March Patch Notes (formerly february)

[He-Who-Hunts]

As an avid user of multiplayer I am VERY happy to see these changes.

I know many of the changes can be done through modding but internet games dont allow these mods, so now I wont feel (as) funny jumping between play types.

The only change I would make is call the "honor" SP branch the "multiplayer" Branch.

 

[Valkrionn]

Would it be possible to write a mod to play the game, thousands of times, with AI's functioning with player restrictions, and just observe the outcomes of patch X to patch Y?

It would seem to me that a simulator should be part of the developmental architecture. Was it present in the past?

That alone might settle some of the arguments we see here - and identify primary problems.

You can't govern chaotic systems easily, but you can identify top issues and then model and simulate to attempt to anticipate unintended outcomes.

I should quite my job and write it, but then who would pick up the garbage?

It's easily possible, via FireTuner. You can let the AI play for X turns, entirely automated.

 

[MadDjinn]

First, as much as I hate ICS and would like to see the core system work better...

It's still the OP way to play. It's not the absolute best way to do things (I doubt there's one really). there are counters, but that's only MP related. (which is borked)

I do not like it, so I don't use it. It can be fixed simply, within the context of the game. I've stated this before in other threads, so I'll not spam the patch notes thread with more. (Since this is all really off topic)

As per the 'economy', I don't think the detractors have really thought through their arguments well enough. Gold is produced. Gold is used on buildings, RAs, units, roads/railroads, etc. Maintenance costs vs. production. There's a barter system; basis of economics.

oh, and a revolting population does no work. All real economies run on happiness, whether you like it or not. Science happens whether the "governments" (control structures really, since religion played a hand in there for too long) want it to or not.

So the basis of the concepts in the game are just fine (it's the implementation that hasn't lived up to the challenge). I'll repeat this again since I doubt some of you have heard about it: Civ 5 is not Civ 4. different games altogether. If they thought that another expansion on the Civ 4 engine would make money, they would have done that. Move on.

 

[bite]

I like the new changes each patch is making the game better, its a pitty they didn't spend the time doing this pre-release but then I didn't mind the launch title unlike some

 

[Zyxpsilon]

Happiness economy Does Not Exist in the history of humanity. Happiness Certainly affects everything from gold to research to production, but it is not the real basis of the Economy. Happiness affects an existing Economy and does not make it.

Hold on, maybe i don't fully understand this... i need some clarifications but i'll start with my own perception.

Happiness Economy is a fact.
Hollywood, the Arts, Disco dancing, Computer Gaming... name it.

Revolt & Riot model aside, if populations has had it they have but two extreme ways to solve the problems (heck, just look at what's happening in North African countries lately);
-1- Stay at home, swallow their angriness, shut up and play poker or somethin'.
-2- Start to brake some stuff around, throw out rulers off their thrones, fight for food and family.

In both cases, Happiness was the trigger and Economy the target.
Neither has to be perceived individually, in fact they are soooooo closely related that Money itself is a factor for Poor/Rich.
Are you happy or sad?
Spend it.

My cities stopped production & research. My population was the cause?
No, i micmanaged the things that lead to such situations badly.
Starved & out of jobs, they should and must get mad.
Thus... Economy =+> Happiness. Individually as much as collectively.

Kill The King - Rainbow.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

Would it be possible to write a mod to play the game, thousands of times, with AI's functioning with player restrictions, and just observe the outcomes of patch X to patch Y?

There's a fascinating tool i use occasionnaly which does just that; FireTuner.
In fact, i'm willing to gamble most "Balancers" out there use it often too.
30 minutes of coding, 10 of swift methodic tracing observation, ya know. Programmers are intellectually sharp enough to simplify their lives instead of complicating them.

But nobody at Firaxis will hand over the gimmicks, yo gotta do it yourself.
Hold it - what am i saying - they partially did that already with ModBuddy.

PS; oooopppps, just saw Valk reply above... sorry.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

I know many of the changes can be done through modding but internet games dont allow these mods, so now I wont feel (as) funny jumping between play types.

LAN, servers -- all the same to me.

 

[Deep_Blue]

Hold on, maybe i don't fully understand this... i need some clarifications but i'll start with my own perception.

Happiness Economy is a fact.
Hollywood, the Arts, Disco dancing, Computer Gaming... name it.

This is translated into Gold income which is translated into Economy. and it is part of the economy not the full deal !

Revolt & Riot model aside, if populations has had it they have but two extreme ways to solve the problems (heck, just look at what's happening in North African countries lately);
-1- Stay at home, swallow their angriness, shut up and play poker or somethin'.
-2- Start to brake some stuff around, throw out rulers off their thrones, fight for food and family.

Which proves my point: Happiness Affects an Existing Economy and Does not make one.

Any thoughts other than that lacks understanding of how the world runs. For instance Despotic Empires with Very Unhappy people emerged many times before in the history with great power and advanced research, look at Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union in WWII both were absolute Despotism and people were very unhappy but they were the super powers and the most advanced nations at their time.

So please do not try to argue with me that Happiness Economy is Realistic, you can argue as Valkrionn argued that this system can work , It can work and it will work but the main concept behind it is plain stupid and reflects the poor creativity when the game was developed.

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

If you're playing optimally under this patch's rules, you're running Siam with Colosseums and Wats under Secularism. That yields 15 per city just from the two Scientists; 18 with a Market. Add in Freedom and you're looking at happiness neutrality and 22 for the low low upkeep of 5 , less whatever you make on the city tile and the tile you work for food

Colosseums 150, Wat 150 (fact check me on this), market 120, 420 hammers total. Let's say your average junk city has 2 production tiles and you have enough rivers or maritimes to work them. 1 hammer (city) + 3*2=6 hammers (mine/lumbermill), that's 60 turns plus however x turns to grow to size 4/5/6 (minus a couple turns when you throw a few hammers in while your city is still small). x will be small if you have luxuries, large if you have to wait for colosseums to finish while you're unhappy.

You could buy buildings, but then you're spending them on RA's instead.

Civ4 ICS: state property and free speech, maximum maintenance is 6gpt. Wait 70 turns for my single mature cottage in junk tundra, I generate 7 commerce. Yes it's late game, but so is civil society and secularism.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

So please do not try to argue with me that Happiness Economy is Realistic, you can argue as Valkrionn argued that this system can work , It can work and it will work but the main concept behind it is plain stupid and reflects the poor creativity when the game was developed.

Hey, i wasn't arguing with you. I was simply incapable to grasp the equation you offered as written earlier.
We're, in fact, stating or "interpreting" the Happiness model in a similar context.
The precision of Gold/Economy ratios was necessary to put such mutual dependency into rational perspective.
Gameplay or reality, i tend to tilt for fun whatever indirect sliders are deployed for me.

 

[Txurce]

Any thoughts other than that lacks understanding of how the world runs. For instance Despotic Empires with Very Unhappy people emerged many times before in the history with great power and advanced research, look at Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union in WWII both were absolute Despotism and people were very unhappy but they were the super powers and the most advanced nations at their time.

So please do not try to argue with me that Happiness Economy is Realistic.

The German people were not very unhappy for the majority of WW2, and the Soviet Union was not one of the most advanced nations in that time. Other than that, I see what you mean.

 

[specialist]

Pointless...whilst they still have the stupid 1upt limitation...

Only the incredibly stupid fail to see how that has completely rooted Civ.

1upt DOES NOT make the game more strategic...it makes it MUCH MUCH LESS strategic...it attempts to turn the game into Panzer General (the actual stated goal of the fool who designed this game)...a second rate game that is TACTICAL in nature and requires far larger maps (more land per unit) than is possible in Civ.

Civ V is a failure of EPIC proportions...only those who are too stupid to be able to play a proper strategic game requiring intelligence and thought think it is good.

And only the brainless struggle with the so called stack of doom...1upt is the weakest of any possible solution to this...there a about 1.49 billion other possbile solutions that could have been implemented before the idiotic idea of 1upt.

And before any pillock try's to defend the fool responsible for this...he is TOTALLY and COMPLETELY responsible...he was the LEAD designer...not the tea lady!

If 2K wanted a game that was more accessable (easy for stupid fat lazy americans to play) - again there was about 1.789 billion ways of solving that without dumbing the game down to stupid fat lazy american level.

Again - a LEAD designer with a brain could have solved that. The lead designer of Civ V FAILED with every single task appointed to him. He is a total embarassment to game developers everywhere.

Sid Meier took his eyes off the ball (by allowing someone so untalented to be in charge) and we have all suffered (except for the stupid fat lazy americans who like clicking end turn without having to think about anything).

Sid Meier and Fireaxis have ensured I will NEVER EVER buy another Fireaxis game again.

This sought of betrayal of a loyal and hard core fan base is unacceptable.

Moderator Action: Calling other forum members stupid is unacceptable. Please be more considerate of people with different tastes to your own.
Note: Backtrolling of this post can be infracted.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Aside from "stupid fat lazy Americans" you're entirely right. Its clear to anyone who's played the Civ series and Civ Fail to any depth that Civ Fail was systematically sabotaged in every level, just filter the forum messages to comments from people who joined before Civ Fail. Even the artwork and the nagging voiceovers are substandard, so they can never fix it to the standard of the earlier Civs. Shame. Props to the development team for starting to fix the mess.

 

[Deep_Blue]

The German people were not very unhappy for the majority of WW2, and the Soviet Union was not one of the most advanced nations in that time. Other than that, I see what you mean.

Soviets Unions was the second Super Power until 1990 so from where did you learn that they were not one of the most advanced nations

 

[Txurce]

Soviets Unions was the second Super Power until 1990 so from where did you learn that they were not one of the most advanced nations

You were speaking with regard to World War Two. I know you've been posting a lot today, so you may have lost track of what you wrote.

 

[Martin Alvito]

Colosseums 150, Wat 150 (fact check me on this), market 120, 420 hammers total. Let's say your average junk city has 2 production tiles and you have enough rivers or maritimes to work them. 1 hammer (city) + 3*2=6 hammers (mine/lumbermill), that's 60 turns plus however x turns to grow to size 4/5/6 (minus a couple turns when you throw a few hammers in while your city is still small). x will be small if you have luxuries, large if you have to wait for colosseums to finish while you're unhappy.

No. You're missing two things here:

1) Tile sharing. You staff the Wats (200H) in the first wave cities and work all the Mines in the second wave cities while bingeing on Maritimes. Rammy's ability helps here.

2) Golden Age. Generally speaking, you want to go Liberty -> Freedom -> Rationalism -> Secularism, and time it so that you hit Rationalism after the Happy bucket fills. That gives you a good fifteen turns to kill it on infrastructure.

If you pick up a Culture ruin, it's not a good thing. I usually spend the forced pick on Tradition, since this accelerates your start considerably.

 

[danieladler]

It seems as they are going in the right direction with this one. Not much on stupid AI combat, though, but they are at least recognizing the denounce hysteria that so easily grips our poor stupid AI rivals...A limit to DoF and Denounciation 50 turns is also very welcome. I very much like the increased plus 1 tile between cities. It will surely straighten some of the AI smallpoxing out, which will spare me from razing half of the cities i capture. And another important thing, that might improve things considerably (it just might, hey im an optimist), is the increasing cost of techs as you go through time. It might give you the possibility of actually enjoying the era between 1800´s riflemen and mechanized infantry, for example. All in all, a step in the right direction. I doubt its enough though, but hey rome wasnt built in 1 turn

 

[Ex-Cop]

Aside from "stupid fat lazy Americans" you're entirely right. Its clear to anyone who's played the Civ series and Civ Fail to any depth that Civ Fail was systematically sabotaged in every level, just filter the forum messages to comments from people who joined before Civ Fail. Even the artwork and the nagging voiceovers are substandard, so they can never fix it to the standard of the earlier Civs. Shame. Props to the development team for starting to fix the mess.

Agreed, except for your comments about "Americans". Thats unfair man. Some of the best strategy gamers are fat Americans

 

[PieceOfMind]

Cities are able to work up to radius 3 now, so leaving that spacing as in Civ4 means you can settle within the workable radius of other cities. That was most certainly not the case in Civ4, so why is this change seen as a copout, exactly?

I'm only nitpicking here so I apologise, but in civ4 (and I'm pretty sure it will be still the case in civ5) you can settle within the workable radius of other cities by having them on different landmasses. I do it all the time in civ4. Funnily enough it's usually because I'm ICS'ing with the great lighthouse and placing cities along the coast and tiny islands as densely as possible.

 

[Valkrionn]

Ah, but the "other landmass" rule is in Civ5 too.

Cities must now have three or more tiles in between them (1 more tile than before), unless separated by a sea/coast tile.

The point still stands; As far as cities on the same landmass are concerned, you couldn't settle into the workable radius of a city in Civ4, why should that be different in Civ5? It's a change that should have been in before the game shipped.

 

[MadDjinn]

Any thoughts other than that lacks understanding of how the world runs. For instance Despotic Empires with Very Unhappy people emerged many times before in the history with great power and advanced research, look at Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union in WWII both were absolute Despotism and people were very unhappy but they were the super powers and the most advanced nations at their time.

So please do not try to argue with me that Happiness Economy is Realistic, you can argue as Valkrionn argued that this system can work , It can work and it will work but the main concept behind it is plain stupid and reflects the poor creativity when the game was developed.

as stated, Nazi Germany was fairly a happy place til it got bombed out.

You can't say that the WWII Soviets were 'very unhappy' given that they managed to fight for their country, rather than against it.

Despotism != automatically unhappy. that's a big problem in your argument. Some people are just fine with that.

unhappy = they get mad. You can't take a bunch of people who are unhappy and form an economic system that keeps them unhappy. It doesn't work.