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 totally unbiased and definitely not paid for by 2k review

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Afforess, Sep 28, 2010.

  1. CivFanMUC

    CivFanMUC Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 7, 2010
    Messages:
    79
    Location:
    Germany
    Very good review, after >16 hours of playing (at a friends home on his pc), I have to agree with most of your points. BUT
    Forcing Steam was a bad, bad, very bad decision.
    If it would be optional, sure, +1
    but with being forced to Steam, for me it's a clearly -40 for Firaxis, for I will not buy the game (but sure will play it at my friends (who is playing CSS since >4 years) on weekends....).

    Unobtrusive? I'd rather say humble and therefore a -1 for Firaxis.


    Plus, some things that JLoZeppeli said:
     
  2. ZenithSD

    ZenithSD Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    5
    Really? So what if someone proves that adding aircraft in the middle ages would be the best addition to the gameplay, that it would balance the game perfectly and would provide great strategic depth and the likes? Would you agree with that too? My argument might seem exaggerated but is it? A longbowman's effective range was something around 200m. Having an archer unit capable of firing past mountains makes just as much sense as having lasers in the stone age.

    And if you're gonna say "well, there were no americans in the stone age either", the way i see it, the civilization series has always been about concepts. Americans, Egyptians or Chinese are there just so they wouldn't call the civs X, Y, Z. Same thing for most of the units, buildings or resources. Do you think that if there's only one wheat resource on the world map then that's the only place where you can grow wheat? Then what do you grow on a farm on a normal tile? What the wheat resource stands for is "a fertile area, favorable for the production of wheat". The coliseum building stands for "a building with the purpose of entertaining the masses". While only the romans called it so, other civs had odeons, ball courts or horse racing tracks.

    What i'm trying to say that the names in civ should not be taken literally. They represent concepts that are either historically correct or just make sense. Ranged combat neither makes sense historically nor is a big enough improvement in gameplay to justify adding it. Hell, they could barely make a playable AI in civ4 with it's square tiles and only "melee" units.
     
  3. Zen Blade

    Zen Blade Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    247
    Rexflex,

    A game exploit versus reality.... Farming XP is a game exploit, but in reality seeing combat is, by definition, experience-generating.

    And yes, you do gain something by smashing a foe to pieces, confidence, familiarity with maneuvers, etc... The same goes with receiving range fire... you gain confidence in the face of such attacks, you are less likely to break during future attacks...
    Morale is a big factor in combat, and most troops were not trained extensively before seeing combat. Yes, the elites, the nobles, they were... but peasants or the poor were not.

    However, I do agree with odds-based experience.
     
  4. Abremms

    Abremms Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    Messages:
    436
    for the love of all things holy please do not derail this great thread by beating that dead horse.
     
  5. ZenithSD

    ZenithSD Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    5
    Derail the thread? First of all i rarely post or read these forums so i don't know which horse is dead. And second, i wrote a response to someone who replied to my rant on ranged combat, and justified it as a concession to gameplay.
     
  6. Viniloss

    Viniloss Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Messages:
    49
    Well, i agree with most of your apointments. I just want to add that i am very disapointed with the game. I think we lose important things like:
    - corporations (i changed few games founding them with that extra gold);
    - resources: where is whales, pigs, rice, copper, hit musicals, movies...;
    - healthy/unhealthy cities;
    - the trade routes are a mess (good times when you could destroy a road and avoid a city to get a resource);
    - the use of resources is dumb and the mains idea was soooo good (how can I get -3 iron if I bought the iron from another player? I mean, if I bought five iron and I used the 3 people who sold me should get right back only two iron at the end of the agreement, do not you think? I thought the idea was to get the resources they had an end. In other words, once used, they no longer exist);
    -stupid wonders bonuses. WHats the point to build UN now? Any player can win a diplomatic vitory... We are no longer elected as secretary, we can not mark the end of wars, the beginning of them, the policies to be adopted;
    - and the comerce between the cities of the diferent players?

    Anyway, did you play "Civilization Call to Power 2"?! A Great game. Complex. Space cities, submarine cities... and the most great option: pacts against polution! Why civ v dont use this too? In this times that "Global Warming" are so important, would be great if we had to deal with this in the game... BTW, with the end of the "heathyness", all the buildings related gone too (recycle centes, mass transport...)!
     
  7. kaltorak

    kaltorak Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,522
    Location:
    Madrid
    It's not realism > gameplay, nor the other way around.

    Realism makes it fun. But when favouring gameplay in some aspect over realism makes it even more fun, than go ahead. After all, fun > all
     
  8. Abremms

    Abremms Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    Messages:
    436
    the gameplay vs. realism debate is a dead horse beaten to death a hundered times over. there are probably a dozen threads just on the first page where it is being discussed.
     
  9. trevort

    trevort Corporal of Marines

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2002
    Messages:
    231
    Location:
    Tennessee, USA
    I don't understand why Firaxis would release Civ5 with an AI that is worse than the CIV4 BTS AI. Shouldn't one of the CIV5 development goals have been " Make the new AI at least as good as the old AI."? :confused:
     
  10. Abremms

    Abremms Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    Messages:
    436
    if V were a direct revamp of IV with all the same systems and mechanics, then it would be reasonable to expect BTS quality AI.

    however, because so many of the systems have changed so dramaticaly, they had to start from scratch. I wish they had done a better job, but I am not suprised that the AI poor. I also don't think its so bad as many of its critics claim. it needs alot of work, but its rarely gamebreaking (to me at least).
     
  11. kaltorak

    kaltorak Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,522
    Location:
    Madrid
    It's not just a different system. It's a much much harder system for the AI, with the 1upt.
     
  12. beholder2

    beholder2 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    27
    Location:
    Paris - France
    So what ? You want a world map that consider archers were just able to fire 200meters ?
    Ok so lets say a tile is 100meters in order to let archer firing 2 tiles above.

    You need approximately 16 000 000 000 tiles just to do the equator lign. LOL

    this is a game with mechanics. Not the real simulation of how civilizations has evolved since 4000BC.
     
  13. ZenithSD

    ZenithSD Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    5

    Why don't you just post a lolcat?
     
  14. Rexflex

    Rexflex Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    313
    Point of order : I did not present a "versus" anything. I demonstrated that both reality and game play would be served.

    Experience is not necessarily demonstrable in any practical sense. I can experience a thousand sunsets and from that experience I would still have no means to shape them.

    It is through the hardship of real combat that the experience becomes practical.
     
  15. trevort

    trevort Corporal of Marines

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2002
    Messages:
    231
    Location:
    Tennessee, USA
    I understand that the game systems have changed, but that is still no excuse for the widely reported poor AI. If, every time Intel came out with a new processor and the CPU performed worse than it's predecessor but the chip packaging was prettier, and they promised/hinted good things will be forthcoming, I don't think they would still be in business. Also, I've been wondering since CIV3 if the public release of each game by Firaxis is just a gigantic open beta.
     
  16. Dave_Oz

    Dave_Oz Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2009
    Messages:
    86
    I agree with almost everything except

    Adding Steam is in no way a good point, having it optional for people who don't know how to update or install mods would make more sense, forcing it on every is horrible.

    Also Seaports should give more then just a production bonus to ships, how about a trade bonus ?
     
  17. ShaqFu

    ShaqFu Requires Nanotechnology

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Messages:
    474
    Location:
    UNATCO HQ
    Why do people insist in comparing game design/development to widget manufacturing, when they're absolutely nothing alike?
     
  18. NBAfan

    NBAfan boss

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2007
    Messages:
    3,351
    Good well writen and informative review!:goodjob: Well worth the wait.;)
     
  19. Brawndo

    Brawndo Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2010
    Messages:
    255
    Very good review with many legitimate complaints, many of which the majority of the forum seems to ignore.

    When some people buy a product, they have a psychological urge to defend it to the death to justify their purchase. I am a big fan of the Civ series, but CiV is very flawed, and as the vanilla game stands, pretty boring and frustrating after awhile.

    After 4-5 games, I just went back to playing Civ 4 and Left 4 Dead 2. I'll revisit CiV when some patches and mods come out
     
  20. zonk

    zonk Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2005
    Messages:
    572
    Very good review - and pretty much about where I'd place it... 60% feels about right - I might quibble with a few plus, a few minuses here and there.

    But - coming from someone who's mods I've played religiously and whose opinion I highly value as a sanity check against my own emotions... I guess I feel better about my - disappointment, thus far - being not crazy.

    My quibbles, thoughts, and ideas...

    On war/1UpT-


    I had an idea last night that maybe it's time to bring back the Civ3 armies in some form. I think 1UpT/hex is one of the biggest pluses in 5 - but it needs to work better. On the player side, while I hated stacks, too -- the one thing stacks did make for is a much easier troop movement. Moving an "army" via hex/1upt is a real pain. In addition, the AI never seems to position properly -- grouping appropriately, etc.

    Sooo... add in the "army" concept and kill two birds! Keep 1UpT -- but allow Great Generals to also create an army -- the user could construct the "army" however they saw fit (i.e., whatever formation and composition... say with a limit of 4 units). Nerf the army a bit by limiting it to the sum of its units 1UpT -- i.e., an army of:
    X
    XXX
    couldn't move through a single tile mountain pass because it's got a 3 hex width. The general could overlay whichever unit (presumably, the middle X, which I would envision as siege unit). If it lands amphibiously, it either can only partially disembark or has to fight its way ashore in certain tiles. To completely disembark, it needs the full tile spaces available. Limit it to one tile per turn moves.

    Maybe you also give it some "citadel" like powers -- let it be flanked, but if you end a turn directly touching an army, ranged units get free shots. This would then force players to truly flank with fast units. You could also have rules "general killed = army dies", so there would be value in "getting behind" an army and attacking from the rear.

    I have to think this would also allow the AI to better position units -- you could give it templates... say... 1 archer + 1 siege + 2 melee and appropriate formations. This would "build in" some AI intelligence with properly aligning forces (i.e., you'd force it to "lead" with melee, with ranged units stacked behind it).

    1UpT and reduced movement makes it not very maneuverable, but you'd have to work your way around it to beat it. Direct combat, I could see, happening a variety of ways...

    Peace:
    Diplomacy is definitely more interesting.

    Agree entirely. Better to hide things -- though, there should be an easy way to list "what you've done" to the AI... I.e., I'm not saying provide points values or anything -- but if I broke a pact of secrecy, there should be a way for me to see that I've done that... be it via advisers or whatever. It's not a "secret" value - and it doesn't give much away, but I should be able to easily see a list of actions I've done to either please or tick them off.


    Cities, Gold, and Happiness, oh my!

    Here's where I find most of my disagreement -- on a few points.
    First - agree completely and wholeheartedly on city defense... I absolutely love it.

    Agree on golden ages.

    Disagree on Great People... My biggest beef with great people is that it's basically an immediate "spend him!" -- there's no decision making process. In Civ IV - you quite often wanted to "keep" a GP... maybe to pop a religion at the right time, maybe to keep for corporation/guild usage, etc. There were sometimes painstaking decisions -- keep the GP or spend him on gold/research/settle/etc? Now - beyond maybe keeping an engineer around for wonder rushing, you can't settle or spend them fast enough. I don't like auto-decisions.

    I likewise disagree on global happiness... I think the fact that city's are no longer something to manage, and the boring multi-turn "Next" with nothing to do are inherently tied to the globalness of things like unhappiness. Maybe going all the way back to Civ4 isn't the answer, but I think if you want to make cities meaningful, you NEED some sort of city-specific modifiers that are worth dealing with. Health and Happiness weren't gamebreakers in IV -- sure, you could have a smoldering city with a green unhealthy face - and not be concerned, figuring "I'll change civics eventually, just wait another 30 turns", but you had to be SOMEWHAT involved in individual city management to work them optimally. I love and agree with the idea of including revolutions -- definitely, a really fun part of RoM/AND -- but to implement that in a logical way, there's simply no getting around the fact that you HAVE TO model individual city happiness in some way. I'm fine with a "global modifier is king" system -- but there ought to be micro-modifiers at the city level.

    City States, Social Policies, and how I learned to love the new victory conditions.

    Social policies - I very much like.... I just don't think they should have REPLACED Civics or some manner of "government". They should have been add-ons or modifiers... Perhaps nerfing civics, perhaps as factors that make tried and true civic combinations less cut and dry. Perhaps COSTING you culture towards an SP every time you switch, rather than anarchy (in fact, I rather like that... say... add Civics back, but make switching a 20% culture accumulation cost).

    City States, I think, are a badly flawed implementation of the baby civ/barbarian civ idea... I like that they work differently than "other civs" -- but they simply play too large a role in diplomacy, and what's worse -- right now, they're an exploit. I'm basically feeding my whole empire, building my whole army, AND getting a nifty culture boost towards SPs solely via City states... that's too much. They need nerfing, badly. I also think they should spawn occasionally, rather than just being there from day 1. It feels wrong that you have these "Civs but not really Civs" that just sit there until allied or conquered. I'm not quite sure exactly where it is -- but I think there's a sweet spot in between Jdogg's "revolutions" mod and City States.

    The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. Wonders are supposed to be the pinnacle of gameplay, providing something to work and strive for.
    Amen! As someone that loves building the wonders - I'm really ticked at what's been done to them. Most of them are near worthless. They're anti-climatic -- and I'd say they're too expensive for what they provide, except... buildings are pricey, too. What's worse -- most of them provide a "one time" benefit. A GP or 2. A tech or two. To make Wonders valuable - there need to be more of them that add global, lasting effects.

    I completely disagree on Steam, but I don't want to turn this into a Steam thread... so no more on that here.


    All in all, though -- I have to say... I'm extremely happy to read this review knock a lot of the same things we've been knocking. Given how awesome AND is -- it makes me that much more excited to see what you come up with for V.

    What's more -- I think it's a testament to AND (and RoM, and all the mods that went into it) that I really find myself saying "compare against vanilla IV or BTS, not AND".
     

Share This Page