NEW PATCH - December 19

Finally I could play Civ V on my Mac with my friends on Windows. Could this really not wait to be ported to Mac too?

No... 2K won't sit on a patch and wait for Aspyr to port it. It's like they're purposely inciting the Mac crowd.

On the plus side, Aspyr's suggested that patches shouldn't take as long to port, going forward. Of course, 2K releases this one right in the middle of holiday vacations, where (A) people with more time to play cross-platform MP won't be able to, and (B) not many people will be in the office to work on the port.

If I wasn't weary, I'd be angry.
 
Then Why didn't they fix diplomacy allready? Thinx they don't have the resource to do it.. If you say it is so easy.

I think diplomacy works just fine. If you capture cities, you are a warmonger and should be labeled as such, even if you weren't the one to start the war. Certain leaders tolerate war more than others, and most will attack at the first sign of military weakness. Nothing wrong there, IMO.

And you shouldn't be surprised when your allies eventually turn on you. The objective of the game is to win, and there can only be one winner. How is the AI supposed to win if its friendly till the very end.

If you don't think that the AI should play to win, then that is a personal problem, not a problem with the game.
 
If you capture cities, you are a warmonger and should be labeled as such, even if you weren't the one to start the war.
I disagree,when the AI starts a war with you,its his/her fault that their empire will be destroyed.
Revenge tastes sweet...
 
No... 2K won't sit on a patch and wait for Aspyr to port it. It's like they're purposely inciting the Mac crowd.

On the plus side, Aspyr's suggested that patches shouldn't take as long to port, going forward. Of course, 2K releases this one right in the middle of holiday vacations, where (A) people with more time to play cross-platform MP won't be able to, and (B) not many people will be in the office to work on the port.

If I wasn't weary, I'd be angry.
Why would 2K make the game worse for their PC players to make the Mac players not feel bad for buying the game on the off-platform that's only supported through a third party? They're not going to hobble the game for everyone for the sake of the also-ran gaming platform.
 
I'm disappointed that there are no real SP fixes, but it sounds like some much needed MP fixes.

I'm sure there will be more patches. They said something big was in the works, and have promised fixes not included in this patch.
 
I think diplomacy works just fine. If you capture cities, you are a warmonger and should be labeled as such, even if you weren't the one to start the war. Certain leaders tolerate war more than others, and most will attack at the first sign of military weakness. Nothing wrong there, IMO.

And you shouldn't be surprised when your allies eventually turn on you. The objective of the game is to win, and there can only be one winner. How is the AI supposed to win if its friendly till the very end.

If you don't think that the AI should play to win, then that is a personal problem, not a problem with the game.

Sure but this never should be a global penalty... If it was permament then it was more balanced... then it is the same as with war weariness in civ .


It would olso make more sence if the AI olso gets the warmonger penalty I have seen kamehameha,Siam,ghandi the leaders with the most warmonger hate declare and capture 3 city states and kill other civilization. And they are calling me a warmonger. That isn't really balanced it only effect the player :goodjob:

Olso the numberous decleration of wars are ridicoulous. Because the AI makes his decission on military strenght and gold they dow eachother constantly. I had a game where the AI dowd me becuase i had if low gold He atackedc me with warriors and I allready had rifleman what is he doing?.
Olso a early warrior rush doesn't help the AI in the long term it only hurts him if they expand and build there infranstructure and dowd you in classical era/medieval era they could do some dammage withouth hurting them self.

And with so many modifiers it is just impossible to maintaine relationship :getting mad for low army, getting mad for a large army, getting mad for winning the game, getting mad for building wonders, getting mad for expanding to fast, or getting mad because they expand a lot and want you're land and so on..

Hmm I guess rather don't play the game then.


Sure the AI should play to win but you should olso be able to interact with them
in the long term.
 
Why would 2K make the game worse for their PC players to make the Mac players not feel bad for buying the game on the off-platform that's only supported through a third party? They're not going to hobble the game for everyone for the sake of the also-ran gaming platform.

I file it under "If you're not going to bother to do something right, don't do it at all."

If 2K wanted to support the Mac platform, they'd design it from the ground up to be cross-platform, they'd cleanly separate UI code from engine code (probably with an in-house interface library in between), and each patch would come out simultaneously for both platforms containing common (engine) fixes and platform-specific UI fixes. Modding would also be supported in a way that ensures all mods work on both platforms. This is Blizzard's model.

If 2K didn't want to support the Mac platform, they wouldn't have engaged in a contract to port the game over. They could have just declared from the beginning that they were Windows-only, and every Mac user would know in advance that to play the game, they'll need to buy a Windows license and go into bootcamp. This isn't an uncommon model.

This half-arsed thing they're doing in the middle is just bizarre. They allow cross-platform multiplayer so long as both platforms are running the same version, but they routinely ensure the platforms are on different versions for weeks, sometimes months, at a time. They support some mods, but when DLL mods are allowed, the architecture means they won't work on Mac. It's frustrating, and in many ways worse than just not bothering to support the Mac platform at all.
 
I think diplomacy works just fine. If you capture cities, you are a warmonger and should be labeled as such, even if you weren't the one to start the war. Certain leaders tolerate war more than others, and most will attack at the first sign of military weakness. Nothing wrong there, IMO.

And you shouldn't be surprised when your allies eventually turn on you. The objective of the game is to win, and there can only be one winner. How is the AI supposed to win if its friendly till the very end.

If you don't think that the AI should play to win, then that is a personal problem, not a problem with the game.

The AI gets no penalties for being a warmonger. It attacks City states and other civs with abandon and gets no penalty, but let the human player do it and its warmonger status for the entire game. There is no way out of it. This is why the system is broken, besides it should never be 16 on1. Two to one, even four to one perhaps, but 16 to 1 is a bit much don't you think? Even in ETW you can grease up your enemies with state gifts. In this dumbed down game you have no way out of it. The diplomatic options are so laughable, simply because they do not exist. CiV should be for ages 3 to 5. To me diplomacy in this game is pathetic and it needs to be fixed. along with AI, AI naval combat etc.
 
Guys. You've been whining about the lack of attention MP gets, and now that it actually gets something, you're still annoyed? It doesn't matter if it came out too late, the main thing is that it came out. So be happy and keep the rants to the rant topic, yeah?

I enjoy multiplayer and am happy for the changes, but I have to sing with the chorus that says the patch I was expecting was more than the changes I'm seeing here.

Maybe some of these issues were really difficult to solve? IDK. But this patch does seem underwhelming.
 
This patch is no more or less what was expected. Seeing a patch, any patch, makes me happy. Hopefully in a month or 2 we will see another patch, with more issues fixed.
 
The AI gets ... attacks City states ... with abandon and gets no penalty

In the game I just finished, 80% of the CS's ganged up and declared war on an AI due to some grievance I didn't even hear the details of.
 
The game I am playing right now is perfect (Prince level) with seven other civs. All the CS and other civs are attacking the vikings (because he was being a ****) while Egypt was caught by surprise by me because he was building his cities near mine.

I attacked just to push him back into time (not destroy him) and after I stopped and made peace everyone else was calming down.

Depending on how friendly and rational you become as well as other civ actions, you won't be seen as the only "bad" guy in this game.
 
The AI gets no penalties for being a warmonger. It attacks City states and other civs with abandon and gets no penalty, but let the human player do it and its warmonger status for the entire game.

So the jist of it that you want to make the game much easier to play at all levels? And you want only limited number of AI opponents (which you already have a tremendous advantage over) trying to beat you instead of all them, which would be more of a challenge? Besides, it's easy to avoid a fight with "everyone" if one don't do stupid things.
 
The game I am playing right now is perfect (Prince level) with seven other civs. All the CS and other civs are attacking the vikings (because he was being a ****) while Egypt was caught by surprise by me because he was building his cities near mine.

I attacked just to push him back into time (not destroy him) and after I stopped and made peace everyone else was calming down.

Depending on how friendly and rational you become as well as other civ actions, you won't be seen as the only "bad" guy in this game.


what do you mean with :
Depending on how friendly and rational you become as well as other civ actions, you won't be seen as the only "bad" guy in this game

Can you explain you'reself i dont know what you mean?

You mean how more AI are warmongering the less warmonger penalty you get?
 
I don't think this list is complete as I know there are more changes to SP that what is listed here...

Small example is that after you click on "you'll pay for this in time", the AI now says "We'll see about that" or some other response that makes sense as a reply.

Never saw that before...


EDIT - anyway, as of this latst patch, and ignoring the AI's crappy war tactics (at this point on par with ever civ's crpapy AI war tactics), I am very happy with the SP game. Still needs a little tweaking here and there, especially with regard to UI, but if this was launch code instead of that broken mess we got, there would be far less ing.
 
I don't think this list is complete as I know there are more changes to SP that what is listed here...

Small example is that after you click on "you'll pay for this in time", the AI now says "We'll see about that" or some other response that makes sense as a reply.

What is the difference between "very well" and "you'll pay for this in time"?
 
Top Bottom