Why don't you play with mods?

[JSMCAG]

This is rather unfair, I am aware, but the main reason I don't play with mods is because they rarely reach the level of Firaxis' work when in comes to aesthetics.
There are very talented people out there, including in this very forum, who have made brilliant mods for Civilization V but, in the end, it just feels jarring to have beautiful, animated, fully voice-acted with an orchestral soundtrack leaderscreens in one hand, and all of the sudden a static, silent leaderscreen comes up. To me, it breaks immersion and flow to the game.
This is obviously not the modders fault - obviously they don't have access to the resources Firaxis has, and even if they did, Civilization V makes it hard to mod that in (if I remember correctly, only recently did we have some sort of 3D leader mod). If anything, it's more my fault for being spoiled!
I guess I could technically just play as the mod civilizations, that way I wouldn't have to deal with their leaderscreen, which brings me to the second reason.

Playing mods that change the gameplay, to me, feels like cheating, and I don't like to cheat. I don't consider it cheating when others play modded games, but I feel like I'm breaking the rules by doing so. Playing as a civilization that does not exist in the game? Cheating, specially more so when the mod civilization is unbalaced. Using a mod that changes a few rules for everyone? Cheating, specially more so when it gives me a bonus when compared to the original game. Things like InfoAddict or the Civ4Diplomacy mod (however that one was called) just makes it seem like i'm breaking the game and accessing the developer tools mid-game, or loading up the WorldBuilder, or whatever... (again, I'm not saying it is cheating, or making any sort of moral judgement for those that do play with mods. I'm just saying that, personally, I don't feel comfortable with myself doing so, which hinders my enjoyment of the game)

So now we are only left with mods that change aesthetics, like the Extra Religions mod, or the one that gives the religious icons colors, or the Ethnic Units mod. To me, though, those changes are not enough for me to justify losing Achievements, and longer loading times. I would totally play those if it weren't for that. This is also the reason why I like the way Paradox handled mods in EU IV - cosmetic mods allow you to still play with IronMan and get achievements, but gameplay mods don't. I actually play with the Better Terra Incognita mod in EU IV, since it changes nothing but the graphics, and makes me lose nothing for that. I wish Firaxis had made that for CivV as well...

So, in other words, I'm an hypocrite and a spoiled brat! I guess I don't deserve to play with mods anyway!

 

[sendos]

1. Concerns of screwing up my game in the process.
2. Multiplayer.
3. Laziness.

 

[Redaxe]

One question, do the balance mods that aim to level out social policies actually help the AI. I mean if a Civ opens with Honor or Piety you know they will lose compared to tradition AIs.

I like the look if the mods that add New world wonders & buildings but the thing is most of them don't add anything really new, just more culture, happiness, gold etc.... It doesn't always enrich the existing game.

 

[kaspergm]

One question, do the balance mods that aim to level out social policies actually help the AI. I mean if a Civ opens with Honor or Piety you know they will lose compared to tradition AIs.

It might, and it might not. For instance, I play with a mod that does overall tweaks to the policy trees. Among these changes, Honor will give you some units and make some of your units maintenance free. Obviously, the AI will get these bonuses just the same was as player will, but that doesn't mean it necessarily makes the AI fair much better. After all, unit maintenance is less of an issue for AI because it gets bonuses to gold and discount on maintenance, and free units doesn't help it if (when) it doesn't know how to use them properly.

On the bottom line, boosting Honor might not be enough to make an Honor AI compete succesfully with a Tradition AI, because it doesn't fix the AI programming problems, but all things else being equal, it can't make the situation worse either.

 

[Redaxe]

It might, and it might not. For instance, I play with a mod that does overall tweaks to the policy trees. Among these changes, Honor will give you some units and make some of your units maintenance free. Obviously, the AI will get these bonuses just the same was as player will, but that doesn't mean it necessarily makes the AI fair much better. After all, unit maintenance is less of an issue for AI because it gets bonuses to gold and discount on maintenance, and free units doesn't help it if (when) it doesn't know how to use them properly.

On the bottom line, boosting Honor might not be enough to make an Honor AI compete succesfully with a Tradition AI, because it doesn't fix the AI programming problems, but all things else being equal, it can't make the situation worse either.

Yeah reminds me of a game where AI Monty started in full jungle & by turn 90 still had 1 city, was 4/5 piety & with the Huns to the south with 4 cities & full republic.
Are there any mods that have worked on fixing the AI?

 

[kaspergm]

Are there any mods that have worked on fixing the AI?

I know there are, but I don't know how succesfull they are, and whether they adress the policy issues.

 

[VicRatlhead5199]

I didn't vote because I often play with mods but when I do play the base game it's because mods can change strategies. It's hard to come to the forums and talk about the game when you're not really playing the same game.

 

[dw0]

Achievements, which I noticed is not an option in the loaded gun poll above... the purpose of which seems to try to lump original game players in with some kind of conspiracy nuts.

I have and sometimes use InfoAddict, Really Advanced Setup, and a few gameplay modifiers... but most of the time I play unmodded BNW. I have already acquired most of the more difficult achievements, but I'm still making progress on a few of the "do X 1000 times" achievements and want to continue getting that progress legitimately through gameplay. Once I finish off all available achievements, I fully anticipate playing minimally modded games (e.g. InfoAddict and maybe some advanced diplomacy mods).

 

[Camikaze]

I like the game as it is without the need for modification. Currently I'm using a TSL map, but that's not truly a modification of the game itself, just a different map. I think perhaps if modding had been more accessible earlier, there might be some stuff available that I'd be interested in trying out, but as it is the effort of investigating mods and installing them does not strike me as worth the benefit that I'd derive. Also, a very high proportion of my hours have been during testing, when mods are neither available nor desirable.

 

[GoStu]

I only just started using mods. For a long while, I liked grabbing achievements, but now I've hopped the fence and started. I don't use any mod civilizations, but I do have these and don't want to part with them:

- quick turns: stops rendering animations for units you can't see, stops showing units moving that you aren't at war with, but does allow you to still see combat animations.

- a mod that fixes spawns Krakatoa, rock of Gibraltar, and GBR to be always workable and to never cause bonus resources to be unusable, as well as only appearing next to decent landmasses.

- a mod that allows renaming units any time

- a mod that adds a clock to the game, as well as alarms and a forced save and quit at a time option.

And so on. I don't care to tamper with balance or design for the most part (except that I have one that makes xcom a project). Mostly, just stuff that makes the base game play better.

 

[Horizons]

Mods are amateur hacks, not tested or verified properly

 

[Arcaian]

Mods are amateur hacks, not tested or verified properly

I honestly don't get where this is coming from. I've been modding games since Diablo 2, and both made and got heaps of mods for everything from TES to Civ. Most of the time there'll be no noticeable difference in quality from a good mod to the base game, and often blends in seamlessly. I don't go for additional civs, so the leaderhead thing doesn't bother me, but in general they fit in well. But if thousands of people are using the mod, I would say it is definitely tested, and if they're continuing to use it then it's enjoyable for its purpose.

It just seems that everyone is worried about corruptions and crashes and bad coding with mods, when if it's a decent mod that never happens! As long as it's for the right version of the game and the right patch, it's never happened to me on Civ 5.


I voted for multiplayer, because when I don't use mods it's because I'm practicing a strategy for a multiplayer game.

 

[Redaxe]

Mods are amateur hacks, not tested or verified properly

Can't say I agree with that either, I guess it really boils down to the individual though. Some people are happy with a 'vanilla' game whilst others are might feel like they've explored everything the developers have officially released so they want to experience something new.

I'll give an example of one game that is about a decade old but still has a huge active modding community that has completely enriched and changed the original released product into something nearly immortal.
Sim City 4 Deluxe; there are huge mod communities that have completely revolutionised nearly every aspect of the game so you can build just about any city you can dream of, it has transformed a simple (and poorly made by EA) city management game into a work of digital art where the player now has the tools to build anything from an agricultural utopia in a beautiful natural landscape, to a commercial metropolis of skyscrapers to a recreation of a Parisian city using an almost unlimited array of new transport/network tools, unique building architecture & other modding tools....

Anyway point being is modding, with the right tools and people behind it can do incredible things that no developer would have the time or money to build....

 

[forcedalt]

I am on a quest for the "ultimate" game of Civ5 , i am willing to risk crashes and bugs to finally unlock the potential i think Civ5 still has to offer. Civ5 is good ,but , it always feels like a little something is......missing. I think that's where all this heated discussion about : tweaks,mods,balance patches, etc... comes from. The devs definitely built a new Civilization , but , did they : "build a civilization to stand the test of time"?

 

[4N4C0ND4]

(since even if you were just playing one, wouldn't you drop a nuke just to try it?)

Played maybe 200h+ of civ5 and never built a nuke so far, just sayin

Game are usually won before that time and/or too lazy to build the project

 

[Carl5872]

The reason I don't use mods isn't listed in your poll. If you use mods, it prevents you from unlocking achievements.

 

[bc1]

While I was surprised by the success of "Enhanced User Interface" (it's a DLC, so it works in multiplayer and achievements can still be earned), even though it's not available on Steam and requires a manual install, the lack of interest for the MOD "Diplomacy Spinning Globe Fix" against which many people complained is also a surprise

 

[direblade99]

The modders killed my beaver :'( what can i say

 

[mrwho]

I'm on a mac. If I wasn't I'd probably use infoaddict, but that's it.

 

[I was NC]

Haven't seen this reply yet: can't get them to work. At all.

I tried to use Gedamon's TSL Earth map. Even got help from someone here. Still isn't happening, which is very frustrating since II had it right out of the box.

Next was my attempt to alter the files so players started off with a worker. Did everything I could and it still didn't change the outcomes.