March Patch Notes (formerly february)

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by lietkynes, Feb 16, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. vandyr

    vandyr Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2007
    Messages:
    351
    There comes a point where endless bashing has more than served its purpose and goes beyond criticism into the realm of complaining for the sake of complaining. How many times can you criticize the same thing over and over and still call it constructive? There are several people here who made it clear months ago they think this Civ V is crap yet they still continue to post the same sentiment every day. I agree with Rusky and the person he quoted is one of the absolute worst about doing it.

    I don't think Civ V is perfect personally, but I also don't think its so bad that certain people can take its release as a personal insult. I've been playing since Civ 2 and honestly, I didn't think Civ IV was any good until BTS. Civ V seems to me to be about on the same path as the rest of the civ series has been.
     
  2. Zyxpsilon

    Zyxpsilon Running Spider

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    On Earth
    Oh com'on... it's simply the usual formulaic method which has been in use (By none others than everyone developing any softwares and games!) since i can't even remember when.
    The whole point with such a generalistic "phrasing" is that it *may* involve undefined principles and features on benching test phases as of the time of writing by the messenger. Don't kill him for being true to some facts.

    I'd even risk another opinion, if you don't mind.
    Bugs & tweaks would probably fill up a thick_book_sized Forum post as any of these precisions would need to be clearly spelled out for the general public to understand or interpret (somehow) wrongfully.
     
  3. Clement

    Clement Layman

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    732
    Apologies for quoting myself, but i've read the patch notes and can't see any of these questions answered, anyone know if these issues have been fixed already or will be fixed with the next patch by any chance?
     
  4. MadDjinn

    MadDjinn Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    4,554
    I'd agree with this. For the hotfix people wanted to know what exactly was fixed... so they told us about things that 99% of the people playing the game would not even know how it affected the game.

    for example:

    # Crash - pCitizens->GetCityPlotFromIndex(iPlotLoop); is returning NULL in the CvPlayer::DoRevolt loop.
    Crash - Occasionally strange values are sent to the movement cursor code. Wrap and clamp the values before they get to the pathfinder.

    "crash fixes" in the game engine would have sufficed for most.
     
  5. Zyxpsilon

    Zyxpsilon Running Spider

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    On Earth
    Okay, i'll give this a try, Clement.

    Read very carefully, twice and again if you must....

    1) Patch 1135, 1141 + 1167. A definitive trend by staff to address *all* Diplomacy concerns.

    2) USER INTERFACE; Add a new diplomatic status "Denouncing" that displays on the turn that an AI civ is denouncing the player They won't spoon feed us with obvious facts, we got to intuitively guess what's happening. Otherwise this wouldn't be a game against weak (or badly coded algorithm, but that's whole different issue) AIs but a ride in the park for the extremely more intelligent Human Mind.

    3) STRATEGIC AI; AI calculation of enemy military might are tweaked based on size of enemy gold reserve Don't be fooled, procedural encoding is a multi-vector function. If an AI can evaluate gold importance of an enemy (such as you) to stage his own military might (as in, predictable or quantified for a clear purpose) it is not so far fetched that it can *also* detect a warmonger behavior amongst anything that is within its calculated reactions by dispatching_registry_driven_routines.

    *************
    -Specially formatted aside...

    4) DIPLOMATIC AI;

    * Avoid cascades of denunciations against a single player. AI now uses its own current friendliness level with a given power to determine how much weight to place on a denunciation against that power.
    * Denunciations expire after 50 turns
    * Declarations of Friendship expire after 50 turns

    That's three specific slots right there. Lemme expand a little on possible consequences;

    ---- Cascade against single... gee, it actually can direct some intentional choices & knows about me??!!
    ---- 50 turns.... hmm, better than none. Can you snap your fingers fast enough? Cuz, in the grander scheme of things it's a thunder strike flashy period of "Now, that i Know and can count turns up to 50, i may just, ya know..."

    **********

    And, finally... take it from Dennis Shirk himself;

    5) With future patches we’ll continue to iterate through Civ V systems and fine tune the balance of each one. So far we’ve already identified combat, multiplayer, late-game policies, wonders and civilization-unique bonuses as additional areas that will benefit from this sort of attention.

    I can't see Diplomacy in there too. Wanna know why?
    Because it is already undergoing experimental and solid code alterations, as we speak. And they'll be the last to tell you how to play YOUR games.

    Please standby, we control the Horizontal and the Vertical... --The Outer Limits.
     
  6. Sullla

    Sullla Patrician Roman Dictator

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,833
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Baltimore MD
    I usually don't like to do a direct response to another poster, because this is an Internet forum, and no one ever "wins" an argument on the Internet. :lol: But, since you directly called me out and attacked me, I'll make an exception this time.

    I know that happiness is intended to be maintenance in Civ5. In fact, I wrote about this at length on my website... at length (well over 1000 words just on global happiness). The problem is that happiness doesn't work as the game's limiting mechanic on expansion. It just doesn't. Both the human player and the AI can spam cities endlessly across the landscape. More cities = more gold = more science = more production. There are only two tradeoffs: slower social policies (which are a bit of a luxury feature, not needed to win) and slower Golden Ages (can be grabbed regardless with Great People/wonders). Go ahead, ask the elite players who are winning on Deity. ICS city spam is the dominant strat. Martin Alvito has already posted to this effect earlier in this very thread. Global happiness stops no one from expanding, because more cities are always better. And Civ5's other broken mechanics (research agreements, Great Scientists, maritime city states) all synergize better with sprawling ICS empires than tight, compact, large cities.

    Exactly, it's the opposite of Civ4's system. That's why it doesn't work! Of course large cities in Civ4 are designed to outproduce their maintenance. The whole philosophy of the game is having new, immature cities being a net loss on your empire, and then turning into a net profit as they grow in size and add infrastructure. As your cities mature, they can then support further cities. It's a self-reinforcing feedback loop, BUT it relies on having large cities with lots of well-developed infrastructure. If you just cover the landscape with size 1 podunk villages, your economy stagnates. That's good game design. Yes, indeed, if you have lots of large, well-developed cities your economy will not go broke. Is that a serious complaint you're making? :D

    Civ5's design is all backwards. In order to improve your cities, you must pay additional maintenance costs. Lots of buildings are therefore a net drain on your economy. If you invest in lots of low-usefulness buildings (gardens, stables, etc.) they will literally hurt you more than they help you. One of the tricks of playing Civ5 at a high level is *NOT* building most of the city improvements in the game. (Note that this is also an extremely unfun "trap" for new players to fall into. Bad design.) More problematic is the fact that loading up well-developed cities with infrastructure is extremely expensive, makes them only marginally more cost-effective than brand new cities with nothing in them. Now, the designers are trying to fix this in the patches by nerfing the base city tile (weaker size 1 cities), nerfing trading posts, nerfing Golden Age tile values, changing minimum distance between cities (a total cop-out admitting they can't solve ICS!) and so on. I said these are poor solutions because they are ignoring the root cause, the fact that under a global happiness mechanic, more cities will always be better to have. They are poor solutions because they make the game EVEN SLOWER to play in the early stages, with less production and gold available to the player. Firaxis is not solving the root design issue, which is the global happiness mechanic. I have 20 years experience playing turn-based strategy games: if you don't make cities cost money to found, then spamming cities will always be the one right strategy. Always. I have never seen this not be true.

    Produced no actual games to support my points... well, I could have sworn I typed up something to that effect somewhere along the way... lemme see if I can find it... maybe something like this?

    http://www.garath.net/Sullla/Civ5/americanempire.html
    http://www.garath.net/Sullla/Civ5/immortalegypt.html
    http://www.garath.net/Sullla/Civ5/artofwu.html
    http://www.garath.net/Sullla/Civ5/liberteordre.html
    http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=392335
    http://www.garath.net/Sullla/Civ5/whatwentwrong.html

    But I guess none of that was valid, because the December patch fixed all of the issues with Civ5. Boy, do I feel embarassed! You guys certainly showed me, I was way off base when I said things like "global happiness doesn't work" and "Civ5 has inscrutable and meaningless diplomacy" and "Multiplayer is broken." I guess I will have to withdraw everything I said, because the game has changed, and it is still changing. :crazyeye:

    Anyway, more seriously, the point I'm trying to make is that Civ5 is not going to be fixed unless the underlying design problems are solved, and they are not being addressed in this patch. Is the patch going to make things a little bit better? Yes, and therefore good news to the fans of Civ5. I said that in my initial post, and I didn't mean it sarcastically. At the same time, does this patch "fix" Civ5 for those who don't enjoy it? Not even close. There are really, really serious design errors in this game right now (research agreements being the #1 issue currently) that are just being ignored entirely. I would also like to warn folks to be cautiously optimistic every time a patch comes out; remember when the December patch released, and there was lots of excitement, which worse off really fast once everyone saw how not well the Friendship/Denouncement mechanics actually worked. There's a very good chance that you'll be hearing a lot of "when is the next patch" posts again by mid-March. Just keep that in mind.

    I have watched some of your YouTube videos on Civ5, Bibor, and enjoyed the commentary. I wish you the best of luck. I was only popping onto the forums to check out the patch notes; since I'm not all that impressed, I'll head out and leave everyone alone rather than post further. :)
     
  7. Bandobras Took

    Bandobras Took Emperor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,922
    Location:
    Orem, UT
    But then, neither did Civ 4's maintenance model. More cities = more gold = more science = more production in Civ 4, too. The only tradeoff, and there was only one in Civ 4, was a temporary dip in gpt as opposed to a temporary dip in happiness.

    What made people space cities apart and not spam them in Civ 4 was simply that worked tiles were so darn valuable. You wanted cities to be working a ton of them. You wanted to grow your cities larger so that they could work more tiles.

    That being said, this patch is a step in the right direction because working tiles and the kinds of tiles within the city radius will matter more.

    I agree that building maintenance is a stupid way to go, but I don't think per city maintenance as such would kill ICS in Civ 5 because Gold and Research are not even remotely linked, now (which I applaud, actually -- it never made sense to me that building a bunch of roads in Civ 3 meant I was a sterling researcher). Maintenance hampered you in Civ 4 because it would drag your tech rate down. Building Maintenance in Civ 5 doesn't suck as much as it did in Civ 3, because your research can keep up -- you're deciding how much to devote to buildings vs. how much to devote to troops, which both draw from the same resource, unlike research.
     
  8. Zyxpsilon

    Zyxpsilon Running Spider

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    On Earth
    omg... everybody, you MUST read this reply by 2KGreg.
    Right now.
    It's that important.
     
  9. Deep_Blue

    Deep_Blue Knight

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2005
    Messages:
    750
    Although Sulla critics seems too harsh but it is mostly true..

    My opinion is that Civ4 engine is the Correct Recipe for Happiness and Empire Maintenance, it was an evolution from previous game designs. But Civ5 system was broken because they decided to re-invent the wheel rather than using a proven system! unnecessary and unexplainable decision that led to the problems we see today in Civ5 , ICS one of major flaws in the new system, in Civ4 at Deity you will be insane if you try ICS, Now we have to systems to compare:
    1- The easiest way to lose in Civ4 is to expand too fast
    2- The easiest way to win in Civ5 is to expand too fast

    - Now tell me which system is the correct choice? and tell me that option#2 is the correct one :lol:

    I dont expect Civ5 developers to convert back to old system, so good luck for them trying to fix the new system. I still have hope in future expansions and I still have hope in modding and I am sure that once the source code get released civ modders will start putting a new game system from scratch.
     
  10. JohnnyW

    JohnnyW Gave up on this game

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2010
    Messages:
    658
    Location:
    USA
    How is that important? He basically said "yeah we could do it (end game graphs), but we're not going to until a bunch of other stuff is done."

    With the pace they've been working on the game I wouldn't hold my breath....
     
  11. Fistalis

    Fistalis Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    373
    Agreed. I think many people simply assumed that the stuff they felt was missing was already planned to be added later. People need to realize they are in after launch development. There is going to be a rather limited number of features they are willing to devote time to add.

    You probably won't see any movies graphs replay or multiplayer animations. Along with anything else you assumed they would patch in at a later time. The exception probably being hotseat since they have said repeatedly they would eventually add that. And of course anything they decide to put into DLC or expansions (paid content).
     
  12. SuperJay

    SuperJay Bending Space and Time

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,273
    Location:
    Shacklyn
    Yeah, I don't really think "it's not out of the question" is somehow breaking news, but I guess I just see things differently. We always knew it wasn't out of the question. Greg's just confirming the obvious. :rolleyes:
     
  13. Zyxpsilon

    Zyxpsilon Running Spider

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    On Earth
    I'll take confirmation any time over anything else..
     
  14. JohnnyW

    JohnnyW Gave up on this game

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2010
    Messages:
    658
    Location:
    USA
    He only confirmed that it's possible, which I believe was already known.
     
  15. Bandobras Took

    Bandobras Took Emperor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,922
    Location:
    Orem, UT
    That isn't quite accurate.

    In Civ 3, the easiest way to win was to expand as quickly as possible.
    In Civ 4, the easiest way to win was to expand as quickly as possible.
    In Civ 5, the easiest way to win is to expand as quickly as possible.

    In Civ 3, the easiest way to lose was to not expand as quickly as possible.
    In Civ 4, the easiest way to lose was to not build enough workers/cottages.
    In Civ 5, the easiest way to lose is?
     
  16. Zyxpsilon

    Zyxpsilon Running Spider

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    On Earth
    Missing;

    1b. The easiest way to WIN in Civ4 was to stack to death and be first to do it.
    2b. The easiest way to LOSE in Civ5 is still to let everyone else do it progressively, first or last by using a One_by_One "Hex_Tiling" approach.

    :D
     
  17. vexing

    vexing knows

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2010
    Messages:
    2,668
    i can win on deity occ - i just massively exploit RAs.
    ICS isn't the only effective strat.
     
  18. MAntoninus

    MAntoninus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    87
    The three tile rule will also make it easier to defend your general region from foreign settlement too.

    It takes us longer to scale up cities with happiness, so we can land-grab more space with the same effort.

    This is one of my bigger headaches in single-player...walling off or managing border agreements to prevent annoying civ from planting a city in nearby tundra and then denouncing me for encroachment.
     
  19. SpearMan153

    SpearMan153 Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    379
    Location:
    Maroochydore, Queensland, Australia
    Sadly my assumption is no. However I do see where the devs are coming from in the way the system currently works and in most cases the warmonger title is justified (from a certain point of view).

    civ5 has a different diplomacy paradigm from previous civs. In civ5 its all about your actions in-game, and the ais interpretation of those actions which result in you being perceived as a direct threat to their own visions of glory/delusions of grandeur.

    In civ5 all the major civs have a manifest destiny complex, the minor civs (CS) are the more reasonable/malleable nations.

    The issue isn't who started the war or why. Its the fact that your glorious armies have just swept across an entire country, which you have forced at gun point to join your every growing empire. Now if you were a more peace inclined country (high war monger hate in traits) wouldn't you be concerned and think: maybe I'm next.

    Just think of the soviet union after ww2: allies in war, conquer a few cities (eastern europe), result decades of cold war and nearly ww3.

    That said I'm hoping they will refine the diplomacy further and give us more tools to make it possible to repair/keep relations good. The general idea of civ5 diplomacy I like, the balance is not there yet and will likely take several more patches to get right.

    This patch (fingers crossed) should take care of the worst of the problems: chain denouncement and never ending denouncements/friendships.
     
  20. Deep_Blue

    Deep_Blue Knight

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2005
    Messages:
    750
    I played Civ 4 for long time and I even have some hall of fame scores so I am telling you when you expand too fast in Civ4 before your economy settles down you will lose on high difficulties. On Civ4 Deity if you try to settle 4 cities early then you become totally bankrupt with no research, less units, unhappy empire and many troubles that will kill your game.

    In Civ4 it was a balance between fast expansion and Economy and it was all about timing of settling new cities:
    expand to 4 cities->Currency Tech->expand to 6 cities->Cottage Spam->Expand to 8 Cities->Build Markets->expand to 10 cities->Build Banks->Expand to 12 cities ..... and so on.

    The Process in Bold makes sense to me!

    So still:
    In Civ4 High Difficulty -> The easiest way to lose is to expand too fast.

    In Civ5 -> It doesn't matter because the Economy Does Not Exists !
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page