To those who have, up until now, not been happy with Civ V...

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by charon2112, Dec 17, 2010.

  1. CreepyD

    CreepyD Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2007
    Messages:
    56
    I think the AI is vastly improved (although I'm basing it on just 1 attack). I'm playing on Emperor.
    Here's what happened.
    I had France start very near me, and by the Medieval era, our borders were slammed together - I knew war would be upon me as the AI is not stupid, so I placed warriors/archers/horsemen within 1-2 moves of the border.
    To my shock, when France did declare war, they rushed over the border with longswords, catapults, horsemen and archers.
    Now the important part.. Longswords and horsemen LED THE CHARGE. I couldn't get to the catapults or archers even though they were able to strike at me.
    He quickly surrounded my capital and killed off most of my army, again holding back the ranged units.
    Gladly I had weakened his longswords/horsemen enough to use my reserves nearby to finish them off. My city was down to about 1/3.
    Also then to my surprise, he REATREATED his remaining troops, as that battle was lost.

    Although the AI still lost the battle, it was far far improved over the pre-patch AI and I'm glad I prepared for that based on the patch notes or I would have lost my capital.

    On other notes, I love all the other changes, it feels like a total overhaul to me, so I will keep playing :)
     
  2. Clement

    Clement Layman

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    732
    I'm going to have to play more of it i think before i can decide, i played one game and did'nt feel much difference, but a few more are required before i figure out how i feel.
     
  3. ohioastronomy

    ohioastronomy King

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Messages:
    714
    The original poster asked a question and got answers. If you don't like the answers, don't read the thread.
     
  4. Islet

    Islet Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    62
    Pre-patch feelings:

    1) CiV feels much more gamey and arcade-like; I feel less like building a civilization and more like rushing towards a predetermined endpoint, usually domination victory. Cities production simply turns to statistics to reach that endpoint. Poor AI compounds the issue further

    2) Overhype on the switch to hexes, 1UPT; huh? so one title is now 6 sides....so? Doesn't really change my strategy by much right? (unless ICS). And before you say "hexes allow 6-directional movement!". Civ IV allowed 8 and terrain usually mattered more rather than movement to maximize distance.

    1 UPT creates traffic jams in my civilization to an unprecedented scale. Perhaps building roads would allow maybe 3 UPT?

    3) Poor, almost random diplomacy; "Your greed of wonders is simply too much". Sure, logical if AI is human (and it tries really hard to be). But I want distinct leader personalities of civilizations, not personalities of MP players!! Next thing I know, DoW.


    Post-patch:

    1) The arcadey feeling is likely to stay, as long as the AI tries to be human, it will always be. Tactical AI just makes is slightly more difficult. Crazy buffs to cities too. Each city is now a fortress.

    2) My traffic jams are still there

    3) Diplomacy is about the same, the AI maniacal intents are still present. Gandhi is still upset with me following the same victory conditions and coveting my lands. AS HE WAS BEFORE, but just didn't tell me upfront.


    Overall Civilization V is an average game, good graphics but poor optimization. Ambitious concept but lacking immersion. Yep, playing just another TBS rather than Civilization
     
  5. Zydor

    Zydor Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,120
    On the positive side
    Yes much improved balance, and Cities you have to at least start to think a little more before overcoming them. It appears more stable and less prone to a crash. Overall they succeeded in pulling it out of the raging inferno that the initial release had plunged it. They achieved their stated aim for the Patch, and, insofar as that goes, yup, tick in the box with reservations over their definition of Diplomacy. Even todays UN politicians would find Civ 5's definition of Diplomacy someone "strange", and those guys are about as wacky as it gets.

    Negative side.
    Its still not Civ. Its poor mans wargaming, really only for warmongers. Its very one dimensional, with warmongering enhanced to such a degree that culteral and political aspects seem almost irrelevant and some kind of "buy one get one free" marketing add on. The "fun" remains absent, its vertually one long battle or prepare for the next. We are not "building an empire to stand the test of time", we are destroying others to create that illusion of building an empire.

    Its almost as if Alexander the Great had become Chief Designer. Conquer everything, ignore the reality of culture, peaceful application of science and technology, politics is for the weak, and the population only exists to feed the armies with cannon fodder. Alexander the Great made a pitch for Culture and Science by initiating the Build of Alexander (in a place devoid of water stuck between salt marshes and barren desert), but never finished it, and it was left to his successors to put in place the great library et al. In that Civ 5 is true to form because it only uses science and technology, and culture, as an after thought, a bolt on useful for enhancing armies only.

    The Epic Journey feeling is still absent, and I fear gone forever, there is no sign of the Franchise wishing to revive that. So overall, no, I am not returning full time. I have now moved onto Victoria 2 & EU3, which after 15 years Civ is very disheartening, because as much as Victoria2 is good, its still not Civ, never will be. But then again, the Franchise seem to have forgotten or deliberately ignore what Civ really is, in its dash to "widen the fanbase".

    I'll watch from the sidelines, playing Civ IV when my withdrawal symptoms become too heavy :) I still have hopes they will someday remember they are supposd to be building a Strategy Game and an "Epic Journey". I still have hopes they will come back to that on the first expansion - but on current evidence I'm not holding my breath.

    Regards
    Zy
     
  6. _hero_

    _hero_ King

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    796
    The game is much better but still has a long way to go. Most of the cheap exploits are gone. You actually have to try now.
     
  7. _hero_

    _hero_ King

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    796
    If you are complaining that over the course of 6000 years you're empire will fight lots of wars, than you shouldn't be playing a game that is supposed to loosely mimic human history.

    If you are saying that war is the only way to go, then you are just plain lying or you really need to improve your gameplay style.

    Moderator Action: do not accuse other users of lying, this is in not way conducive to civil discussion
    Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
     
  8. Zydor

    Zydor Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,120
    I also wonder how long this simplistic - almost smug and childish - attitude will exist, trotting out this silly "whining" scenario everytime someone dare criticise the game Its getting very very stupid, and beyond childish. Its hardly original any more. The OP asked for opinions and got them. It was obvious except to the blind, deaf dumb and stupid, that they would be negative opinions. Dont like that, dont read the thread, go play Civ.

    There are many like me who love the Franchise, supported it for decades - myself for 15years - and want it to succeed. At every opportunity I will come back and give an opinion - when asked to as the OP did - after playing the game I have loved for 15 years. At present its still not Civ its lost the "Epic Journey". You like it, great I really am genuinely pleased for you - so go play it, and stop wasting yours and everyone elses time winging and moaning about people when they give the opnions on a topic they were asked to do.

    Disregards
    Zy
     
  9. luisfpf

    luisfpf Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    34
    The patch improved / addressed many of the problems, and the game is better than before, but...

    1. - Dont settle near my boarders! ... Where the hell are your borders!?!
    2. - Worker Improvements / Tile yeld.
    3. - Construction times...
    4. - Buggy UI...
    5. - Small / Fast - Tech Tree
    6. - Culture - I just dont get why a larger Empires tend to stagnate on culture.
    7. - New Natural Wonders - Fountain of youth !?!? whats next Santa's Home? Rodolf Stable? The tree of life filled with feries?
    8. - Game performance / crashes in Huge Scenarios.
     
  10. HorribleHarald

    HorribleHarald Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Messages:
    132
    Well, maybe civ5 is taken step to better way but I'm still waiting REAL improvements like diplomatic wrestling, espionage, improved trading system, civil wars and more other things which I would feel more pleasant.
    There is still this stupid global happiness and I have not ever really liked 1upt either. I could stand those things if there would be more soul, but there is not. I think Civ5 is and it will be only average wargame. I'm waiting civ6 and better design, not like this.
     
  11. War_Pig

    War_Pig Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    Messages:
    186
    Location:
    Ohio


    This can't be said enough! If you truly feel the game can't be saved and "will never play again" why the heck are you here getting in the way of those that enjoy it?

    Moderator Action: telling other users they should not be posting here is unacceptable. Its even more so in a thread in which the users you want to stop posting have been expressely asked to post by the OP.
    Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
     
  12. Islet

    Islet Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    62
    This is really taken out of context. Yup, I agree, over 6000 years, an empire would fight a lot of wars. But with actual reason. Border disputes e.g. Alsace-Lorraine, religious, Crusades, humanitarian, Kosovo. But the game does not have such supporting elements to back it up. No religion, no diplomatic guarantees.

    Civ IV may also lack such things, but at least it did provide you with a lead-up. Leaders get annoyed by your lack of help, trading with worst enemies, different faith. Bad nature, vassals to your empire. It provided a reasonable, logical background that one can follow to war.

    Right now, Civ 5 prefers to focus on game elements that is contrary to diplomacy. "Following the same victory path" Err...what? So is the AI interested in conducting relations or does it just want to win the game?
     
  13. Slowpoke

    Slowpoke The Mad Modder

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    1,321
    1 and 2 are pretty untrue now, as you can now make REAL relationships with the A.i.

    3, ICS is still there but in a vastly reduced way. If you want real anti-ics, download a mod (when we're done fixing how the patch messed them up), the 3 huge ones do it fine.

    4, yes, who knew you might actually need a siege weapon to siege a city

    5, The FoY occurs in about one in 100 games. Seriously, it is rediculously rare, I've never seen it even while debugging my mod and using map reveals over and over.

    In short, you really need to actually play the patch BEFORE you dis it
     
  14. liv

    liv Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,394
    I still think it is a bit boring. There are less choices to make through the games. Those social policies are slow to get to and very automated almost - cannot change religions which made things funner - a new click on one of those policies seems rather a let down after spending centuries earning one. I liked that you get a chance to wait to use your points but that is still not enough to make this interesting for me.
    All the choices in the city being made for you (as for what tiles to use) still is not much fun to me.
    I still don't like that the game encourages you to raze cites. Illogical.
    The military skills by my opponents seem a bit improved. That is a plus but it did not make for how automated the came comes after a while.
    Diplomacy is better now. Since it is nice to know what other leaders think about you.
    Those city states are still very one dimensional things. Not sure how they could be improved.
     
  15. Zydor

    Zydor Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,120
    Answering the OP question - which you would do well to do. If you have no opinion on the OP question because you like the game as it stands - I throw back your "answer" at you: what the heck are you doing on the thread.

    I for one have never said "I will never play it again" and I very much doubt most have not. Many like me have stopped playing it on a nightly basis thats for sure. Meanwhile, if asked I will give an opinion, dont like it, great, put the white horse away and play civ
     
  16. SuperJay

    SuperJay Bending Space and Time

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,273
    Location:
    Shacklyn
    That's an interesting analogy, Zy. I can't comment on its accuracy post-patch, but that's certainly what I felt like back in vanilla.

    Charon, I'm impressed you started this thread. I hope it was because you're genuinely curious and not just trying to say "I told you so" to all of the so-called 'haters.' ;)

    And really, guys? Are we STILL sniping at each other over opinions on a video game? That STILL hasn't gotten old? How long will some of you continue to indulge in that kind of behavior? I thought we'd have kind of grown out of that nonsense by now. Charon asked for opinions from people who were previously negative about the game; if those opinions are going to offend you so much that you can't control your own behavior, try reading another thread rather than making unconstructive personal attacks on others.

    (I'll check back here and post my own experiences once I have time to fire up Civ5 and give it another try. Thanks to those who have shared constructive opinions on their experiences.)
     
  17. lschnarch

    lschnarch Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,296
    Care to explain in which way a negative opinion about the game could get "in the way of those that enjoy the game"?

    Please? :rolleyes:
     
  18. charon2112

    charon2112 King

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    990
    Location:
    Massachusetts USA
    I agree. I'm interested to hear previous detractors opinions post-patch. I'd like this to be a non-hostile thread, so please, fans of the game (as I am)...in the spirit of the holidays if you must, let's not attack or question people's opinions in this thread.

    Thanks :)

     
  19. Escalate

    Escalate Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    43
    Opinion on Tactical A.I.

    Defensive A.I. is definitely improve. They can hold my attack long enough (thank for better city defence), know how to fortify position, I'm very happy.

    Offensive A.I. needs further improve. After I fend off enemy first wave, they usually send 2-3 units to slaugther at my defensive troops over and over. they should wait, reorganize thier troop and send another capable force.

    One of the most disturbing thing I saw since first release and no fixing yet is A.I. send a LOT of unescort settlers-worker walking around even in most intense situation, end up being enslaved or sunk.

    IMO, latest patch is very good but there is a long way to go. :D
     
  20. Dralix

    Dralix Killer of threads

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    Messages:
    2,407
    It's not just Civ IV that lacked such things, but the whole series. And not so much that they lacked them, really. Such concepts do exist in other games (eg. casus belli in Victoria II), but, in my opinion, have always been outside of the scope of Civ games.

    There seems to be a few different camps in regard to how the AI should behave. Should the AI be there for historical flavor, to be an obstacle to the human player's path to victory, or try to win itself. Personally, I like the fact that the AI is trying to win, but to each their own.



    It's funny, back on the Vicky 2 forums shortly before the release of Civ V (which was around the same time as the Vicky 2 patch was expected) some people were surprised that anyone still plays Civ after playing Paradox games. To me, there is no comparing them. That's not to say that one is better than the other, but they are completely different, and one doesn't try to be the other.

    I think that some people are looking for more out of Civ V than any game in the series pretended to be. For those people, maybe the Paradox titles will give you what you're looking for. Maybe you can enjoy both, but for different reasons.
     

Share This Page