this game is boring

Jharii

King
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
696
Location
Walled Lake, MI
I played Oblivion this summer for at least 600 hours. It might've been 800 I forget.

Anything less than 100 is a waste.

Interesting. Anything that saves me one night at the bar is not a waste. :)

One night at the bar = $50.
Two nights at home instead of at the bar = Priceless.
 

Anthropoid

Grognard fantome
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
821
Location
USA
Your loss. I'm having a blast.

Though I'm happy to hear that you are enjoying it, I hope you can understand how I also feel it is crappy that by switching the direction of the series so dramatically, and evidently winning over a lot of folks (many of whom it seems did not enjoy previous versions, though not saying that applies to you) they simultaneously have alienated a large fraction of us micro-manager or "grog" types. Maybe in a year or two, with expansions and mods both "camps" can be made to be satisfied. Still from my perspective, it feels crummy.
 

vandyr

Prince
Joined
Sep 5, 2007
Messages
351
Though I'm happy to hear that you are enjoying it, I hope you can understand how I also feel it is crappy that by switching the direction of the series so dramatically, and evidently winning over a lot of folks (many of whom it seems did not enjoy previous versions, though not saying that applies to you) they simultaneously have alienated a large fraction of us micro-manager or "grog" types. Maybe in a year or two, with expansions and mods both "camps" can be made to be satisfied. Still from my perspective, it feels crummy.

I can't, because I don't see how the direction was switched at all. Admittedly, I never played Civ 1, but Civ 2 has arguably taken up more of my life than any other game in existence, followed closely by Civs 3 and 4 and yet, Civ 5 is my favorite installment by far.

I also find that the 'alienated micro managers' are also the ones crying loudest about having to micro manage their military. The problem here is that people will never be happy no matter what.

To me, Civ 5 has found a happy medium between micro managing and overall control, which I find particularly enjoyable and refreshing.
 

Kryhavok

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
69
Received a quest from a Military City state: take out my neighbour! The victim city state had resources that I presumed were valuable so I went for it. Made a Trieme and sailed it over to their island. Spent 10-20 or so turns bombarding a warrior before I realized that all I was doing was giving him 1/2 dozen promotions! Ok, that's a little strange that his warrior is now uber strong from sitting there getting arrows in the head and then recovering. Oh well, what ever doesn't kill you clearly makes you stronger. Passion -1.

Im not sure why you would continue attacking an enemy which you're clearly not strong enough to take out. If they're in their own borders, they're gonna heal and if you aren't doing enough damage then you're not going to take them out. Of course they'll gain XP, they're engaged in battle. Maybe its a little lame that they're just sitting there, but they still deserve something for surviving battle. Besides, wasn't your Trireme levelling as well?

Finally, took the city state. Received an allied status for Military City state instigator. Started receiving military units. wtf again! He's gifting me units almost as fast as I could produce them if I was on a full war setting with my 4 cities? Kindof scratching my head as to why he needed help in the first place. Seems to be (more than) a little out of balance.

The Militaristic CS asked you for a favor and you did it. That makes them your Ally until it degrades. They will occasionally gift you units, and you can ask them to stop whenever you want. I personally haven't seen the rate so extreme that it would be considered an exploit. The production rate is probably on par or slower than what you could produce yourself, but that is entirely circumstantial

Ok, fine. Actually not fine! What the heck, I'm not playing an RPG here - I don't really want to go on quests to find the sacred sword of a Thousand Truths! (Later I would find that the Military City states might be the least of problems). Passion -1 (and -3 when I learned of the degree of this exploit).

I'm not sure what the complaint is here. If you don't want to do a quest, then don't do it? Are you mad that they included extra things to do in the game? :confused:

Through my attack on my first city (state) the city bombardment made me realize that a Settler might be my most powerful military unit in the early game. Run into barbarians? No problem, just plop down your settler (location doesn't seem to matter much) and start bombarding. He can't hurt you! Where's the tension of taking a risk of making a settler early run and daring to cross hostile lands to rush to that critical city location! And the Settler is relatively cheap too!
Passion -2 + an angry scowl!

There are trade-offs to settling a new city. Culture costs rise. Happiness decreases. Maintenance costs rise. Sure, city sprawl is a simple, effective and often used tactic, but I wouldn't consider popping cities up everywhere just to fight a unit. The costs and effectiveness of a simple combat unit that can move and fight are a much better tradeoff. Also, there's tension trying to run a settler through hostile lands. If an enemy even touches your settler, they're gone unless you fight back for them.

Built my first building. WTF, am I interpreting this correctly, +1 food. Thanks alot! That took forever to build! What a pitiful rate of return if you can call it that. (Later, I would come to understand that these buildings had expensive maintenance! HA, am I to understand that this is a CIV game that wants you to NOT build?!?) Passion -1 (Upgrade that to Passion -3 when I realized the scope of the problem).

There are no buildings that are +1 food. The granary gives +2 food for -1 gold maintenance. The Lighthouse gives +1 food PER water tile worked. I will admit though, I rarely find the granary worth it and only build lighthouses if I find my coastal cities are stagnating.

Found my first actual Civilization (Persia) strung across 2 smallish, very close islands. How fitting for a Greek conquest! Set up my Trieme between the two islands to cut off naval reinforcements as my major offensive sailed towards Island #1. Finally! A chance to turn that Trieme into a useful military unit after that debacle of ineffectively bombarding and inadvertently promoting my enemies' warrior. Blinked repeatedly in disbelief as I found that I couldn't take out their enbarking canoes sailing right under my nose! Great! I get to bombard them but not engage them! PFFFF! If
you can count rage as passion then +2; but really Passion -2!

You can move onto an embarked unit and instantly destroy it, if it is unable to defend itself (Askia's embarked units can defend), which I guess you could consider like a ramming ability.

Oh well, lets hope the land battle is more decisive. And it should be; I've made my first Chariot Archer with movement of 5! I get giddy as I visualize a series of hit-and-run tactics that wear down my enemies and prepare them for my Greek Horseman charge! Huh? If I shoot (range 2 spaces) then I can't further move...but, but, the standard movement of a melee unit is 2? So if I want to shoot I must end up dead? (Scratch head). Doesn't seem very useful to have all that movement. I guess I could rush very quickly to the front lines in order to fire and then die. Yes, very useful for dying fast - not much else.

I haven't played many previous Civilization titles, so I'm not sure if hit-and-run was ever available. From a RISK and other world-conquering strategy game standpoint, it's pretty common that you can't move after an attack. You're fatigued from battle. It would be cheap to be able to run in, attack someone, then run away repeatedly.

Of course, come to think of it I couldn't even rush to the front lines very quickly because some stupid worker is in my way.

That should not be true. Combat units can stack with non-combat units at any time. 1UPT really means 1 non-combat + 1 combat UPT.


Spent couple hours bombarding their city and following up with my Greek Cavlary and Spearman (whatever they're called). Kinda going through the motions once their field army is taken out. Long, slow motions actually. Use my otherwise useless Chariot archers and Trieme to bombard their city, doing almost no damage each time (Settlers rock the military house!) but some until I'm sure that my shock troops can get off a win. Probably could have taken them earlier with more experience. Hmmm, that was pretty boring. I remember facing off in Civ3/Civ4 where you (pre-Catapult) have to worry alot about having enough troops to take their city. You know that you're going to lose some troops, maybe alot. This was like, I know that my troops are going to take damage but not die. So as long as I hit, then pull back, I'm not going to lose any troops. Really took any of the tension away. Passion -2.

Not sure what to say here really. Early game cities are a little on the weak side, but I've definitely lost quite a few units trying to attack cities. Maybe you're just playing on too low of a difficulty?

But thinking about this further: why did they get rid of cottages? Especially for a game that was supposed to move combat outside of the city. Can you imagine the tension as an equal or greater enemy approaches your fertile commercial land? "HOLD THE LINE!" you scream with the realization that even if they don't take your cities they could chop you off at the knees by pillaging the source of the soldiers paychecks! Visions of Hannibal in Rome! This game, who cares? Just build back those "Trading posts" and you're back in business again. Really missed the mark here. Passion -2.

I don't know anything about cottages, but there are still tile improvements and most military units can pillage an improvement (farm, mine, etc). If a city was already depending on that improvement for gold or food, you've just cost them that income.

Sorry, but overall you sound like you're just nitpicking and wishing this was just another Civ 4 expansion. From what I can tell, its a different game. That doesn't make it boring or bad, for me at least.
 

RaXz

Chieftain
Joined
Nov 15, 2005
Messages
3
I was looking so foward to CiV, I've been playing from Civ1 when I still was a kid. I became addicted and played all the Civ games when I had the change, but now I really don't feel the need to even demo CiV. That says a lot personally, I don't even have to restrain myself from trying it. :( I really didn't expect that this ol' song would happen to Civ, a lot of great franchises have bitten the dust, and I guess Civ is among them now. I grow tired of dumping the core fans and trying to aim for a bigger audience. Well, maybe we should be happy that they didn't try to make Civilization: The FPS.
 

SuperJay

Bending Space and Time
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
3,273
Location
Shacklyn
I was looking so foward to CiV, I've been playing from Civ1 when I still was a kid. I became addicted and played all the Civ games when I had the change, but now I really don't feel the need to even demo CiV. That says a lot personally, I don't even have to restrain myself from trying it. :( I really didn't expect that this ol' song would happen to Civ, a lot of great franchises have bitten the dust, and I guess Civ is among them now. I grow tired of dumping the core fans and trying to aim for a bigger audience. Well, maybe we should be happy that they didn't try to make Civilization: The FPS.

While I'm not finding Civ5's current state to be wildly entertaining or highly replayable, I wouldn't dismiss it altogether just because it launched in a less-than-stellar state. Check back in 6-12 months, chances are it will have gotten a few more patches to fix more bugs and improve the AI at the very least. I'm cautiously hopeful, myself.

And you might as well try out the demo, just don't draw too many conclusions from it. ;)
 

totallylost

Chieftain
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
56
I was looking so foward to CiV, I've been playing from Civ1 when I still was a kid. I became addicted and played all the Civ games when I had the change, but now I really don't feel the need to even demo CiV. That says a lot personally, I don't even have to restrain myself from trying it. :( I really didn't expect that this ol' song would happen to Civ, a lot of great franchises have bitten the dust, and I guess Civ is among them now. I grow tired of dumping the core fans and trying to aim for a bigger audience. Well, maybe we should be happy that they didn't try to make Civilization: The FPS.
civilization: total war awesome shooter strategy fun time!
 

RaXz

Chieftain
Joined
Nov 15, 2005
Messages
3
While I'm not finding Civ5's current state to be wildly entertaining or highly replayable, I wouldn't dismiss it altogether just because it launched in a less-than-stellar state. Check back in 6-12 months, chances are it will have gotten a few more patches to fix more bugs and improve the AI at the very least. I'm cautiously hopeful, myself.

And you might as well try out the demo, just don't draw too many conclusions from it. ;)

Yea, that was my plan. And it's much cheaper that way, but shame that it has come to this, I usually wait a while before I buy a game these days. I sure hope that addon's and mods will bring back the old Civ feeling. But that won't rewind the practice of calling this game Civilization 5, when Civilization: Tactics would be a better wording, or even better, Civilization Revolution 2. That way they wouldn't have as much of disappointment as there is now.

Well, look on the bright side, at least CiV made me post on here instead of lurking in the shadows. :lol:

civilization: total war awesome shooter strategy fun time!

:lol:

Don't forget to add marketing buzzwords, like epic, nextgen, mature and visceral. ;)
 

Knightly_

Warlord
Joined
Feb 25, 2009
Messages
271
Location
Münster, Ger
Ive played over 100 hours and i am done with it. At least for the next few months. For me this game is so boring that i have no motivation to play it anymore. Every game feels the same (at least at the higher difficulty levels). It gets even more boring the further you advance. I could write several pages why this is the case but i am too lazy to do it. It is discussed among this forum...
 

Ermelinho

Child with the Mirror
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
88
Location
Among the Daughters of the Desert
Ive played over 100 hours and i am done with it. At least for the next few months. For me this game is so boring that i have no motivation to play it anymore. Every game feels the same (at least at the higher difficulty levels). It gets even more boring the further you advance. I could write several pages why this is the case but i am too lazy to do it. It is discussed among this forum...

i´m at one with you. i´d been a civ addict. so far. this game is not just boring, it´s irksome and exhausting. i can´t even tell why that is, but all the previous civs precluded me from sleeping. now, if i can´t sleep i play two or three turns of ciV and fall asleep immediately.
it´s not sid meier´s civilization anymore. it´s jon shlafer´s soporification.
 

Centerfinger

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 11, 2010
Messages
57
Location
Sonoran Desert
...when Civilization: Tactics would be a better wording, or even better...

That is actually one of the best descriptions of Civ5, that I have seen. I guess I'm fortunate enough that I really like all Tactics games for the DS (advance wars, FF tactics, etc.)

I can see where the people who know every aspect of previous civ games could feel civ5 just stripped all that was added in prior versions, but I played III and IV (vanillas) as a very casual player. I feel like I'm really just getting into all that is involved in 5. I may have the same feelings as you once I advance my strategies more, but for right now I dig it. Would it be possible that you guys find it boring because you know all the strategies to win every time.
 

Sadan01

Conical Flask
Joined
Feb 15, 2005
Messages
640
Location
Brisbane, Australia
I've played a grand total of 11 hours. Beaten the game on Immortal and Deity. Bored completely. After yesterday's patch, I loaded Civ 5 up again to play as the Mongols. Got about 20 turns in.... Bored. Civ V is going to sit on my hard drive doing nothing for quite some time I think.

Edit: I'd be even happier if someone updated the gfx in Civ IV to V's standard.
 

D_Toccs

Chieftain
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
21
Would it be possible that you guys find it boring because you know all the strategies to win every time.

Not at all. I know all the stratergies to win in Civ 4, but that doesn't make it boring because each game is a new set of challenges.
When I start a game of Civ 4, I have to find the best quality land near me and make sure I settle it. Relations with my nieghbours and other ai is important and unique each time, eg. If Montezuma or Ragnar are beside it I'll have to prepare for war, or if Willem Orange or Mansa Musa are beside me, I want good relations for trade etc etc. If there are 2 religions in the area I will have to choose which one to adopt so as to keep relations with people, I have to constantly have the best government types for my people and my current goals.
In Civ 4, knowing all the stratergies doesn't matter because there are so many variables that can change your path that it makes each game unique.

Whereas in Civ 5, it doesn't make much difference if I get the best land for my cities, just that I get land. The ai are all just enemies so it doesn't make any difference who is beside me or what their relations are to each other, if Washingon hates Elizabeth this turn it doesn't mean they won't be best buddies next turn..
Social policies are just anther tech tree really, there's no negatives to any of them and even if they could be changed you wouldn't bother because no situation will ever come up where having a certain SP would be bad for your civ.

The only variable between games of Civ 5 is the map graphics. And that is why it is boring.
 

Guardian_PL

Emperor
Joined
Nov 4, 2006
Messages
1,231
Not at all. I know all the stratergies to win in Civ 4, but that doesn't make it boring because each game is a new set of challenges.
When I start a game of Civ 4, I have to find the best quality land near me and make sure I settle it. Relations with my nieghbours and other ai is important and unique each time, eg. If Montezuma or Ragnar are beside it I'll have to prepare for war, or if Willem Orange or Mansa Musa are beside me, I want good relations for trade etc etc. If there are 2 religions in the area I will have to choose which one to adopt so as to keep relations with people, I have to constantly have the best government types for my people and my current goals.
In Civ 4, knowing all the stratergies doesn't matter because there are so many variables that can change your path that it makes each game unique.

Whereas in Civ 5, it doesn't make much difference if I get the best land for my cities, just that I get land. The ai are all just enemies so it doesn't make any difference who is beside me or what their relations are to each other, if Washingon hates Elizabeth this turn it doesn't mean they won't be best buddies next turn..
Social policies are just anther tech tree really, there's no negatives to any of them and even if they could be changed you wouldn't bother because no situation will ever come up where having a certain SP would be bad for your civ.

The only variable between games of Civ 5 is the map graphics. And that is why it is boring.

Wooow, that is a VERY well put reason why I can't get any joy from civ5, while I am still playing a previous part of the series - thank you D_Toccs :goodjob:
 

Knightly_

Warlord
Joined
Feb 25, 2009
Messages
271
Location
Münster, Ger
I started a civ4 bts game yesterday (emperor, fractal, random leader) and it was like this:

Washington of America... cool i havent played him for a long time. Agriculture is almost always a useful tech. Traits (expansive, charismatic) are good, allow for an early rapid expansion and big cities so lets see if i can focus on that. Starting locations looks good, i have pigs, sugar and some hills, a river. Looks like a potential bureaucracy monster. Copper, horse or iron seems likely in my BFC. Animal husbandry first seems obvious. Worker first to get the pigs online asap and because i can build workers faster (trait). But wait... what can my worker do after the pigs are online. I want to go for bronze working after AH and have no time for roads. Only forested hills... short calculation about research turns says that the worker is idle for 10 or so turns. Thats too much, so warrior first... i need to micromanage to get the warrior out when the city grows. Ok lets go explore. I find a scout in a goody hut. Land looks very good around me, enough food resources + mostly green land... excellent. Turn 10 i meet a scout of Joao. Uhhhhh hello my fellow... where is he... northwest. Ok Joao is an expand-maniac who uses his rapid expansion traits to the max. His cities are too far away for a rush. In addition i dont know if i have copper or iron anywhere around. Maybe i need to pump out the first settler earlier than planed or Joao will grab the best land. Another 5 turns later i meet... uuuuhhh THE SHAKA! This goddamn unit pumping son of a b****. He is too my left with lots of space between us. Anyway this is something i have to worry about it is difficult to make him a friend. Another few turns later: Wang Kong. Where is he. His archer tells me that its most likely that he is to the left of Shaka. Those two wont like each other haha... oh nice they are already worst enemies. Very good, that will keep me out of shaka trouble for a long time. Furthermore Wang Kong will be able to defend against Shakas stacks because he is protective and has a good science rate due to his financial trait. Bronze working shows no copper around. I dont have time for iron working. In addition with fast expanding i should be able to secure stone which opens up the path for some wonders around. So i am going to fast expand with the first settler definitely earlier than happy cap to block some land vs Joao. I can get horse with my second city, too. This allows for skipping archery against babarians... ahh i need to fogbust a little more efficient. Religion is the big unknown in this game. None of my enemies founded a religion yet and it could change the diplomatic situation dramatically if a religion pops out.

This are only the first few turns of a game... god i am addicted again :). When i compare this to what i get from civ5 in the first few turns it is... well... a lot more.
 

Morningcalm

Keeper of Records
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
4,116
Location
Abroad
V certainly lacks the replayability. Things that mattered in Civ IV don't matter as much in V, if they matter at all:
-Wonders
-Terrain (all hills are the same)
-Having a city devoted to making a military. Here, you can beat an AI's entire army with just 5 upgraded units.
-Cottages (over time, they grow and become better, having them pillaged in IV was painful)
-Diplomacy. Trade is virtually useless in V, and the AI all attack you anyway.
-Balance of tech v. money making v. building production v. culture (sliders achieved part of this).
-Anarchy (in V you get ONE TURN of anarchy switching from Rationalism to Piety or vice versa, how is that supposed to matter?)
 

lschnarch

Emperor
Joined
Oct 7, 2010
Messages
1,296
I also find that the 'alienated micro managers' are also the ones crying loudest about having to micro manage their military. The problem here is that people will never be happy no matter what.

There is a clear difference between having to micro-manage for no gain at all (unit movement) and micro-managing for better city output or whatever.
 

cavalryaddicted

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 28, 2010
Messages
11
Agree everything....The only thing i found more interesting of the others chapters is the hexagonal tiles just because i want to find a reason for the money i've spent i don't want to believe that is a sid meyer's game...
WHY, i want to know, WHY this general tendency to make all the games in the last few years for brainless consolle-users? Like Thorite i've played civilization for more than ten years (my opinion is that civ1-2-3 all the way to conquest is like the invention of the game of chess), i play a new civ3-game every three days (when i can). I like the graphic, but i prefer consistent games to shiny ones....and really do they think consolle-users will be still there after ten years?
Surely a two-hours-of-interest-game lead you to buy a new game eventually, so i see the reason..
(excuse my english i'm Italian)
 

KingMackem

Chieftain
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
68
Location
Durham, England
I have now played over 100 hours of Civ 5. I've won all victory types on varying difficulties from Prince to Deity.

Last night I downloaded Rise of Man for the first time and booted up Civ 4 again. My god... what a game. I can't believe I've never noticed this mod before. Don't think I'll be touching Civ 5 for a while.
 
Top Bottom