Tempted to buy Civ5

[TeaBreak]

Hi all,

Long time player of Civ but not bought CiV yet as I've been abroad.

I was about to buy it but then remembered why I stopped playing Civ 4, I'd like to know if the game mechanics have changed at all.

Mostly I'd play a multiplayer game with 1-2 friends and a few AI opponents and it was good fun. Until war broke out. We found that if you lost one of your cities, there was effectively no way of coming back to win. Your production takes a hit, as does your economy, meaning that you're going to fall behind either on tech or military regardless.

As a result, we'd always play until around the rifling era when things start getting a little tetchy, a human player would lose a city and effectively be "out". Unlike some other strategy games where a bit of cunning and guile could reverse a losing position, we found that civ is less forgiving here.

I'd like to know whether Civ 5 is any different. Or alternatively, I'd love to hear some ideas as to modes we could play that might help us get into the late game and that might let us feel that all is not "lost" after losing just one city.

Thanks a lot.
TB

 

[Maktaka]

CiV is very good about supporting vertical empires (i.e. fewer cities closer together for a more defensible position) and cities are much easier to defend. The cities defend themselves and are particularly potent if you build the defensive structures that further increase it's strength. Defensive combat allows you to forgo building nearly as many units as the attacker and still come out on top, especially if you take the social policies which strengthen cities and defensive buildings built in them.

Losing a key city is still a major blow however, and one you will need to work hard to overcome. You're just much less likely to lose the city in the first place in CiV. Retaking the city before your opponent secures it is your best bet should you lose one, as the city takes some time before coming under the conquerer's control and able to effectively defend itself from your counterattack.

If you're particularly interested in the late-game you could try an Industrial or Modern era start, likely with quickstart enabled. You'll get multiple settlers and some units to defend them with right off the bat while having quick access to the shinies that you usually never reached.

 

[Ranos]

I personally don't play MP for a number of reasons but CiV is much better as far as warfare goes. 1UPT makes a huge difference. War is now more tactical than the"whoever has the bigger stack wins" of CIV. Unfortunately, they haven't been able to teach the AI how to use 1UPT effectively so it is easier to destroy the AI than it used to be.

I never made it very high in difficulty in the previous Civ games due to my style of play but can see myself getting to Diety in CiV.

As for being able to come back from one lost city, I think it is easier. I can't really explain why though.

There are a lot of changes and many things you have to get used to in CiV but once you get it figured out, I think it is the best of the Civ series.

 

[chazzycat]

from what I hear around here, multiplayer supposedly has a lot of issues. If MP is your primary goal you might want to check out that forum: http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=406

Only 5 people viewing the forum is a bad sign...

If you're looking for a single player game I would recommend it wholeheartedly.

 

[zuraffo]

If you want to play MP, wait until they fix the MP before buying.

As far as gameplay goes, it is not bad, now that all the major bugs have been weeded out.