Why don't you play with mods?

[Asklepios]

I don't care about achievements, and I do like playing with mods that either change the game into a different one (like Faerun, or Game of Thrones), or that add fan-based civilisations (though I'm often dubious about whether they're balanced right).

What I don't do is use mods to "fix the game", because to me the fixes the game needs aren't things that mods can achieve. Also, some fixes to the game feel too much like cheating. Sure, I could download a mod that "fixes" honour by making it stronger, but in my head that's not playing with Honour fixed, thats just playing with a cheat code.

 

[PFSIKH]

You forgot the option of "I do not like getting to turn 2## and having the game crash."

 

[Ninakoru]

I recently started playing with Ninakoru's mod that rebalances the game based on the majority of the complaints players have. It makes the game far less science focused, archer/CB/XBow spam is no longer the default army composition, honor and piety are actually good policy trees, etc. I like it a lot better than the original game, but it does have its own imbalances. Poland is ridiculously overpowered, even more so than the unmodded game.

Still didn't get to balance Leaders, yeah.. Poland always OP.

On topic:

- Archievements
- Multiplayer.

That's what keeps many people out of mods.

 

[Stacked_Deck]

I haven't seen any gameplay mods that I agree with. While I don't agree with every design choice in civ 5 that doesn't mean I'm going to download a mod with equal amounts of silliness, just in the other direction.

Maybe I'll play with some other civs at some point, but obviously the leader screens have a rather glaring disconnect to the standard ones in the base games. I looked briefly at the Armstrong/World Marshal one, because MGR:R is awesome, but the dialogue in the leader screens put me right off.

 

[Krajzen]

Hell, I forgot about achievements. And I can't add one more option to the poll. Where are achievers voting?

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I voted Multiplayer because of the Hotseat issue.

 

[NASAROG]

Apple army unite!

Anyway, I don't really feel like messing around with mods.

Plus: Laziness

This mostly. The mods don't work as well on MAC's. Sad but true. SO I don't mess with them.

 

[El Caballerion]

There is NO WAY i can play CIV V without mods. Here's a few and my reasons for needing them.

R.E.D. Modpack: Absolutely the best one. It makes the game feel more authentic and diverse. I CANNOT play as the Zulu with white warriors. No thanks.

CULTURALLY LINK START LOCATIONS: Helps the game feel more well-rounded in terms of starting on a continent with similar cultures.

TERRA INCOGNITA, PERFECTWORLD, COMMUNITAS: Lush and unique map scripts that are far better then the ones in the game (besides Fractal)

RANDOM CITY NAMES: Makes the game feel more organic. Love it.

 

[El Caballerion]

NOTE: I play ONLY on the mac. It's a confusing process, but it's amazing once MODS are up and running.

 

[forcedalt]

You forgot the option of "I do not like getting to turn 2## and having the game crash."

I do try out some mods , but , its a risky process. Like the notice says : there is no guarantee of stability ,and , no liability for crashes on mod games.

A dodgy mod can get scary. i once tried a mod made for vanilla on BNW ,and , it crashed the OS on turn 1

I voted Multiplayer because of the Hotseat issue.

You can't do a hotseat with mods on?! oh no! I wanted to do that!.........is there a mod to fix that?

 

[Browd]

I think mods may be a bit more popular than some of these responses might imply, but if the OP's question was based on the relative lack of discussion of mods in General Discussions and Strategy & Tips, I suspect that is more a result of self-selection (or perhaps self-editing) than reluctance to use mods.

For discussions in these two forums to work, posters need to have a common baseline -- they need to be talking about the same game. Sometimes we get confusion when BNW answers are given for vanilla or G&K questions, or vis versa; those are often frustrating to the discussion participants (even when the disconnect is quickly sorted out), and misinformation has spread and sometimes can't be corrected efficiently.

For mods specifically, it makes little sense to talk about a general strategy that depends on a particular mod or combination of mods. Responding to "how do I deal with warmonger hate" by saying "play this mod" may be well intended, but may not be useful to the person posing the question. So, relatively little discussion of mods in those two forums. Of course, there is robust discussion of mods in the Creation & Customization forum (and those discussions are certainly not limited to "how to mod" and "please help fix my mod" threads).

 

[comatosedragon]

Hall of Fame.
I can live without achievements, but I really want my games on my HOF.

 

[Chum]

Achievements --

You know steam has global achievement stats right? 32.6% of all players that own Civ 5 have dropped a nuke on another player. Do you understand how ridiculous that is? I get that not everyone that bought the game has made it to the atomic era in order to do that (maybe didn't like it in the first 350 turns), but 78% of players have found an ancient ruin, so there's your baseline for people who have played the game AT ALL.

Beat the game on any difficulty level as --- these are in like the 4-8%ish range for non DLC races. If people "cared" about achievements, they'd do the easy ones, like, oh, I dunno, loading up a game as Catherine.

Sorry, achievements are a fringe reason to play, and only for the OCD. I don't play to have steam tell me "Good job!" when I built 1000 tiles of road.

As far as mods go, mods do not only include total conversions, some mods just fix simple and annoying things, like unlimited barbarian XP, which at least gives you a reason to be killing all the barbarians into the later eras. If you disagree with the concept of that, that's fine, but understand you basically do the same thing by DoW'ing a city state and leveling up your troops off them, so the "Accepted" tactic is really no different. You're beating up on things that are no threat to you. There's a lot of little mods like this that are perfectly stable and don't crash OS's.

 

[Ravellion]

I have the achievements I want, so I should be amenable to mods. However, I don't really see anything that seems like an improvement. Maybe in areas of the game, but not as a whole.

 

[project_ako]

Achievements aren't a reason to play the game. They're a reason to not use mods. I haven't found the mod that was so useful or well balanced that it was worth giving up HoF, achievements, and fast startups for.

 

[otaman1]

IGE doesn't conflict with a non-modded saved game. Just saying.

 

[Gedemon]

the small dozen of achievements I've unlocked were gained in my first game, I've not played without mod since the second...

so in my case the question was more "why don't you play in multi ?"
no animations
mandatory simultaneous clickfest
no mods

but, as Jaii der Herr here, I've been tired of waiting for an official fix and I've applied the saying "if you want something done, do it yourself"...

And it is done, now I just need to find a way to make it user friendly (which, sadly, is not the simplest thing to do)

 

[Kung-Fu Kitty]

Achievements --

You know steam has global achievement stats right? 32.6% of all players that own Civ 5 have dropped a nuke on another player. Do you understand how ridiculous that is? I get that not everyone that bought the game has made it to the atomic era in order to do that (maybe didn't like it in the first 350 turns), but 78% of players have found an ancient ruin, so there's your baseline for people who have played the game AT ALL.

Sorry, achievements are a fringe reason to play, and only for the OCD. I don't play to have steam tell me "Good job!" when I built 1000 tiles of road.

Are you saying 32% is ridiculously high or low? OCD? Civ doesn't cater to that at all .

 

[Chum]

Are you saying 32% is ridiculously high or low? OCD? Civ doesn't cater to that at all .

It seems low as a percentage.

Consider this baseline -- all people who have purchased the game thru steam would be 100%. All people who have started up the game would be probably in the 78% range (since that's the amount who have an Ancient Ruin achievement, and that's probably the single best indicator of "have you at least TRIED the game?") Of the people who loaded the game, only 40% of those have dropped a nuke on someone else. It either means that only 1 in 3 people who purchased the game finished A game (since even if you were just playing one, wouldn't you drop a nuke just to try it?) or that achievements really aren't that big of a deal to the general populace. If people were REALLY worried about achievements, they would do something so simple as that to get one. That seems to me that the majority of people aren't. Achievements cater to this very small subset of people who don't consider a game "Complete" unless they obtain all of them. I personally find them contrived and a nonsensical way to introduce replay value into a game at no cost to the developers.

 

[cpm4001]

There is NO WAY i can play CIV V without mods. Here's a few and my reasons for needing them.

Same here. R.E.D. Modpack + Civ IV Diplomatic Features + Grave's History in the Making II: Brave New World Edition + New Luxuries and Optimized Resource Distribution = Civ V the way it should be!