My Experience After Playing Several Full Games

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Carradine, Jan 19, 2011.

  1. Carradine

    Carradine Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5
    So I did play the game on release, and quickly waited for the large patch to come out to play any more. When it did I started to play the game again, and to make a long story short I really think that patch fixed much of the problems I had with the game, and the game is a huge deal of fun for me now. Usually I would be weary of just one patch fixing all major problems in a game, but the large patch did seem to do this more than adequately for me.

    I recently had a great deal of time to play the game, and would like to give my opinions about its current state in order to make the game better.

    I played many full games, about 5-6 games, on a standard 8 player continents maps. 1 on prince difficulty, 4-5 on next difficulty (1 above prince) and one on 2 difficulty levels higher than prince.

    Navy:
    One thing I have noticed is that the AI do use ships more effectively, though there is obviously alot of work needed to be done with them. When land masses are separated only by coastal tiles (not ocean) The AI will do full on attacks. One game I played Japan went to war with me, and he actually did a multi-pronged attack. He attacks some of my cities close to him, and he also sent a group of embarked units around the coast to attack my capital. Good stuff.

    However, even though I do see ships and embarked units, I never did see a full on invasion force over ocean. But honestly that is not as big of a deal as I would expect. If the civ is on a decent sized continent, they should have enough area to expand and grow there, and there is no reason for them to conquer and expand far away from their lands. Though it would be nice to see from time to time. They do however send settlers to other continents and settle them very frequently.

    Naval AI was a pet peeve of mine that I do hope they fix very quickly. For anyone who played Empire: Total War when it was released, you know what i am talking about regarding naval invasion AI, I was floored to see the exact same problem in Civ V.

    Armies:
    Units do seem to behave better since the patch, the AI do seem to make an effort to put melee units in front, and ranged units in back. However overall this does seem to need a huge deal of work still. Regardless of difficulty level, or whether I am powerful or weaker than the enemy, I am able to crush almost any units I come upon with no losses. I am able to out maneuver and pick at certain units at will. Even when the AI is much more powerful than me, and has twice my army. I will destroy their whole army and they will want peace with me and I claim half of their cities in the peace negotiations. The AI must learn to attack more intelligently.

    Also, I am not sure if this is already taken into account, but Army strength should also include XP/promotions of units as well. Again this comes down to an AI going to war with me with literally 4X the military strength, but I still annihilate them cause I have a few heavily promoted units.

    I didn't see any problems with unbalanced/overpowered units in the game, again the problem I saw is that the AI needs to be improved to attack/defend more efficiently.

    City attacking still seems to be a bit tough. The fact that the city regenerates every turn even when attacked the turn before is quite powerful. That basically negates a siege unit attack or 2 melee unit attacks per turn. I understand that taking a city should take many tuns and should be hard, but needing 5-6 units attacking a city for 3-4 turns exclusively is alot of resources and time. Especially since alot of units get city attack penalties.

    A huge issue for me however is XP gain methods. There are too many ways to grind XP against enemies with little chance for retribution from the enemy. One of the biggest problems is when attacking a city. If there are no defending units, you can literally surround the city, and attack it with all your units and they constantly gain XP for free, espeically all ranged units that can attack a city and take absolutely no damage. I played a game where I have naval units bombard cities every single turn for most of the game. They grinded well up over 500 XP each and were basically unstoppable. This is a serious issue and needs to be changed. Especially the XP for attacking cities.

    Buildings:
    Me and my friends are polarized on the issue of the buildings taking too long/are too tough to build. My argument is that people may have gotten to used to the Civ 4 method, where you could build practically every building in the game in all cities. I really like that you must pick and choose and specialize your cities in Civ 5, instead of being able to build every building immediately. I personally dont have any major issues with any of the buildings costs/effects for the most part.

    The Barracks/Armory etc.. buildings need to be more useful. The barracks takes a large amount time to build, and in the end you get one promotion. Something you can get by attacking barbarians a couple of times, and you lose all those turns of production. The buildings need to be cheaper, or the benefits slightly more powerful.

    Happiness may need to be tweaked. Every single game I need to build all the happiness buildings just to stay alive. Its the only style of building that I must build immediately upon researching it. Colluseums, circus', Theatres, I must buy or build these just to keep my happiness positive. And not just because I build big cities, but in every game I play, no matter if I am going for big cities, or military conquest etc... Its a absolute requirement.

    Basic AI:
    Overall the AI is not too game-breaking. Diplomacy seems to work very well for the most part. The tough part was learning the effects of the new diplomacy ideas like friendships/denouncements, and the permanent effects of going to war with people/city states. Again the army unit movement AI needs work as they do still seem to scatter their units and not move well as a group. Also I think they need to take more statistics into consideration before attacking. As mentioned above, an AI with 4X the army power of mine will attack me, yet I will roll over them with little to no losses.

    City states seem to work fine. I have had no issues with them and they don't seem to be very unbalanced in any big way. However like the Civ AI army units, they just don't seem to know how to attack or defend correctly. Especially city-stats have absoluely no chance of taking a city, and do get slaughtered every time when defending, even when they have 6+ units to defend against 2 or 3.

    Also in a couple of games, China pulled WAY ahead in military power, twice when my military power was 1-2k, china would somehow have 8-16k military power. There may some AI tweaks that need be done there.

    Terrain Tiles:
    This was something I thought was fine until I played my latest game. All my other games I was struggling just to try and win the game on the difficulty level 1 above prince. Then my last game I play the next difficulty level higher, and I completely annihilated everyone, I won the game around the 1600s in a diplomatic victory, something I thought would be impossible at such a high difficulty level.

    What I found was I basically won because my main cities were situated near rivers/fresh water. All tiles near them get +1 food basically. That makes sense, however that, in combination with all the techs and buildings that benefit from fresh water makes any city near them way too powerful. Building a farm on those tiles gives another +1 food, the early tech of fertilization gives those fresh water farms another +1 food, also building a city next to a river gives many new building options to the city like watermills. And buildings like hydro plants, etc boost those tiles even more. All these benefits far outweigh the management costs of happiness, etc.. for the city. Anyone who starts on a coast or in open land with no fresh water start at a major disadvantage. Even though as a coastal city you can control the waters and build a lighthouse for food in the coast, it is nowhere near the benefits you get being near fresh water in the game. And with the population comes more production/gold etc.. Just my farms alone allowed me to skyrocket past all other civs in the game. And the huge research rate from from the population sealed the deal all too quickly.


    Overall:
    Despite all of these issues, I enjoyed the games I played. But now me and my friends are waiting for some dedicated server support so we can go back to playing some multiplayer games! I wanted to write all of this so the game can be improved since me and my friends love Civ so much we want it to be awesome.
     
  2. P-Zombie

    P-Zombie Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    61
    Interesting analysis. I agree most strongly with the point you make about terrain bonuses. With tile yields as low as they are, every extra bit you can squeeze out is a big deal. Fresh water is even more important in Civ5 than it was in Civ4, yet the map script no longer guarantees you'll have any nearby. I think this has a negative impact on the game.

    This statement is the one I disagree with most strongly. If the AI is playing to win, and conquest is a victory condition the AI is intended to pursue, then that is a huge reason for it to be able to handle wars in distant lands. If the AI isn't smart enough to threaten your capital on another continent, then no AI can ever possibly win militarily. To me, that's a serious flaw.
     
  3. nokmirt

    nokmirt Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2009
    Messages:
    5,088
    Location:
    Iowa USA
    I think cities near rivers should get a bonus. This adds strategy to the game. The AI should be programmed to build cities near rivers if possible. We all know not all cities will have this benefit, but if you have one or two in your empire it adds flavor to the game. If you don't you will scout out one to take at some point in the game. The AI should be programmed to look for the same oppurtunities.

    Rivers should also differ in some way like they did in real life. The Nile for instance, was much different that the flood plagued Tigris and Eurphrates. Some rivers could become better suited for late game hydro power. This idea would make the game more diverse and interesting. You would never know what kind of river you are near until you try to reap its benefits. The same could be done later for other terrains. They don't have to make it hugely complicated, but we all no that no two areas are exactly alike. Just a thought!
     
  4. Gnollen

    Gnollen Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    39
    The city-heal thing is a bit excessive I agree. From an abstract standpoint, I see it as the city is reinforcing / reprovisioning itself each turn. Therefore I think the thing that makes sense is that this bonus heal gets eliminated if like 3-4 enemy units are adjacent to the city. Then the city is truly invested and under siege. Makes some sense logically, and it also creates new strategic options for the defender. They would have a new reason to conduct sorties to break the siege.
     
  5. Naokaukodem

    Naokaukodem Millenary King

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,328
    +1!! .
     
  6. cman2010

    cman2010 King

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    740
    I liked your review and am glad you were able to return to the game and get more use out of it.
     
  7. He-Who-Hunts

    He-Who-Hunts 2nd Legionary Cohort

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    265
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Earth
    I think cities near rivers should get bonuses but those bonuses should slowly start to offset as time goes on and civs begin to collect new technologies (AKA buildings and land working techniques).

    I mean if you look at the world today we possess the necessary means to build cities that compete with those that have rivers running through them.
     
  8. Becephalus

    Becephalus King

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    725
    Not really actually. Although rivers are not nearly as important/valuable.
     
  9. Aldor

    Aldor King

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2005
    Messages:
    685
    Location:
    Germany
    Agree, the military buildings are indeed the ones I don't build, unless very late in the game when nothing else is left to be built (when they don't really make any difference anymore). Not sure how to make them better really. Perhaps they could be maintenance free, like walls and castles.

    I think happiness is fine as it is. Unless it works different on higher levels (than prince, and I think it doesn't), you don't need the upgraded happiness buildings. I haven't played a single game where I needed to build them in all my cities. Occasionally I will build a theatre in a few, select cities, but most often collosseums are all I build. There are many ways to keep your people happy...don't rely on buildings alone ;)
     
  10. JollyRoger

    JollyRoger Slippin' Jimmy Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    42,983
    Location:
    Chicago Sunroofing
    I don't want to be able to build every building in every city, but I do want to have a realistic shot at timely building each type of building somewhere in my empire in a time frame pretty close to when I acquired the technology to do so. There is still a big mismatch between tech pace and production capability that makes this fairly unrealistic.
     
  11. nokmirt

    nokmirt Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2009
    Messages:
    5,088
    Location:
    Iowa USA
    A very good point. My idea was for early game with perhaps some unseen bonuses later on. They should implement both of these ideas.

    I have been realizing that my game play has been rather poor. I have played two much civ 4, and have been trying to build most buildings in my cities. But also, I have been improving every tile with workers, probably not a good idea right?
     
  12. jtb1127

    jtb1127 Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,498
    Location:
    Arlington, Virginia
    Basic AI:
    Diplomacy seems to work very well for the most part.
    I don't understand how you can say that.
     
  13. kossmikman

    kossmikman Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2010
    Messages:
    80
    You don't need every buildings in every city. Specialize them. Improve only tiles your cities can work and for resources, no need to improve every single tile.
     
  14. Effexor

    Effexor Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    9
    Diplomacy is completely and utterly broken. If you do nothing at all, deny every request, they will generally all be friendly with some exceptions. If you declare friendship, you are just asking to be hated by everyone else. Then the 'friend' will begin asking for small favors, like the large majority of your entire bank account. If something goes sour, there is no way to repair the relationship.

    Total isolationism is the clear winner. Diplomacy? If it wasn't for the city states, it would be completely impossible to win a Diplo victory. How you can possibly say Diplo works in that light?
     
  15. Horizons

    Horizons Needing fed again!

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,401
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    If you want to build the national wonders you need to build certain buildings first in ALL of your cities - so much for 'picking and choosing'.
     
  16. Deussu

    Deussu The Omniscient

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2010
    Messages:
    167
    Location:
    Finland
    Rivers are a bit too downplayed, as some have already said. A 10% boost in commerce would probably portray the financial benefit a little more. Right now I tend to settle my cities next to a river slot (preferably desert) to gain maximum benefit from those tile yields. Hydro Plant comes so late in the game anyways it hardly matters anymore.
     

Share This Page