1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

My Thoughts On Civ5: - The Good and Not so Good (LONG)

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Archwizard, Oct 3, 2010.

  1. MadMaligor

    MadMaligor Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Messages:
    78
    I don't miss war weariness at all. Being at war has enough of an impact that a hit to happiness could cause serious balance issues. Keeping someone at war, or being attacked by multiple civs while ahead even though not the aggressor, would be an easy way to cripple growth, production, and combat effectiveness.

    The solution is a more effective AI. The AI should take better advantage of close militaristic city states and pop alliances with gold, just like the player does. The AI needs to be a bit more defensive, pop units for gold when available, and sneaky on the attack by sacking tiles more effectively to hurt an oppponents economy.

    Elongated Wars should have diplomatic consequences, not happiness hits. Have other civs badger the aggressor at some point to stop, and then step the heat up with promises to defend the weaker opponent by gifting a unit, then get to the point of eventually joining in.

    *edit* - btw...good read. I have alot of similar likes and dislikes, and am enjoying the differences Civ V has to offer.
     
  2. Archwizard

    Archwizard Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    72
    I wanted to mention something on the build wealth front:
    A scout costs 25 hammers. I disband that scout for 10 gold. I just earned 40%.
    This is in my current Emperor game.
     
  3. Yoshimune

    Yoshimune Haruhiism

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2003
    Messages:
    317
    Location:
    Tokyo, Japan
    Yes, building units to disband them immediately is much more profitable than "building" wealth. It might be an unintended exploit, but it serves to support your point that the % of hammers that go towards wealth should be higher.
     
  4. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,886
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    War weariness should have been implemented. It's ridiculous that a nation can be at war for hundreds of years and not gain any unhappiness. You can have scores of your units die but your civilization doesn't bat an eye. Give them some cotton or dye though and they'll absolutely love you. :rolleyes:

    War weariness is a good deterrent against long protracted wars where you wipe out an opponent. It works quite well in Paradox games I must say. The Europa Universalis series as well as the Victoria series makes war much more costly and realistic.
     
  5. Ayt

    Ayt Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Messages:
    221
    It is funny to think about. You can lose unit after unit and be at war for centuries and your population won't care, but if you actually succeed in taking over a city you get a huge happiness penalty. So my citizens are indifferent to other citizens of my empire dying and to being in a protracted war, but they are somehow upset about the acquisition of another city from an enemy?
     
  6. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,886
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    Yep. It's like the game designers got everything bass ackwards isn't it?

    This game loses a lot of immersion value with things like that.

    It makes zero sense.
     
  7. Edibi

    Edibi Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2006
    Messages:
    13
    Archwizard, this is a fantastic format in giving feedback. All the other flamers and fanboys out there that talk in generalities should get a tutorial from you.
     
  8. Archwizard

    Archwizard Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    72
    These are exactly in line with what I am talking about. It's why I think a system where war weariness is modified by loss/gains would work out well, with a turn-based increment to prevent just sitting "at war." One thing I've noticed in a lot of my games is that the end game tends to boil down to two civs, you + whichever AI managed to kill off everyone else on its continent. I don't find it particularly interesting to have every game boil down to two players.

    Thanks Edibi, I appreciate it.

    As I play more I've been writing down more thoughts/suggestions. I'll be posting them pretty soon probably.
     
  9. Iberian

    Iberian Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2004
    Messages:
    475
    Lose units on the battlefield? It is only a flesh wound. My units never die they only get wounds.


    War may also bring happiness, perhaps these are Spartans or Aztecs.
     
  10. Archwizard

    Archwizard Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    72
    A civ trait such as "Gain double happiness from war-related causes and suffer half happiness penalties from war-related causes." could certainly be implemented I bet.
     
  11. Crayton

    Crayton King

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Messages:
    698
    Location:
    FLORIDA
    And then there are "moral" wars, fighting the good fight. Until the eighteenth century with the globe's population explosion I am unsure that "War-Weariness" was an actual factor.

    War-Weariness may simply be an amplification of political dissidence caused by the rise of mass media more than actual population weariness.

    Before the eighteenth century and mass media, most protest of war was actually the result of the destruction of the land (exs. Hundred Years' War, Thirty Years' War), the enslavement of people, and the annexation of land. These are factors already represented in game. Even the loss of a loved one was not nearly as big of a deal as it is made to be today.

    Going back further, before the decline of antiquity (at least in the West), war had a much more religious connetation. It was not "oh no, our resources!" but rather "oh no, the gods are angry!"

    Of course, as twenty-first century players, we expect our citizens to behave roughly as twenty-first century citizens.

    As a side note not related to a particular aspect of the game, it would be nice to see religion play a more active role. Not as a simple diplomacy boost but perhaps incorporated into a civ's meta-narraitve. And a game like Civ can only benefit from more story-telling.
     
  12. Poruchik

    Poruchik Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    4
    I was so inspired by your post (I agree with you opinions, for the most part) that I decided to grade the game feature by feature, to see how the game grades out for me (score for each feature is how much it adds to my enjoyment of the game):
    -5 - I want to bang my head against the wall
    0 - I could take it or leave it
    5 - Fantastic addition

    Total score of 0 or below, to me, means the game is not worth playing. Let's see how we do.

    SCORE: 3 I like hexes, but I didn't particularly dislike squares.

    Agree completely.
    Score: 5 for the concept.
    Score: -2 for implementation. I should be able to direct city growth. If there is a source of gems two tiles away, my city should not be trying to acquire useless plains tiles first.

    Score: 5 Agree completely.
    Score: 3 Agree completely.
    Great general stacks with a land unit, but cannot while embarked? A civilian unit stacks with a combat unit on land, but an embarked unit (effectively civilian, since it cannot fight on water) does not stack with naval units? Feels like a good idea that could use improvement.

    Agree completely.
    Score: 5 For the idea
    Score: -1 For the implementation
    Score: 2 Natural wonders are kind of meh, especially since it seemed like they were promoting them heavily as a cool new feature.

    Score: 3

    Here's where I disagree with you. Research benefits should stack, while social policy benefits should replace one another. There is no reason that I should run the same social policy in 4000BC and 2000AD.
    Policy unlocking also needs to be reworked. Beelining to a certain tech is too powerful to unlock later policy trees. Later policies should have more pre-reqs. I can research education and acoustics before mining. Really?

    Score: 0
    Haven't played enough to evaluate all policies vis-a-vis one another, but in previous versions of Civ there were plenty of Civics/Governments that barely anyone used.
    That's a matter of balance and tinkering.
    Score: 3
    Good idea, but as you pointed out can be abused. You can build an army, wait for one civ to conquer the rest of the world, and when you take their capital you win?
    Needs more thought to make it a little tougher.

    Score: 3
    Good idea, but again, not fleshed out. My embarked tank can be destroyed by a single naval unit even if I have 4 destroyers around it, as long a there is a single path to that hex? Doesn't feel right.

    Score: 2
    Score: 5 Agree completely.
    Score: 2 Agree completely.
    Score: 3
    Again, good idea, but I don't like random tech coming out of research agreements. The agreement should say something like "Let's research 'Physics' together". And if two civs cannot find a tech that they can research together, due to being in different eras, or missing prereqs, than no agreement should be possible.

    Score: 3
    Score: 3 For the idea
    Score: -3 For the implementation
    As discussed in multiple other threads, happiness is out of whack.

    Score: 3

    Score: 3

    Score: 5
    Love the new great general mechanics.
    Score: 0
    Score: 0
    I am ambivalent about this particular feature, but in general, dislike the lack of fine grained control.

    Score: 0

    Score: 1

    Score: 0
    Still nobody can figure out what it all means.
    Score: 0
    AFAIK, you can build farms on non river squares.
    Diplomacy as a whole gets a big fail.

    Score: -5 For lack of transparency
    Score: -5 For muddled UI
    Score: -5 For pacts that mean nothing

    Yes, I hate it that much.

    Score: -5 For lack of transparancy
    Score: -5
    Agreed. Just yesterday, full health barb spearman just walked by my 1HP warrior who just destroyed his encampment.
    Score: -1 Sea based AI were always week in civ. On the same difficulty level, I could win much easier on islands/archipelago in III/IV rather than pangaea. That's not to say it couldn't use improvement.

    Score: -3
    Agreed.
    Score: 0
    Agreed, but there are more things to fix with higher priority.
    Score: -1
    Score: -1
    Score: 1 There is one, mouse over the happiness icon on the top bar.
    Score: -2
    All good points.
    Score: -5
    Yes, and it bothers me to no end. Especially lack of combat modifiers.
    Score: 0 Same resource map as civ IV. Zoom out and toggle it near the minimap.
    Score: -1
    Score: -3
    Agreed. If my unit can be promoted from Warrior to Mech Inf, why not attack power of a city?
    Score: -2
    Score: -3 Sell, destroy, or upgrade. I like the idea of upgrading a building.
    Score: 0
    I disagree. You don't want to scroll through a large amount of buildings during the early era when you can only build 2 or 3.
    Score: -1
    Agreed, but this seems easy to fix, unlike other features.
    Score: -5
    Civilopedia is a whole another topic. See the end of this post.
    Score: 0
    This is more about AI in general. Although I don't think puppet cities should do optimal things. If you want optimal, annex them.
    Score: -1
    Great idea.
    Score: -5
    Another thing I miss
    Score: 0
    Score: 0
    Annoying but really a minor gripe
    Score: -2
    Great points.
    Score: 0
    Plays into entire how to optimize new combat system.
    Score: -1
    Doesn't bother me. What bothers me a lot, is how you can outbuy another civ. If a city state is already an ally of one civ, it should take a lot more money to make them an ally of another.
    Score: -3
    Yes! That was the first thought in my head when I opened my first city-state screen. You can do their missions, but they won't even give you a mission unless you are their friend.
    Each city state should have a list of tasks published that they desire that give variable levels of influence.
    Score: -1
    Score: 0
    Base rate is 1/t, and then there modifiers. I agree that it should be more transparent - problem for most parts of the game.
    Score: -1
    Score: -1
    Score: 0
    Agreed, but these are relatively minor.
    Score: -3
    Score: 1
    Nah, it's fine.
    Score: -3
    This is a big step back.
    This is not possible since happiness fluctuates turn to turn unlike culture (which only grows)
    Score: 1
    It's fine rolled into happiness
    Score: -1
    Advisors are generally not helpful so far. I turned them off after half a game.
    Agreed. Not enough to bother me though.
    Score: -1
    Remove promotions altogether and give exp instead. As mentioned, early promotions are way too powerful (a single promotion is a game changer early.)
    I will now add a few points not mentioned here.

    In general, the new interface is awful. Not 'worse than civ IV' which it certainly is, but just awful in and of itself. I've worked with user interface professionals, and ciV violates a lot of basic precepts.
    Score: -5

    Civilopedia is unusable. I was going to write more, but I think that sums it up.
    Score: -5

    Inability to stack or move through different units. It is now possible to block someone entirely in neutral territory.
    I don't think it should be possible.
    Score: -2

    Really don't like the removal of 'distance from capital' penalty. Minimap now looks like a teenagers face, with different color zits all over the place, instead of a contiguous country.
    If a civ settles a tile half a map away to take advantage of resources, there should be some logistic penalty, be it food, slower production, or corruption.
    Score: -3


    Now for some new features that I like.
    2 base movement, slowed to one by various terrain features.
    Score: 2
    I don't think they went far enough. Since they reduced roads due to road maintenance, maybe base movement should be 3 in friendly territory in open space.
    It takes too long to go anywhere if you play on large or bigger map.

    I like how each civ trait has an individual name, rather than X is financial, organized. A very minor point, but I like it.
    Score: 1

    New cultural win condition
    Score: 5

    Total: -16
    I will play it a few times and go back to civ IV, civ IV + mods and Starcraft II. Hopefully patches/expansions will make this game realize its potential.
     
  13. Archwizard

    Archwizard Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    72
    Excellent, I'm glad to see it. My turn to respond :)

    Re: City Growth

    I agree, and said as much in my original post.

    Re: Unit Stacking

    I agree here. Not stacking at all on water seems messed up, why they didn't keep the 1 civvie/1 military stacking here is a mystery.

    Re: Social Policies

    The ability to research things in bizarre order has always been a possibility in Civ. If anything, Civ5 is more restrictive than previous ones, since there are no dead ends now. Think of all the dead end techs you never had to research at all in previous editions of Civ, now you have to research everything eventually in order to progress.

    On the never-changing front, while it may not be the most logical thing to run the same policy for 6,000 years, I think it's a great game mechanic. As I mentioned, some of the choices are agonizing because of weighing competing usefulness considerations. I like the short-term vs. long-term analysis. If you could change the policies, then a lot of that would be lost.

    Re: Autocracy
    I'm currently playing a Huge Map, Standard Speed, Chieftain Difficulty game for the express purpose of using Honor and Autocracy branches to completion and just beat up on people (also to get the Achievements for unlocking Autocracy, beating a Huge map, and beating Chieftain difficulty).

    I still think Autocracy is complete crap. Especially when you think about the fact that it locks off TWO other branches: Liberty and Freedom, both of which are very useful.

    Re: Research Agreements

    That's an interesting idea, but I don't know if I agree with you. The only thing I'd like to see changed is make it so the tech you are currently researching isn't the one you get. I once had the tech I was researching given to me when I only had 1 turn to go to complete it. That sucked.

    Re: Rivers Allowing Farms

    You're not the first person to essentially point out that I was unclear. I meant that rivers allow you to build farms on hills. I've updated the original post to say that.

    Re: Seeing Owned Resources
    That only shows you which ones you have access to. Not which ones you own, and not how many of each. I'd like to see Ivory [3: 2 from Camps, 1 from Helsinki (City State)].

    Re: Finding Resources

    Yeah, it sucked in 4 too. I want to be able to have a "Find Resources" interface where you can click on a resource icon to cycle through the tiles where the resources are actually located. Making me scroll around the map looking for icons/graphics sucks.

    Re: Displaying Buildings To Be Built

    That's a fair enough point. A checkbox like "Show Queue" would be perfect. "Show All Buildings". In fact, I would say they should add "Show All Units" as well, default to not showing all the units you can't build due to lacking resources.

    Re: Puppet Cities

    I agree that puppet cities shouldn't exhibit optimal behavior, I'd just like for them to not be absolutely stupid.

    Re: City States, Their Alliances, and Influence

    I agree re: escalating costs, and having a city-state mission sub-menu (like the gift of gold sub-menu) would be a welcome addition.

    Re: Turn To Next Golden Age

    Sure it's possible, that's why I said base it on current happiness. Of course, it won't be a perfect predictor of when you'll actually achieve a golden age, but there have been plenty of times when I'm planning things out when I would have appreciated a quick, rough estimate of how far off my next golden age is.

    Re: Ruins/Units

    I don't know, I don't think having a Spearman instead of a Warrior is that big a deal.


    Violates precepts such as...? I'd love to read specifics.

    Definitely. I've actually stopped using it altogether (I think I said that too).

    You can move through other units/cities. In order to block someone in neutral territory you'd need to have a number of units equal to the movement allowance of the unit you're trying to block (not hard in forests/hills areas).

    I agree, civs (either you or the AI) sending a settler 30 tiles away just to grab a resource is pretty gimpy.

    I don't know about this. I'm playing on a Huge map for the first time right now, and it's still super early so I can't really evaluate this size map. but on the Large maps the base 2 rate hasn't bothered me.

    I definitely, 100% agree. It feels much more "personal" to each civ for them to each have a unique trait rather than picking 2 abilities from a list of 8.



    Thanks for continuing the discussion, I obviously only responded to ones where I had something to say in relation to your post/my original post(s).
     
  14. brianshapiro

    brianshapiro King

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2003
    Messages:
    775
    I don't think war weariness models anything in reality. If a people think a war is wrong (Vietnam) they'll protest loudly, but if they think its right (WWII) the protest will be minimal. It also depends on the form of government, demand for civic involvement, and the type of war. Democracies with wartime drafts will have more war weariness than empires that rely on a volunteer or mercenary army. The Punic wars lasted about a hundred years, and even though it lasted that long, its hard to see many Roman citizens complaining, since they weren't in danger and there was a professional volunteer army.
     
  15. Archwizard

    Archwizard Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    72
    Well that's why government type dictated how much war weariness affected your civ in 3. And in 2, Republic and Democracy each had a chance of forcing you to sign a peace treaty.
     
  16. brianshapiro

    brianshapiro King

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2003
    Messages:
    775
    Yea, war weariness was much more broad in civ4. But under certain forms of government, I wouldn't expect any war weariness at all no matter the length of the war. It doesn't matter how long it is, if its slow.

    I'd also expect it to be influenced by your government and the type of enemy you're fighting. If you're a democracy fighting a fascist country, I wouldn't expect protests. On the other hand, if you're fascist country and are at war for a long time with a democracy, I'd expect more protests than you'd have if you were at peace.

    It would also have to be influenced by who started the war.
     
  17. Poruchik

    Poruchik Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    4
    A lot of the early policy adoption happens when we have no idea how the game will play out. I don't like going into a game saying "and this game I will win with culture". I prefer to make up my mind as the situation develops (and I like playing random leaders too). I want to be able to go military, have good strong AI beat me back, and say ok, now I'll try for culture. It's not possible in current situation. Let me switch a key policy here or there.
    Off the top of my head:
    * Layout
    Too much empty space, and not enough information. Don't make me scroll down when I don't need to. The fonts are too big.
    Text where graphics/charts would work much better

    * Not enough information is hyperlinked (this is mostly civilopedia issue), but don't make me close one window to open another, if the content is related
    * Inconsistencies (some popups open and close with the same button, some have X in the right hand top corner, some "close" in the bottom left). Any of those are fine, just pick one and stick with it
    in diplo screen, sometimes resources are on the right, sometimes on the left under the AI player


    And so on.
    Way too easy to accomplish if you have any rough terrain around. Why should my elephant be blocked by a worker (from a friendly civ, no less?)
     
  18. Archwizard

    Archwizard Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    72
    Perhaps re: Civics. I have noticed that, with the way I play, achieving cultural victory before 1950 or so is really quite difficult unless I only activate 5 branches.

    Some things Civ5 does with its UI is a big step forward from 4 though. For example: mouseover info in the info bar works no matter what screen you are in. I played a little bit of 4 again recently, and was aggravated to all hell that I couldn't mouseover stuff to get info unless I was not in any sub-window.

    And I would agree that as long as you have non-war relations with an AI you should be able to do the stack 1 military w/ 1 civilian unit thing.
     
  19. Poruchik

    Poruchik Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    4
    And another big improvement is an ability to move the cursor and have the map scroll during AI turns. I find that one of my favorite improvements. But two steps forward and four back is not progress.
     
  20. Blackadar

    Blackadar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2007
    Messages:
    71
    Excellent post OP! I don't agree with everything, but those are well thought out ideas and issues!
     

Share This Page