Sullla crazy story

[Metecury]

Lucius Cornelius Sulla as a leader for Rome though is MOST UNWELCOME. Give me Marius, Scipio or if you want some real fun of the Republic working as intended, Cincinnatus. (I would LOVE to see what unique bonsses he would give)

But Sulla? Terrible- he was very much the WORST thing that could have happened in the late Republic.

Why not Sulla? He was a great general that expanded the Republic, a brilliant politician and the leader of Rome through very troubled times, he arguably did more to preserve the republic than to damage it. Honestly Caesar is the worst possible thing that could happen to the republic.

 

[rastak]

A science-centric game (citizen=science) brings the completeness of the tech tree more in play.

1UPT is far, far superior to SoD, particularly from the standpoint that it is much more fun to play. People way overestimated AI's ability with SoD (I witnessed so many suicide stack attacks that it was stupid), and underestimated AI's 1UPT ability - ever face an early Japanese rush on multiple targets? Plus, many of us are old wargamers and trying to figure out how to move units on a hex-based map was one of the greatest gaming experiences, esp. in trying to deal with terrain, line of fire and zone of control. Besides, there was no skill or fun in moving a bulldozer (and RTS-like rushes) but there was much more in trying to fit 7 units into an enemy terrain that only had room for 4 - so which 4 and in what order of battle?

Sure, the AI does not do that as well, they didn't do that well in wargames in either, nor did they do SoD that well. In Civ5, that's what difficulty levels are for.

Having 4 cities where every single resource is a decision-point (which is the basis of playing 4x games, not covering the map with SimCity-like messes), instead of the massive, over-production of Civ4 = less decision-points and less value (in acquiring, trading, losing or fighting) of each resource.

Civ4 was my favorite game until Civ5 came out. While the initial release was problematic, it was playable and I and others had many fun games - more than I had in any Civ4 games. But I anxiously awaited the patches and the expansions to see if they would greatly improve on the new designs - and they did beyond anyone's expectations, particularly in making a culture victory fun to play for first time ever.

I get it, you love Civ4 and can't let it go and you and others spend so much time slamming those of us that love Civ5 that it gets really annoying and tiresome, esp. when you and others hijack Civ6 threads. People like you and Sullla wanted a different game, as long as it was Civ4. In my opinion, Civ5 improved on nearly every aspect of Civ4 (not all, though) in making the game more fun to play and bringing in a much more diverse Civ experience. If you and others can't understand that, then don't bring it up in every thread.

Wow, had I not known better I would have thought I typed that whole thing. I agree on every point.

 

[Pepo]

@Buccaner citizen=science is an unbalance mechanic that favors civs with more pops. It could also be translated as food=science. By tiding these two, the game is making a ICS the optimal strategy(G&K was basically that), so it was balance by proportional growing of the tech cost and harsher GH modifiers, getting the opposite effect. Commerce not only allows for deeper strategies (reduce investment to upgrade forces, investing on culture or espionage instead of science) but also doesn't make food, the most important resource , even more OP. Sure Cottage spawn was a problem, but it could had been balance while pop=science just make food the king resource

1Uot is much more fun to play, but it isn't for civ but for panzer general and alike. When all battle becomes huge traffic jams where the ai doesn't know what it is doing there is a problem. Seriously, stopping much greater forces with a small number of range units kills balancing between building units and buildings (further done by gold rush- not any better than drafting or slavery rush) that make defense too much of an advantage to the player. Meanwhile although SOD can be boring, they are a simple mechanism that the ai can use , which is necessary for a balance game. Build too much and you will get wiped by a rush. Attack too much and you will over-expand and get being tech. That's strategy

Finally, building only four cities is against 2 of the X of the game (Expanding and Exterminating). Why would you want to expand if you are going to be in a worse position after conquering a city? And although city emplacement matter, by being able to work three layers of titles( which aren't going to be all utilize) , they are making it less relevant. Of course that individual cities in civ IV where less important, but I don't see anything wrong with that.

I find it funny that you say that "we" are hijacking Civ VI threads. We aren't , we are just giving our opinion because ( believe or not) we don't want a new civ IV, but a worthy successor. And that's why we clash with people like you who want a civ V successor. We all care for civ and want the series to growth better and better, but we had reach the point where the community divided between two different games. I hope that civ VI, although i'am sceptical about it, will bring the community together

 

[rastak]

@Buccaner citizen=science is an unbalance mechanic that favors civs with more pops. It could also be translated as food=science. By tiding these two, the game is making a ICS the optimal strategy(G&K was basically that), so it was balance by proportional growing of the tech cost and harsher GH modifiers, getting the opposite effect. Commerce not only allows for deeper strategies (reduce investment to upgrade forces, investing on culture or espionage instead of science) but also doesn't make food, the most important resource , even more OP. Sure Cottage spawn was a problem, but it could had been balance while pop=science just make food the king resource

1Uot is much more fun to play, but it isn't for civ but for panzer general and alike. When all battle becomes huge traffic jams where the ai doesn't know what it is doing there is a problem. Seriously, stopping much greater forces with a small number of range units kills balancing between building units and buildings (further done by gold rush- not any better than drafting or slavery rush) that make defense too much of an advantage to the player. Meanwhile although SOD can be boring, they are a simple mechanism that the ai can use , which is necessary for a balance game. Build too much and you will get wiped by a rush. Attack too much and you will over-expand and get being tech. That's strategy

Finally, building only four cities is against 2 of the X of the game (Expanding and Exterminating). Why would you want to expand if you are going to be in a worse position after conquering a city? And although city emplacement matter, by being able to work three layers of titles( which aren't going to be all utilize) , they are making it less relevant. Of course that individual cities in civ IV where less important, but I don't see anything wrong with that.

I find it funny that you say that "we" are hijacking Civ VI threads. We aren't , we are just giving our opinion because ( believe or not) we don't want a new civ IV, but a worthy successor. And that's why we clash with people like you who want a civ V successor. We all care for civ and want the series to growth better and better, but we had reach the point where the community divided between two different games. I hope that civ VI, although i'am sceptical about it, will bring the community together

I was caught up in the hype for Civ 1 and bought it the morning it hit the shop. Thing is, I was drawn to "build a civilization to stand the test of time", which for me did not equate to covering every square inch of land with my cities. It meant for me, starting with a single city and a small area. Expanding my area and building great cities to be the envy of the world. Wars? Sometimes I fight 'em for space I wanted (exterminate), sometimes because there were tiles I wanted to mine (exploit).

So, in Civ I and Civ II I wanted to play tall. As you might imagine, I was pretty terrible at the game since ICS was the only real way to win. I lost alot.

Civ V gave me the option to play the way I normally want to play. Explore the map and find everyone, exploit resources, expand my holdings and exterminate those near me that don't play nice. For the first time it was an option to play tall that could actually work.

 

[skyclad]

Well since they are keeping 1upt lets at least hope they program the AI well enough that archers can move and shoot this time around...

 

[Seek]

If it should be anyone, it should be Gazebo. I'm sure they stole a bunch of his mod for VI At least every CiV patch/expansion seemed to.

Not to discredit Gazebo (been a fan of his work since his first release of CSD) but to set the record straight he didn't start the CBP until after all expansions and all patches except the last one. Gazebo inherited and worked off of Thalassicus's Communitas Mod (originally known as Thal's Balance Mods and later Vanilla Enhanced Mod) and it was from that which the devs of Civ 5 borrowed so much from.

 

[Xen]

Why not Sulla? He was a great general that expanded the Republic, a brilliant politician and the leader of Rome through very troubled times, he arguably did more to preserve the republic than to damage it. Honestly Caesar is the worst possible thing that could happen to the republic.

His handling of the social war and his dictatorship are the biggest contributions to the rise of Caesar. Sulla represents the for lack of a different term, "Anti-Gracchan" factions taken to such an extreme that in an effort to prevent either other Italians or non Patrician class Romans from getting any share of power devoured itself and ensured not only both would come to pass (through savvy leaders like Caesar who capitalized off anti-Sullan sentiment ala the Populares), but the destruction of the very republic he sought to protect - largely by others following and then expanding upon his example.

Edit: Therefore if you want a leader like Sulla, Caesar does it better. if you don't want Caesar, why would you pick the inferior version that just set the stage for him?

And if you want the Roman republic to be represented there are a plethora of other leaders to choose from. Heavens, even Marius would be better!

 

[ShaggyCan]

Not to discredit Gazebo (been a fan of his work since his first release of CSD) but to set the record straight he didn't start the CBP until after all expansions and all patches except the last one. Gazebo inherited and worked off of Thalassicus's Communitas Mod (originally known as Thal's Balance Mods and later Vanilla Enhanced Mod) and it was from that which the devs of Civ 5 borrowed so much from.

I would have said Thal, but I don't think he is active anymore. Could be wrong. But I said Gazebo because he is still hammering away at it every day right now.

 

[neilkaz]

Well since they are keeping 1upt lets at least hope they program the AI well enough that archers can move and shoot this time around...

Yes that would be nice and I am quite hopeful for Civ 6.

 

[Magil]

Edit: On second thought, this is not the right thread for this sort of debate, and we've been over these points before. I'm sure nobody is going to change their mind.

 

[Louis XXIV]

So tell me which aspect of Civ V did it better than Civ IV?

I thought unique traits was a vast improvement over Civ4.

By the time you get to expansions, I actually like some aspect of religion better (although there are other things I like less when it comes to mixing of religions - just like I liked Civ3's population mixing better than any successor).

 

[joncnunn]

Most of the recent posts in this thread are similar to those in http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=570060.

Moderator Action: Thread closed