Special abilities

[Ikael]

Goddamn, these special abilities sounds like crap. Situational, overtly militaristic and with little, if any relation to history. Save from a few of them like the Glory of Rome or manifest destiny, most of them might very well have been based on a Dr.Who alternative Earth scenario. The French cultural bonus being lost after the invention of the steam engine while their prime cultural age, the Belle Epoque took place precisely right before WWI and during the invention of the steam engine and steel structures (hello Eiffel tower)? Germany presented as a kind of barbarian horde (screw anything that was in between the Roman Age and Hitler), India, one of the largest countries of the planet along with Russia, China and Brazil getting penalized for having lots of cities you are freaking kiddin me??? Jesus. This could end up being a great wargame or boardgame, but this Civ is going to have ZERO historic flavour. Or sense, for that matter.

 

[Xetal]

I think ideally each of the civilizations (due to their unique abilities, buildings, and units) will be different enough that it feels like you're playing a significantly different twist on the game.

Some of the civs seem like this will be so, some not quite as much. Balance can always be achieved through tweaking of numbers. The important thing for now is to have good concepts for abilities that make the civilizations truly unique from each other from a gameplay standpoint.

 

[Calouste]

Goddamn, these special abilities sounds like crap. Situational, overtly militaristic and with little, if any relation to history. Save from a few of them like the Glory of Rome or manifest destiny, most of them might very well have been based on a Dr.Who alternative Earth scenario. The French cultural bonus being lost after the invention of the steam engine while their prime cultural age, the Belle Epoque took place precisely right before WWI and during the invention of the steam engine and steel structures (hello Eiffel tower)? Germany presented as a kind of barbarian horde (screw anything that was in between the Roman Age and Hitler), India, one of the largest countries of the planet along with Russia, China and Brazil getting penalized for having lots of cities you are freaking kiddin me??? Jesus. This could end up being a great wargame or boardgame, but this Civ is going to have ZERO historic flavour. Or sense, for that matter.

India is actually significantly smaller in area than Russia, China and Brazil. There is a big gap between the 6 largest countries (Russia, Canada, China, USA, Brazil and Australia) and the rest, headed by India http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_outlying_territories_by_total_area

You also seem to have missed that Germany has a medieaval UU.

 

[D712]

The ability of Germany makes sense, considering Germanias past. And I think its really stupid for Civs to be penalized for expanison. It takes away the great feeling you get when you realize your civ covers most of the map. And conquering cities shouldnt cause anger throughout the civ, it should spread happiness to already owned cities and unhappiness in the conquered city, but since they put happiness and unhappiness throughout the empire that cant happen.

And plus, what do the special abilities going to do for the civs not listed? Like Russia, what does "Siberian Riches" do for them? I expect a +1 gold for any tile 5 tiles away from any city.

 

[brianshapiro]

The ability of Germany makes sense, considering Germanias past. And I think its really stupid for Civs to be penalized for expanison. It takes away the great feeling you get when you realize your civ covers most of the map. And conquering cities shouldnt cause anger throughout the civ, it should spread happiness to already owned cities and unhappiness in the conquered city, but since they put happiness and unhappiness throughout the empire that cant happen.

Thats one attempt at realism that I don't like in Civ.. conquering the world is a fun goal in the game... except that I don't mind it for being realistic, since its not truly realistic. If it were, there would be some way to actually accomplish it and manage your empire and make everyone happy, and not simply have to put up with insurmountable negatives.

 

[Senethro]

Goddamn, these special abilities sounds like crap. Situational, overtly militaristic and with little, if any relation to history. Save from a few of them like the Glory of Rome or manifest destiny, most of them might very well have been based on a Dr.Who alternative Earth scenario. The French cultural bonus being lost after the invention of the steam engine while their prime cultural age, the Belle Epoque took place precisely right before WWI and during the invention of the steam engine and steel structures (hello Eiffel tower)? Germany presented as a kind of barbarian horde (screw anything that was in between the Roman Age and Hitler), India, one of the largest countries of the planet along with Russia, China and Brazil getting penalized for having lots of cities you are freaking kiddin me??? Jesus. This could end up being a great wargame or boardgame, but this Civ is going to have ZERO historic flavour. Or sense, for that matter.

Its inspired by history, not an accurate reproduction of history. This might not be the right game for you if you're going to be that grumpy about unimportant details.

 

[Lorteungen]

It may not sound like it, but Americas +1 vision I think could be extremely powerful and possible even unbalanced. Increased vision wasn't that important in Civ4 because of the protection you got from the stack that always defended with the best unit for the occasion. This will change with the new combat system. In Panzer General it was all too common to lose your most experienced tank to an ambushing anti-tank gun, especially if you didn't have air superiority. Units in enemy territory are a lot more vulnerable with 1upt and reconnaissance really matters. I can't wait

 

[civzombie]

this special abilities are so different that perfectly balancing would be very difficult they are probably not perfectly balanced.

Having said that, in a game where the map changes every game, I am not sure perfect balance in a vaccum is even desirable. As the maps change, the relative power of a particular special ability changes for that particular game. To cite a simple example, in civ4 the gallic warrior might not have been perfectly balanced against say the romain legion in a vaccum, but if you generated in a map that happened to have a bunch of hills, then they might have ended up being balanced for that map, even if they were not balanced for all maps.

 

[brianshapiro]

The French cultural bonus being lost after the invention of the steam engine while their prime cultural age, the Belle Epoque took place precisely right before WWI and during the invention of the steam engine and steel structures (hello Eiffel tower)? Germany presented as a kind of barbarian horde (screw anything that was in between the Roman Age and Hitler), India, one of the largest countries of the planet along with Russia, China and Brazil getting penalized for having lots of cities you are freaking kiddin me??? Jesus. T.

These are all relative things. The French cultural prominence during the Belle Epoque could be said to be built on the growth that occurred earlier in the Ancien Regime, where France established itself as a power.

I don't know how the thing with India will work, but I expect if you build enough temples, etc that give happiness bonuses you can build just as many cities, but with larger populations. Are there a lot of temples in India?

 

[GoodSarmatian]

There is some logic in being penalized for too many cities, large empires tend to be either unstable or very conservative. China, an incredibly large country with a long history had more than it's fair share of civil wars, was conquered twice by barbarians and fell behind in tech after the seventeenth century.
I guess you can still expand across the whole continent, but you'll need to secure a lot of happiness ressources, build the righ buildings and choose the right social policies while neglecting others. There'll be a trade-off: Many cities and a large population will give you the production capacity and money to have a huge army, but you'll probably have less golden ages and won't be able to keep everything up to date.

 

[Seven05]

Am I the only one who think some of the special abilities we know so far is much more OP than others?

I think a lot of people aren't looking at the big picture, that and we're all just speculating anyway

For example, a lot of people seem to think that Rome is a big advantage:

The Glory of Rome (Rome): +25% production towards any buildings that already exist in the Capital.

This just means your capital is very important (sounds right for Rome). However it means that in order for you to take advantage of that bonus you MUST build every building in your capital regardless of its value to your capital. That can add up to a lot of wasted production that won't be recovered unless you have a fairly large empire. It also means you have a lot of building maintenance for buildings that may not be particularly usefull, is it truely worth that extra gold per turn for a 25% discount on those buildings in other cities? And then there is the coastal city issue, what if your capital is not on the coast?

The Great Warpath (Iroquois): Units spend only 1 Movement Point entering any tile with a Forest.

This will probably be pretty helpful early in the game. Exploration will be quicker (will we still have goody huts?) and if it's all units than workers, and most importantly settlers, will get quite a boost.

Trade Caravans (Arabia): +1 gold from each Trade Route, and Oil resources provide double quantity.

This one will be interesting, but I find it amusing that an ability that is most beneficial early in the game is somehow worse than one that has no effect at all early in the game.

Monument Builders (Egypt): +20% production towards Wonder construction.

I read the argument that this is worse than the 33% bonus for the civic (or whatever they're called in Civ5) which would only be true if this ability prevented the Egyptians from using it. Since they probably can use that they have a substantial advantage because they will get a 20% bonus all the time whereas other civs have to sacrifice something to get 33% and nothing prevents Egypt from doing the same to receive both bonuses.

Population Growth (India): Unhappiness from number of cities doubled, Unhappiness from number of Citizens halved.

I think this one is getting a bad rap, maybe the math is too confusing? A lot of people are assuming that this will mean the Indian civ will be forced to have a small empire with fewer but larger cities, how so? Obviously during the early part of the game they will do better by not over expanding, but late in the game when everybody is effectively done expanding they will have a HUGE advantage. Throughout the course of the game they will have the advantage of being able to support a larger population than anybody else and it is likely that the halved unhapiness from population is more than enough to offset the double unhapiness from the number of cities, well unless you try to settle your cities in the tundra.

The only disadvantage from this is that they will be penalized for settling cities that can't grow, as long as every city they settle can grow there is no penalty. As long as their early cities have room to grow they have the potential to be a powerhouse throughout the game. Can you say specialist economy?

 

[kurtkage]

This was posted just over a month ago but I haven't seen it brought up in this thread. From a CNN article
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/gaming.gadgets/06/28/civilizationv.preview/index.html

Artificial-intelligence programmer Ed Beach said that different civilizations will have different strengths and weaknesses but that some tendencies will be randomized by the game's new A.I.

"It looks for weaknesses and uses best practices to play the game," Beach said. "There are different levels of strategy and it will pick up on how you play."

He said game developers did thousands of A.I. runs to make sure that all civilizations are balanced. But he cautioned that bonuses and location on the game's maps will play a big part in the success of each culture

I just figured it had something to contribute to this thread. (Emphasis mine)

 

[Calouste]

This was posted just over a month ago but I haven't seen it brought up in this thread. From a CNN article
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/gaming.gadgets/06/28/civilizationv.preview/index.html



I just figured it had something to contribute to this thread. (Emphasis mine)

Thousands of runs is not that much statistically considering that with 18 civs available and 7 in each game, there are 31824 possible combinations.

 

[kurtkage]

Thousands of runs is not that much statistically considering that with 18 civs available and 7 in each game, there are 31824 possible combinations.

Point taken. I'm just saying that the power of these abilities are being tested, so one could hope that they aren't too grossly under/overpowered. Then again civ4 traits are certainly not all made equal depending on your playstyle. Variety is good tho.

 

[CannonballJack]

Goddamn, these special abilities sounds like crap.

I think this conclusion would be somwhat premature. Why get angry about it?

Situational,

Some more than others, yes. Compare and contrast: Imperialistic, Protective.

overtly militaristic

What about Arabia's trade bonuses, Egyptian Wonder-building, or Greek city-state wrangling? Even the English and Iroquois abilities can contribute to exploration and expansion as much as war.

Also keep in mind that we haven't seen all of the abilities yet. For example, although it's a safe bet that Songhai's River Warlord ability involves war (also: rivers), Siam's Father Governs Children sounds more like a happiness or management boost.

and with little, if any relation to history. Save from a few of them like the Glory of Rome or manifest destiny, most of them might very well have been based on a Dr.Who alternative Earth scenario.

Civ and alternate history go together like peanut butter and peanut butter.

The French cultural bonus being lost after the invention of the steam engine while their prime cultural age, the Belle Epoque took place precisely right before WWI and during the invention of the steam engine and steel structures (hello Eiffel tower)?

For starters, an ability that only kicked in after Steam Power would be terrible.

I Am Not An Historian, but from what I can tell, the Belle Epoque wasn't so much a French golden age as it was a general European golden age that the French got to name. It was a generation of continental peace, so it's a fairly short time, and it's not like it catapulted the obscure little country of France to international prominence. This is still the country of Notre Dame, Versailles, and Voltaire, and the idea that France had centuries of consistent cultural bloom between the fall of Rome and the beginning of the industrial age seems reasonable to me. (Again, IANAH.)

Also, free culture for the first half or more of the game seems to be neither situational nor overtly militaristic.

Germany presented as a kind of barbarian horde (screw anything that was in between the Roman Age and Hitler),

Well, how else do you come up with a single trait that unites Roman-era tribes to a 21st-century industrial powerhouse? They had to pick something. I'm not 100% sold on the mechanic, but combined with Germany's two unique units, it's a pretty clever set-up. For much of the game, they'll have some kind of military benefit, whether it's loyal barbarians or advanced tanks. It's a playstyle.

India, one of the largest countries of the planet along with Russia, China and Brazil getting penalized for having lots of cities

Calouste already covered this, but just to expand: India's less than half the size of the next larger country (Australia), but isn't substantially larger than the next few entries on the list. It's less one of the world's largest countries than it is the largest of the world's medium-sized countries. Also, although maybe a third the size of China, it has nearly the same population. Giving India a trait that encourages population density isn't just reasonable - it hits the nail on the head.

The only problem I have with the mechanic is that it's the only special ability we've seen so far that includes a penalty as well as a bonus. You can play against type with one of the other civs - peaceful Aztecs, landlocked English - and only lose an opportunity, but if you try to sprawl with India, you'll be sabotaging yourself.

you are freaking kiddin me??? Jesus. This could end up being a great wargame or boardgame, but this Civ is going to have ZERO historic flavour. Or sense, for that matter.

Compare and contrast: Building Courthouses lets me poison my rivals' reservoirs more often.

I'm intrigued by the special abilities so far. They look like they give individual civs more personality - waging war for culture as the Aztecs is going to be completely different from building alliance of city-states as the Greeks. The Civ series has never been about a perfect representation of history, but nothing I've seen yet seems like gibberish.

 

[brianshapiro]

I Am Not An Historian, but from what I can tell, the Belle Epoque wasn't so much a French golden age as it was a general European golden age that the French got to name. It was a generation of continental peace, so it's a fairly short time, and it's not like it catapulted the obscure little country of France to international prominence. This is still the country of Notre Dame, Versailles, and Voltaire, and the idea that France had centuries of consistent cultural bloom between the fall of Rome and the beginning of the industrial age seems reasonable to me. (Again, IANAH.)

France dominated the cultural landscape of the 19th century, so by the late 19th to early 20th century, they also dominated the Belle Epoque period. And their dominance in the 19th century goes all the way back to the 30 years war and the Peace of Westphalia.

 

[CHEESE!]

... as it was a general European golden age that the French got to name.

Many things are.

(don't yell at me, I'm English.)

 

[King Jason]

The only problem I have with the mechanic is that it's the only special ability we've seen so far that includes a penalty as well as a bonus. You can play against type with one of the other civs - peaceful Aztecs, landlocked English - and only lose an opportunity, but if you try to sprawl with India, you'll be sabotaging yourself.

Not necessarily. I'm not sure we know the actual amount of unhappy generated per city and per pop, nor if they ramp up any further than a base number. This is very important information. Otherwise, if we assume 1 unhappy ber city, and 1 unhappy per citizen, then behold the following example;

Regular Civ:
10 cities = 10 unhappy.
10 population in each = 100 unhappy.
Total = 110 unhappy to deal with.

India:
10 cities = 20 unhappy.
10 population in each = 50 unhappy.
Total = 70 unhappy to deal with.

Obviously, with those numbers, the Indian bonus is HUGE, such that naturally I assume per pop/per city penalties aren't the same (1 per)... but if they are; under the same circumstance, India will always be dealing with less happiness than any other civilization, regardless of their penalty. In fact, if the numbers are anywhere close to the above, the "penalty" is necessary, really... to ensure the bonus isn't blatantly overpowered.

India will be hindered with early sprawl, perhaps, but after acquiring enough bonii to expand, they can do so to great effect... Take a look at a different perspective if the mechanics are close to the above numbers... The indian civ compared to the regular civ could construct 3 more 10 pop cities and still only be at 106 unhappy, compared to the 110 of the regular one; giving India the larger empire, in both size and population.

 

[brianshapiro]

Many things are.

(don't yell at me, I'm English.)

The English have credit to the name Victorian era

 

[CHEESE!]

Yeah, well, we dominated that era. So we win.