nerfing would stop and all the energy was put towards Civ6...let this dreadful beast of a game die! Until Civ6...still with CivIV.

 

[thadian]

Please fix the AI war declarations - they are very peaceful with each other and in an instant, even if its strategicly bad, they will war you.

Napoleon and Bismark were in a war, and Napoleon moved his units into Bismarks territory to the east, I was to the west of Napoleon. Bismark used longswords to wipe out napoleons attacks leaving him 3 units at home, bismark with some 18 units, me with about 12 units. Then Napoleon and Bismark make peace, Napoleon declares war against me despite having no units to fight - im not encroaching his borders with units, he is dependant on me for luxuries and strategics (in fact, the only reason he had swordsman and horseman is because i traded him iron and horses).


In another game, I was Iroquois, i build: Scout, Worker, Monument, Warrior, Warrior. On turn 35 or so i meet Ramses. It is about turn 40, and i finish my second warrior. I meet Ghandi. I click "End Turn". They both denounce me and Ghandi tells me i have a pathetic army. 2 turns later, i meet Alex. I click end turn and Alex tells me i am a city state. I click end turn and a third warrior is done - and all 3 declare war against me.

I play on emperor level but the last week or so ive been playing on prince to try to learn new strategies that don't rely on slingshots or perfect percision.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

No need to get upset or downright condensending.

Neither of these qualify what i was commenting about.
Perceive what you wish - the fact remains simple; anti-CiV players will never be satisfied by anything.
Perpetual patching included.

 

[thadian]

personally, im not anti-civ, im anti-making civ suck.

i prefer to not have perpetual patching for many reasons but that doesn't mean i hate civ - i just want them to do better because i know they can, and i want them to increase the quality of their product. then again, this is what tends to happen when you pay 50 bucks for something and it turns out to be a rip off. you want to be "made whole", meaning a better product. and just because you don't feel this product was implemented well doesn't make you anti-civ.

"anti-civ" is a propaganda line you say to make it sound like unsatisfied, vocal customers are just crybabies who don't deserve to speak when they are unhappy with the practices of the company who released the product you enjoy.

 

[Randall Turner]

You aren't one of the experienced players who have been complaining that Civ V is way too easy, are you?

My complaint has always been about the curve, ie, that it's hard early and snowballs late. (It can snowball "bad", but if you're winning it snowballs "good".)

The real way to fix this is to put more diminishing returns mechanics in, ala Europa Universalis.

I voted "good" on this patch, overall - but that doesn't mean I think it won't snowball, I think it will. (That's what I'm grumping about.) The problem is the only way to "fix" it now is to modify the handicaps XML file in the middle of the game, which I often can't do well after a pint of scotch.

 

[Megalomano]

I think they forgot to balance the Commerce tree to match the new Piety and Rationalism, they should also deal with the damn A.I happiness bonus.

 

[MadDjinn]

Taking a shot at the happiness changes...

Of course, I'm still waiting to see how the per building happiness works in the new system. Whether it goes into the 'global' bucket or if it's the same as happiness buildings (and therefore pop in a specific city based) So things may change as we get more information.

 

[turboraton]

I play weekly with my friends at Lan and I can say I'm very happy with those changes. Early aztecs is gonna be AMAZING! I think we will have to tone it down to Emperor because of the new happiness system. I am also loving the Colossus / Great Lighthouse buff. You have done a really good job on the wonders. Keep up the good work!

 

[Airey]

Taking a shot at the happiness changes...

These changes will be interesting. "Forcing" players to choose between SPs vs balancing happiness with other methods is good.
That early GS, Steel bulb, and Capital + puppets was just too easy. With the massive +GPT Ai gives for Peace treaty. This opening is suitable for every winning condition.

Managing mass puppets would be harder. But it'll make it plausible to annex cities.

It's kind of early to know how everything will work together.

I don't really mind them "sledgehammering" the game when they realize it's not working, and go towards a totally different direction.

 

[MadDjinn]

These changes will be interesting. "Forcing" players to choose between SPs vs balancing happiness with other methods is good.
That early GS, Steel bulb, and Capital + puppets was just too easy. With the massive +GPT Ai gives for Peace treaty. This opening is suitable for every winning condition.

Managing mass puppets would be harder. But it'll make it plausible to annex cities.

It's kind of early to know how everything will work together.

I don't really mind them "sledgehammering" the game when they realize it's not working, and go towards a totally different direction.

Oh, they definitely will be interesting, and the 'easy route' has been taken away. Which is definitely better.

In a different post I mentioned that I'm good with the meritocracy changes. Quick LS rush was getting boring.