What Civilization 5 did right

[Jediron]

Andoo
That's not true with higher difficulties and non small/duel continents. On higher difficulties and bigger maps you may easily bring down one civ with horseys but by then other civs are very likely to be protected by spearmen and/or pikemen that counter horsemen. Then you have to suffer heavy diplomatic disadvantage for the rest of your time in the continent.

a) Rush build/buying 4 horsemen did this exactly for me, pangua map/huge/marathon speed/Emperor difficulty.
I am more then happy to upload the saved game for you...you can see for yourself that in CIV V this can be done.
Here is my savegame.
Here you see the almighty French "Armee" (mind you i have nothing much else...maybe 1 spear somewhere)


B) you are familiar that the horsemen in CIV V is a overpowered unit and that this "horseman strategy is explained in detail here in the forum ?

The two things I love the most about Civ 5 are hexes & the strategic resource implementation. Also, the graphics blend beautifully with the hex style and the intro video is some of the best CGI work I've ever seen in a game.
Yep, that's pretty much it for me too. City states could have been one, but the way they have don it...meh

 

[afa2000]

I agree with the gridlock point, and it was listed as one of the fixes on the patch notes for the AI. But the problem there obviously is that in a 1UP system you don't just scale up production bonus for the AI, a system which was borrwed from when the game had SODs and stacked units. So it's not really a 'problem' insofar as the solution to increasing difficulty was borrowed from a different era.

The problem is AI can't be competitive without these bonus because it hasn't been smartened up (don't know if that's the correct word). And we don't know even if it's possible, as he points it out at number 1. Game is already slow as it is.

As for complaints about fewer units and scale and such. There's been a lot of debate about what 1 unit represents in Civ games. Is it a batallion, a regiment, a divsion? Did Rome really have 100 legions as the AI even on modest difficulty settings in Civ3 could easily manufacture. Well no. But on a question like scale, 1UP does sort of solve it.

Take his example about England (number 4). I think it's a serious problem with scaling.

1 unit = their era equivalent. I do treat my units as divisions now. But that's purely abstract and intellectual.

What about 3 scouts with 1 hp needing more room than one "fully healed" tank ? Can you help me to figure it out ?

 

[afa2000]

Extensively. And 1 extensively, and 2 extensively...3 and Rev I never got that much into.

Come on ... who do you think you're fooling ?

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=323643

You played your fifth Civ IV game a year ago ...

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=321477

Didn't even know how collateral damage worked. Don't pretend to be who you aren't.

 

[CornPlanter]

In previous Civ titles diplomacy was a moot points because you can field such huge armies and just conquer your neighbors, so why bother dealing with them in any other way then with the sword. Civ 5 is different in this regard your neighbors are important and significant and so are your city states.

Except that the truth is exactly opposite.

 

[Jediron]

charon2112 -history log -2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by Birdman6
As Windsor said, never attack a city until its defense bonus is 0. Siege units are made for suicide...it's a powerful tactic so use it! Yes they will die but they're easy to rebuild.
charon2112
So anytime you use a seige unit to attack a stack of enemies, it will automatically do collateral damage to the whole stack? Or is that a special attack that I have to do?

 

[falconne]

I agree. It's refreshing to see someone actually have a point, like the OP, and describe his experience in detail. There's been so much empty complaining (and really by the same 5 or 6 individuals, re-posting over and over about how bad Civ V is).

Care to back that up? I wonder what the results would be if we picked say 3 or 4 random recent threads with more than 5 pages as see how many unique posters fall in to either side.

 

[Jediron]

To speak as one sheep to the other: Should we BEH about it?

 

[zuraffo]

<snip>
The fact that you can't weild an infinite army and cant grow your empire like bacteria in a petry dish is what makes diplomacy so important and it actually matters what you do to your neighbors. This is the greatest breakthrough to Civilization and it makes the game so dynamic and interesting you never know in each new game in what political situation you will find yourself in.

Because now you don't need infinite army to conquer your neighbours. I have done a total diplomacy-less game where I just killed off anyone on my continent. They sort of just rolled over. I didn't even have 10 units.

 

[charon2112]

You don't know me friend-o...I played Civ I and II constantly when they came out. And I mean constantly, I briefly played III and hated it. I didn't play IV when it was released, I got to it late, but have been playing non-stop since.

Sorry if I'm not "hardcore" enough for you. But most of my adult gaming life has been dedicated to Civ.

Come on ... who do you think you're fooling ?

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=323643

You played your fifth Civ IV game a year ago ...

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=321477

Didn't even know how collateral damage worked. Don't pretend to be who you aren't.

 

[afa2000]

You don't know me friend-o...I played Civ I and II constantly when they came out. And I mean constantly, I briefly played III and hated it. I didn't play IV when it was released, I got to it late, but have been playing non-stop since.

Sorry if I'm not "hardcore" enough for you. But most of my adult gaming life has been dedicated to Civ.

I see how dedicated you were, given that civ III was released at 2001 (and you said you briefly played it) and Civ IV was there since 2005, but your first contact was a year ago. It's ok, just think that maybe you're not experienced enough to understand many of the points made by those who have been playing Civ year after year since the first versions came out.

 

[DaveGold]

All of this was impossible in past Civ games because it was all a moot point and diplomacy was like jello nothing sticked.

I'm afraid nothing sticks in this game. One of the AI leaders can take an entirely unreasonable dislike to something you're doing, such as building wonders, settling cities, fighting a war, not keeping citizens happy, etc, and then that's it. They'll sever any pacts, won't trade with you, and declare war when they see an opportunity. Occasionally things do work right in CIV5 but you can play again and see all the problems horribly exposed.

 

[charon2112]

I see how dedicated you were, given that civ III was released at 2001 (and you said you briefly played it) and Civ IV was there since 2005, but your first contact was a year ago. It's ok, just think that maybe you're not experienced enough to understand many of the points made by those who have been playing Civ year after year since the first versions came out.

It's entirely possible. I think Civ players range from very casual to very hardcore...and I'd put myself firmly in the middle. I did have a big break from Civ for several years (no PC)...

 

[rav009]

why not declaring war on USA before Aztec conquer it?Try to conquer its cities before Aztec do,then exchange the city of USA with Germany for money