That's odd, I don't have this problem. When I tell them to go, they go. The only time that a unit doesn't go where I tell it to is if another unit lands on that tile first, which, to me, is completely reasonable.
this game is boring
- Thread starter Mr_Wonka
- Start date
That's odd, I don't have this problem. When I tell them to go, they go. The only time that a unit doesn't go where I tell it to is if another unit lands on that tile first, which, to me, is completely reasonable.
LegionSteve
Motörhead
I have seen this problem too. It doesn't happen all the time. I think you are right about the cause - something blocks the unit's path, and because it is in a city it goes to sleep instead of asking for new orders.
Guardian_PL
Emperor
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,231
"Go to" stops when there's an unit blocking its path, or worse - sometimes my unit tries to go around said blocker, which results in trespassing, barb vicinity or loss of four turns due to rough terrain. Can happen numerous times across the "go to" order, and each time I'd have to repeat the procedure which nullifies the purpose of that feature.
Joys of 1upt I guess, though if only that unit of mine would remember where it's going then it would be fine - I'd click skip turn or sth and that'd be end of trouble.
I'll reply to your individual points but some overarching themes: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?
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
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
First, you've retorted to individual points in my CiV story. Fine, you're free to do so but you didn't in anyway tell me why this game is interesting/not boring to you. That's the title of this thread so maybe you could retort in a constructive way rather than just trying to "pick at" my story.
Second, please keep in mind this was my first and only game, which will be the majority of my answers to your points. Its my first 6 hour impression with the game certainly not an overall strategy guide.
Third, CiV supports keep writing off complaints saying "looks like you just wanted another BTS" and so try to invalidate your opinion as stuck in the Civ4 mold. My point is this is not an improvement over Civ2, Civ3, and certainly not any version of Civ4. If it had come out after Civ1 maybe I would be impressed. (I can picture it; Civ1 you could stack units but might lose the whole stack; Civ5 you couldn't stack units; Civ2 major improvement you can stack units and NOT lose them all!).
"Not sure why I would continue attacking..." because this was my first engagement of my first war and I actually thought that he might die and I didn't know how the XP system worked. Now that I understand how it works I would not do that again, I would just leave my Trieme sitting there giving their warrior bad looks until the rest of my army arrived. Even more boring than my first impression.
"The Militaristic CS asked you for a favor..." You're right I could ask them to stop gifting me unit. I can't imagine why I would turn down free units in a military oriented game.
"I haven't seen the rate so extreme that it would be considered an exploit". Ok lets pretend that Taiwan is a Maritime CS and its inbetween two empires China and US. Taiwan and US become allies and then Taiwan gifts 2 foods to every city in the entire US! That doesn't seem strange to you?
"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? "
The problem is that they've made these CS so powerful that you cannot ignore them so yes, you must go on quests! Why have they done this? Because CS were obviously to be the key conflict point in this game. In Civ3 it was pseudo-exponential luxury goods and strategic resources. It was definately worth destroying your BFF to get that next luxury good and you'd have the ability to do it if you acquired strategic resources. Civ4 they watered down luxury goods (you wanted it but not enought to smoke that same BFF) and replaced it with religion; a dynamic, strategy-oriented, non-territory based conflict generator. Brillant I said. What do we have in Civ5? A ridiculously overpowered "City-state" who must be ridiculously overpowered in order to generate the necessary level of conflict and a rabid dog AI. Its hard to consider this "extra things" but more of a band-aid solution to poor game design.
"There are trade-offs to settling a new city." Whatever. In this respect CiV is slightly better than Civ2 or Civ3 but so very, very far behind Civ4. Yes, so long as you find some generic +5 luxury good, then you're free to send off your settler. Not very dramatic.
"There are no buildings that are +1 food. The granary gives +2 food for -1 gold maintenance." Quite possibly I am mistaken. Same diff. +2 food -1 gold and a heck of a lot of hammers still means a stinky rate of return. The point is you'll never build this building to get ahead (strategic investment) but just kindof band-aid a city thats stagnating. City State ally +2 food, 0 gold cost, 0 hammers, oh yeah that's for every city. Granary +2 food in ONE CITY, -1 gold and minus a bunch of hammers. Oh, yes you will be going on quests.
"You can move onto an embarked unit and instantly destroy it, if it is unable to defend itself". I'm not sure that it means that a canoe is able or unable to defend itself against a Trieme. I tried my best to destroy it. I searched everywhere for a menu button that would allow me to directly engage it but to no avail.
"I haven't played many previous Civilization titles, so I'm not sure if hit-and-run was ever available." It wasn't, but in prior versions your base movement was 1, your fast movers were 2, and bombarding was restricted to 1 space and to easily destroyed catapults. Essentially, all other versions were more strategic than tactical. Given that this was 1upt was a major move towards tactical warefare, call me crazy, but I had hoped that since they were going to completely rewrite the combat system it might be good and it might involve things that made warfare tactical (like cutting off naval reinforcements or actually being able to shoot arrows without an automatic death sentence).
Listen, if you like the game that's fine I don't begruge you. Checkers is an ok way to pass the time. Its just not worthy of its title and its a poor strategy game. To be fair, I would like to commend the designers for trying something new. Maybe by Ci_VI it will be worth playing. The idea of a working 1upt, decent 1upt AI tactical combat plus a STRATEGY game that invovled trade-offs, strategic investments and more realistic points of conflict would make me more than happy.
Honestly, if you're moving say, 10 units, or even 15, how many does this happen with? One? Two? You guys act as if every single unit runs into this problem every time you move it.
Sorry man, I don't mean to nitpick. I just feel like you should play more than one game before you conclude it's boring. I also felt like many of your points led you to false conclusions based on your lack of experience with the game mechanics. ie, "can't attack a unit 1:1 from the coast and kill it fast while it heals and fortifies => BORING."
I don't see how this impacts the fun-factor of Civ 5. I'm not going to write off your opinion simply because I think you were expecting more of the same, but I will argue that the game is not "boring" simply because its not the same.
Again, sorry I wasn't trying to condescend or anything. I guess my point was once you saw the unit wasn't going to be taken down so easily, you should have waited for more units, as you said you will. I can understand how waiting around can be boring, but I think having to use a larger force to take out units makes it more fun/engaging than just 1:1 battles that you can win easily all the time. That just comes down to a personal preference though.
I feel like you're contradicting yourself here. You don't want them to gift you units because it's too powerful/exploiting, but you wouldn't turn down units in a military game. The CS is just boosting your army to give you more units to help fight faster => make things less boring, imo.
I was referring to Militaristic CS only. They do not provide food. I agree the maritime CS are a *bit* of an exploit.
What about CS do you consider overpowered? I don't think the quests make it too easy, because some of them require you to tick off another CS or AI civ. Granted, some of them make it very simple to get that boost in food/culture/military, but then you have to maintain relations if you desire to keep it and you might piss off the AI by befriending a CS that they liked.
You make it sound like plopping down a city has 0 repercussion as long as there's a luxury resource near. Not true. AI are greedy for luxuries half the time. You might expand too close to their borders and push them to war with you. If you've already got that luxury, you're not making a net happiness gain so now you need to balance your population to account for it. You could be settling too far away from your own empire to be safe (though, I rarely find that to be a problem
). What if your map doesn't have many luxuries to begin with, or just a few of the same? Makes it a bit harder to expand rapidly.[removed]
Edit: That was a bad explanation I had there and it was pretty much wrong. I agree that maritime city states are overpowered and need to be nerfed. If I'm not mistaken, the food bonus is +2 in the capital, +1 elsewhere. Still powerful, but not as bad. Overall, you're right - there are a lot of buildings in the game that are just not worth it to build and its kind of sad that the way it currently is, building in a civilization game is pretty much discouraged (with exceptions). Hopefully its a simple balance issue that can be patched/modded. That said, however, it does not always mean you have limitless gold and city states available to bribe. Ive had plenty of games with very few to no maritime city states. Ive had several others where missions weren't feasible or easy to complete. Singapore wanted Brussels taken out, and since they were maritime I thought 'heck yes I'll do that!' I sent some units over but it turned out Brussels was stronger than I realized and since it was kind of far away I wasn't able to send enough units (while currently fighting another war) to take them down.
I'm not sure what you mean by a "canoe". Is it an embarked land unit? Then you can move ontop of it and it will be destroyed. Is it an enemy Trieme/Galley/Caravel/etc? There is a "ranged attack" button for all naval units that you can use to attack from a distance (left side, topmost action button).
What's the difference between strategy and tactics? I argue that 1UPT adds plenty of strategy/tactics. The problem is that the AI isn't very good with it. But that doesn't make it less boring. Attacking with an archer isn't always a death sentence, if you move some melee units with them and put them between you and the enemy. Or if you wait for the right opportunity/use terrain to your advantage. I've found combat to be the least boring part of the game because I constantly have to determine if a move is safe for a unit, if I'll have the right terrain bonuses to actually win, etc. Also, the extra movement from a horseman/mounted unit/etc can be used to more easily intercept enemies. What if someone tries to flank your catapult? Rush your horsemen over there and attack in the same turn. You may put your horsemen in danger, but then you can use your catapult to defend them until you move again.
If you don't like the game, thats also fine and I don't begrudge you. I just want to try and sway you to enjoy the game rather than write it off as boring after one game, that's all. I agree the game needs some work and it probably doesn't live up to its reputation. But I also think Firaxis has already done a great job with patching issues and once they get an AI patch out the game should be leaps and bounds better. In the meantime, there are tons of great community mods out there to make the game more enjoyable and tweak the issues that you may find "boring".
When you're allied, you get +4 food in the capital and +2 food in each city.
In addition, you get any resource which the CS currently has access to.
Quite easy, the food from the maritime CS will be invested into specialists. Scientists would be something which comes to mind.
The Great Scientist then can be burnt for either a Golden Age or a new tech.
Woah, is it really +4 and +2? Dang, my mistake.
Also, totally forgot about specialists
Edit: It is definitely +2 and +1. I just finished playing a game and checked to make sure. Hovering over the "friend" status of a Maritime CS pops up a little tooltip that says something along the lines of "This city state is your friend and will provide +2 food to your capital and +1 to your cities"
I find your post amusing.
I decided to give Civ V another chance, I thought that the new patch and the modpack CCMAT would enhance the experience/give more versatily to the game.
Well,sadly for me it still feels like a wargame that just slugs ahead..
I tried to accept it and chose Mongols and went full steam ahead conquering lands, and with my trustworthy(pact of coop, tech pact) friend Hiawatha went to a war against a common enemy... in the middle of the war, suddenly Hiawatha informs me that he will destroy me, and along with GANDHI of all people, started a war. Like it's been said before, there's not much to diplomacy here..
I've played CIV IV alongside with V, and I just feel it much more versatile, rewarding and absorbing.
There's so much going on in IV and loads of options and choices and the world feels more alive and makes more sense.
Even the graphics are cooler, I love how I can just take a glance at city and see that aqueduct is up and running, smoke arises from the chimneys of villages...
In my current game I have enemies but also trustworthy allies, I've managed to avoid the major world wars but have had some "punitive expeditions" and currently my secret privateer fleet is pillaging and starving my enemy along with my cold war of espionage.
I managed to build United Nations and am the secretary general, but with the cost of being militarily a bit backwards.
Still, my close neighbour Frederick is my best ally and has a powerful army, and has even gifted me iron and gold at times..! How about that, Hiawatha of Civ V!
* * *
I haven't lost all hope of Civ V, there's lots of things that I like, but along with the poor combat AI, weak diplomacy and imho static graphics, my gripe is that there's not enough stuff to do besides fighting and preparing to war.
I've played as Gandhi for cultural victory, and actually managed to avoid more wars than usual, but that gamestyle was sloooow and quite boring, especially with the long waiting between turns. Besides near the end the game started crashing a lot..
I just hope expansions that would give back religion and espionage in some form, bring more flavor and options to diplomacy and bring back apostolic palace and make the United Nations mean something more than it's now.. it would be so cool to hold votes and maybe conduct peacekeeping missions etc.
Well,sadly for me it still feels like a wargame that just slugs ahead..
I tried to accept it and chose Mongols and went full steam ahead conquering lands, and with my trustworthy(pact of coop, tech pact) friend Hiawatha went to a war against a common enemy... in the middle of the war, suddenly Hiawatha informs me that he will destroy me, and along with GANDHI of all people, started a war. Like it's been said before, there's not much to diplomacy here..
I've played CIV IV alongside with V, and I just feel it much more versatile, rewarding and absorbing.
There's so much going on in IV and loads of options and choices and the world feels more alive and makes more sense.
Even the graphics are cooler, I love how I can just take a glance at city and see that aqueduct is up and running, smoke arises from the chimneys of villages...
In my current game I have enemies but also trustworthy allies, I've managed to avoid the major world wars but have had some "punitive expeditions" and currently my secret privateer fleet is pillaging and starving my enemy along with my cold war of espionage.
I managed to build United Nations and am the secretary general, but with the cost of being militarily a bit backwards.
Still, my close neighbour Frederick is my best ally and has a powerful army, and has even gifted me iron and gold at times..! How about that, Hiawatha of Civ V!
* * *
I haven't lost all hope of Civ V, there's lots of things that I like, but along with the poor combat AI, weak diplomacy and imho static graphics, my gripe is that there's not enough stuff to do besides fighting and preparing to war.
I've played as Gandhi for cultural victory, and actually managed to avoid more wars than usual, but that gamestyle was sloooow and quite boring, especially with the long waiting between turns. Besides near the end the game started crashing a lot..
I just hope expansions that would give back religion and espionage in some form, bring more flavor and options to diplomacy and bring back apostolic palace and make the United Nations mean something more than it's now.. it would be so cool to hold votes and maybe conduct peacekeeping missions etc.
KahunaGod
Warlord
I first picked up Civ 1 in '93, maybe '94. I was in the US Army serving in South Korea. The game blew me away. Build my own world spanning civilization? Create armies to deal with enemies? Worry about food, gold, science, etc? Freakin awesome. i have played every iteration of the series except Civ 3. I got hooked into Everquest at that time *shudder - never again will I play an MMO - I lost a job, a girlfriend and eventually, my bank account, apartment and.......well, the game ate my life. Ok, back to civ. Civ4 comes out. I am once again floored. I worry about my little budding empire. I feel a need to hurry to get resources and buildings. I keep wringing my hands about what my neighbors are up to. I have invested emotionally into my Empire. Warlords and BTS made it even better. I heard about Civ5 coming out. I was sooooooooooooooooooooooo jazzed. It was all I could think about in gaming for 2 years. Me and my friends started playing Civ4 more and more to get our chops up to snuff in preparation. We new it was going to be awesome and hard. We felt we needed to be ready for it. Then we saw Civ Rev, and a tiny tiny tiny stinker of doubt was planted. But nooooooo, we thought, no, really, Civ5 wont be like that at all, I mean Civ Rev was a silly console game. Civ5 will be a super multi-threading quad+core PC blowing massive game! Right?! We will need to get new PC's just to run it, right?! Its gonna be freakin awesome, right?!
Then I finally got Civ5. It is cold, stale, emotionless. I play and play, and cant care less about my empire. I dont even see my empire as a "group of people" struggling for survival. They are just colors. Resources are mostly meaningless ( i know people will scream about happiness, I worried about it my first 3 games, then realized its meaningless - the ai doenst even care about it ), buildings are a hindrance ( the cost of upkeep vs. the cost/time of construction is a joke ), I have no real control over my land and how its worked (i mean really? no workshops/windmills/watermills? - my land is mostly boring and the resource rewards are, ummm, meaningless mostly, wow, a whole 1 extra hammer now! woohoo my library is only 38 turns now instead of 41, gee thanks, I feel like that really helped......./sarc), my military is ...........to be honest, no word comes to mind that wont make the moderators twitch unpleasantly. On game 4 I realize that CS are useless wastes. Why are they in the game? the bonus' are ok, but the gold requirement to keep them happy is kind of extreme for the reward. Its better to just puppet them, cuz if you dont the AI will. I know consider CS to be the biggest joke in a game I have ever played, I really just find them annoying, it would be better if they were really other AI civs, they are truly nothing more than happiness resource targets. The SP's at first seemed interesting, until I realized they meant very very little. By game 5 the were stale. Always ended up getting hte same ones. By game 5 I had learned how to manipulate my SP's, Golden Age score, Specialist Golden Ages and Taj Mahal into nearly 250 out of 330 turns of golden age. Bored to tears. I kept waiting for this game to get interesting, hard, challenging, I kept looking for depth and complexity, but I never found it. I am so DISSAPOINTED I can barely contain myself. Then I read the interview from Shafer where he says it was purposely less complex, purposely more like Civ Rev, purposely not beta tested to any extent, purposely hoping for the modding community to work its magic, and I thought, FU SHAFER, give me back my money!
Then I finally got Civ5. It is cold, stale, emotionless. I play and play, and cant care less about my empire. I dont even see my empire as a "group of people" struggling for survival. They are just colors. Resources are mostly meaningless ( i know people will scream about happiness, I worried about it my first 3 games, then realized its meaningless - the ai doenst even care about it ), buildings are a hindrance ( the cost of upkeep vs. the cost/time of construction is a joke ), I have no real control over my land and how its worked (i mean really? no workshops/windmills/watermills? - my land is mostly boring and the resource rewards are, ummm, meaningless mostly, wow, a whole 1 extra hammer now! woohoo my library is only 38 turns now instead of 41, gee thanks, I feel like that really helped......./sarc), my military is ...........to be honest, no word comes to mind that wont make the moderators twitch unpleasantly. On game 4 I realize that CS are useless wastes. Why are they in the game? the bonus' are ok, but the gold requirement to keep them happy is kind of extreme for the reward. Its better to just puppet them, cuz if you dont the AI will. I know consider CS to be the biggest joke in a game I have ever played, I really just find them annoying, it would be better if they were really other AI civs, they are truly nothing more than happiness resource targets. The SP's at first seemed interesting, until I realized they meant very very little. By game 5 the were stale. Always ended up getting hte same ones. By game 5 I had learned how to manipulate my SP's, Golden Age score, Specialist Golden Ages and Taj Mahal into nearly 250 out of 330 turns of golden age. Bored to tears. I kept waiting for this game to get interesting, hard, challenging, I kept looking for depth and complexity, but I never found it. I am so DISSAPOINTED I can barely contain myself. Then I read the interview from Shafer where he says it was purposely less complex, purposely more like Civ Rev, purposely not beta tested to any extent, purposely hoping for the modding community to work its magic, and I thought, FU SHAFER, give me back my money!
Only with the "MOAR GORE" mod!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Gismo
Chieftain
KahunaGod, I really feel with you. It's exactly the same what I experienced, to the last word. I've not played CiV since two weeks now and I'm still so disappointed I can't find the words.
sketch162000
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2010
- Messages
- 221
I agree whole-heartedly with your comment about people. My empires do not feel like they are filled with actual people anymore, just numbers. I have no idea why. Maybe the feeling that you aren't really "nuturing" a city and its population anymore? No health, no religion, no civics, resources are underwhelming....I dunno....
KahunaGod
Warlord
Thanks guys, glad Im not out here in the cold alone. Although the fire of my dissapointment keeps me warm.
"Wolverines!"
"Wolverines!"
Ikael
King
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 873
Civilization is a game that it is suppoused to be played for years, it is not an Uncharted / Castlevania / whatever type of game that once you finish it you never touch it again.
I have enjoyed my first 25 hours of the game or so, but that's an incredible narrow lifespan for a civ game.
I do think that the replayability of the title has been heavily damaged due to lot of core poor game design decisions: global happiness homogenizing cities, the impossibility of subjugate a civ in any other way but by sheer military force (no more culture mongering or religion), terrain types being extremely similar, special resources not mattering at all, and a long etc.
Also, I cannot help but feeling that the builders got shafted on this Civ. I can understand that for people that viewed the saga as a wargame mainly, this Civilization V is pretty much the game of their dreams. I have no qualms in admitting that almost every decision that has been took regarding combat has been spot on and vastly superior to the Civ IV's stacks of horsehockey doom. But for people who liked micromanaging and empire building, this game is boring and almost devoid of any single interesting choice save for the sparse social policy choice.
I've been playing Civ since nr. one came out (got a score on 186% in Civ. 1)...
And THIS VERSION IS THE BEST EVER MADE!!!
..lol, I don't understand ppl complaining about the speed of the game, I run it on my laptop, 1gb graphic card, 2gb ram and dualCore 2GHz 800MHz FSB 2MB cache! (not much really) And it runs like a dream on middle graphics adjustment... I run it by DX11 (don't ask if ya don't know, lol)
EDIT:
Just found out that one is not able to raise capital cities or city-states!!! Without a mod to counter this:
THIS GAME IS USELESS!!! lol..
---------------------------
Kind regards, Killovicz
And THIS VERSION IS THE BEST EVER MADE!!!
..lol, I don't understand ppl complaining about the speed of the game, I run it on my laptop, 1gb graphic card, 2gb ram and dualCore 2GHz 800MHz FSB 2MB cache! (not much really) And it runs like a dream on middle graphics adjustment... I run it by DX11 (don't ask if ya don't know, lol)
EDIT:
Just found out that one is not able to raise capital cities or city-states!!! Without a mod to counter this:
THIS GAME IS USELESS!!! lol..
---------------------------
Kind regards, Killovicz
I first picked up Civ 1 in '93, maybe '94. I was in the US Army serving in South Korea. The game blew me away. Build my own world spanning civilization? Create armies to deal with enemies? Worry about food, gold, science, etc? Freakin awesome. i have played every iteration of the series except Civ 3. I got hooked into Everquest at that time *shudder - never again will I play an MMO - I lost a job, a girlfriend and eventually, my bank account, apartment and.......well, the game ate my life. Ok, back to civ. Civ4 comes out. I am once again floored. I worry about my little budding empire. I feel a need to hurry to get resources and buildings. I keep wringing my hands about what my neighbors are up to. I have invested emotionally into my Empire. Warlords and BTS made it even better. I heard about Civ5 coming out. I was sooooooooooooooooooooooo jazzed. It was all I could think about in gaming for 2 years. Me and my friends started playing Civ4 more and more to get our chops up to snuff in preparation. We new it was going to be awesome and hard. We felt we needed to be ready for it. Then we saw Civ Rev, and a tiny tiny tiny stinker of doubt was planted. But nooooooo, we thought, no, really, Civ5 wont be like that at all, I mean Civ Rev was a silly console game. Civ5 will be a super multi-threading quad+core PC blowing massive game! Right?! We will need to get new PC's just to run it, right?! Its gonna be freakin awesome, right?!
Then I finally got Civ5. It is cold, stale, emotionless. I play and play, and cant care less about my empire. I dont even see my empire as a "group of people" struggling for survival. They are just colors. Resources are mostly meaningless ( i know people will scream about happiness, I worried about it my first 3 games, then realized its meaningless - the ai doenst even care about it ), buildings are a hindrance ( the cost of upkeep vs. the cost/time of construction is a joke ), I have no real control over my land and how its worked (i mean really? no workshops/windmills/watermills? - my land is mostly boring and the resource rewards are, ummm, meaningless mostly, wow, a whole 1 extra hammer now! woohoo my library is only 38 turns now instead of 41, gee thanks, I feel like that really helped......./sarc), my military is ...........to be honest, no word comes to mind that wont make the moderators twitch unpleasantly. On game 4 I realize that CS are useless wastes. Why are they in the game? the bonus' are ok, but the gold requirement to keep them happy is kind of extreme for the reward. Its better to just puppet them, cuz if you dont the AI will. I know consider CS to be the biggest joke in a game I have ever played, I really just find them annoying, it would be better if they were really other AI civs, they are truly nothing more than happiness resource targets. The SP's at first seemed interesting, until I realized they meant very very little. By game 5 the were stale. Always ended up getting hte same ones. By game 5 I had learned how to manipulate my SP's, Golden Age score, Specialist Golden Ages and Taj Mahal into nearly 250 out of 330 turns of golden age. Bored to tears. I kept waiting for this game to get interesting, hard, challenging, I kept looking for depth and complexity, but I never found it. I am so DISSAPOINTED I can barely contain myself. Then I read the interview from Shafer where he says it was purposely less complex, purposely more like Civ Rev, purposely not beta tested to any extent, purposely hoping for the modding community to work its magic, and I thought, FU SHAFER, give me back my money!
Spot on mate, I'm in the same boat. What I would advise you to do is check out the 'Rise of Mankind' mod if you haven't. Then you can throw this 5 in the bin and still have a great new Civ experience.
This may have already been said in this thread, but all that one need do with that Trireme to stop embarked enemy units is move it into the same space that that the embarked unit occupies and it is dead. In effect, you just rammed the embarked unit with you Trireme.
Being allied is a higher level of "friendship" than just being friends and thus provides a higher level of food. When friends, you get the +2 and +1 food and with allied city states you get +4 and +2.
Similar threads
