Dark_Jedi06
"Deus ex Machina."
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2006
- Messages
- 1,399
So what you're saying is we should expect less "Why isn't Civ 5 more like Civ 4?" threads and more "Why is Civ 5 becoming like Civ 4?" threads.
Haha.
So what you're saying is we should expect less "Why isn't Civ 5 more like Civ 4?" threads and more "Why is Civ 5 becoming like Civ 4?" threads.
The problem is that there are no "brothers in faith" in Civ5 due to the lack of religion
We dislike you settling near our cities
We appreciate your help in our ongoing war
We are glad to have a PoC
We are annoyed for you breaking your PoS
We are annoyed because you have a PoS against us
...
What are you even trying to say here? Blind diplomacy and permanent buildings aren't back of the box features. They're things which either the devs were trying out or didn't get around to fixing - we don't know that these things haven't been on their list to fix for 6 months.
If they change something major - like eliminating city-states, removing the 1UPT restriction, removing embarkation (and I don't mean adding a transport in addition, which I could totally see happening) or removing social policies - then a post about backtracking will be justified. These changes don't even remotely qualify. They simply don't speak to the central gameplay of Civ V.
I just remembered this pretty recent golden comment from the official Civ 5 forums, where a Civ 5 defender thinks it's silly that people accuse AI being too warlike:
"Can you name 1 real world relationsship between nations , close borders without a war at least every 1-2 years?"
Actually the blind diplomacy was a selling point
So, first we get permanent buildings and yea sayers said this is totally WAD, now you really gotta think about your buildings. Silly ofcourse so they patched that out.
Then we had the blind diplomacy. LOL, there are no numbers when Obama meets other leaders in the real world they laught. Ofcourse, this is a game that require information not socialskills so that is going.
So what is next in the patchpipeline? I´ll bet you 10 bucks it´s SP, at a cost ofcourse.
Any takers ? I´ll give you 2:1 odds!
What do you think they will revert? 1upt seems unlikely but i wouldn´t be surpriced if we got some kind of more citybased happiness sometime in the future...
the current diplo system is useful, but you have to pay attention. an easy way to judge enemy ai's is by how much they offer you for any luxury.
Less gamey diplomacy was a selling point. Telling you they're annoyed because you broke your pact of cooperation is still less gamey than Civ IV by a long shot... to be honest, it would be extremely difficult for them to make diplomacy in Civ V as poor as it was in Civ IV without reimplementing religion.
In real life, diplomacy isn't #s, but it isn't blind. In this game it is not even clear what the AI is angry about most of the time.
And since a game isn't real life, but rather a game, the rules of the game are very important. Indeed, hiding the rules is a civ IV flaw also, but not a good one.
Of course, given the kind of post I'm quoting I really don't expect you to understand what makes a good game. You aren't even focusing your thoughts properly.
I agree, it's useful to have a bit more diplo options, but no reason to go back to +/- system.
@ OP, why aren't you just happy that they're working hard to improve the game?
What is unclear?
I am saying two points the "defenders" (I am thinking of another word but why bother) furiously defended as being part of the new way of playing, the new civ, are not WAD or not even intended.
I go on and claim that SP imho will likely undergo a similar change, backtracking to the civics so to speak.
Then I simply wonder if anybody else thing some things will be change "back" to a more civ 4esque way.
Anything else?
I still don't see how changes to diplomacy constitutes "backtracking" in any way. I don't see anywhere that patch notes say you're going to see modifers and numbers that signify a civ's attitude. That's what I remember them hyping pre-release, and that's what I remember the "defenders" defending. I see no conflict between not liking that old system and thinking the new one can be made better, as you seem to be implying.
The game telling me that France likes me because I am selling him furs, and the game telling me that France likes me 7.059 much, are two different things IMO.
How do you expect me to give your viewpoints any respect considering how poorly written your post was? I can't understand a single word you said. Your post clearly shows that you spent 15 seconds writing it, which is the same time that I'd usually have spent on a thread like yours.
To be honest, I don't think transparency would be necessary if diplomacy overall worked better.
But as it is right now, the diplomacy can be difficult to use. It's easy to stay peaceful with the AI, in my opinion, if you just pay attention and use common sense, but it is difficult to do stuff, and for example, to stay peaceful while also getting some sort of benefit from the relationship. If you never ask your friends for anything, then you give them free stuff, of course they'll be your friends. )