I have played Civilization since I was seven and I am now twentysix. I have played Civilization from Civ I all the way through to Civ V. I have even played the Call to Powers and have been hopelessly addicted to everyone... apart from Civ V.
When I play Civ V I feel like a spectator just wiling away the turns until something interesting happens. Civ IV is infinitely more complex than Civ V. Civ V is a mass market game. I understand that Firaxis like all other companies must operate to market realities. However in doing so they have produced a game that is not substantial in its quality.
Civ V represents a monumental leap backwards in terms of functionality.
Particular issues of note.
HAPPINESS - I tend to play Civ on large maps. I want to have large empires on far flung continents with vast armies ready to unleash Armageddon. This is not possible due to the new happiness system . Even if one were to have all the luxury resources it would still be difficult to maintain a large empire or even go to war and maintain all the cities captured. I have found myself going to war and razing the vast majority of cities in Civ V.
Happiness cannot be an empire wide factor it must be city specific. I read an interesting point on this forum and please forgive me as I forget the name of the original poster - “A coliseum in my capital Paris will do nothing and should do nothing to appease the militarily occupied city of Thebes” - the fact that it does makes a complete nonsense of the Happiness system as integrated in Civ V.
The natural wonders are a good idea but should only givev you a happiness bonus is it is in your borders.
ROADS/TRADE - There must not be an upkeep for roads or it should be minimal, not one gold per turn. Large empires crumble because large road networks can’t be maintained and units cant move fast enough for defensive purposes.
A side issue while I’m discussing hexes, ‘airbases’ - loved them in Civ II they were like my empire’s Area 51s where I would store bombers, missiles and nukes. They need to be brought back.
GOVERNEMNT/CIVICS - In all the Civilizations I played I honestly believe CIv IV was the one to hit the spot. It is miles if not light years ahead of what Civ V considers to be organising a Government. Choosing occasional bonuses is just lack lustre and again only serves to remove more decision making away from the player. I want to be able to change government from Communism to Democracy or be able to choose ridiculous traits such as free speech with slavery. In Civ V this is no longer possible, what you choose in 3000BC has dire consequences for life in 2000AD. Why? I know Civ cannot be 100% true to human history but this is a major flaw.
RELIGION - I did like Religion in Civ IV. It was fun converting the world to your faith and then watching the money roll in or better yet watching holy wars kick off when two dominant religions spread across several Civs just had enough of each other. Religion needs to be included, again it is a fundamental part of human civilization, to not include it would be akin to not acknowledging the invention of the wheel. I do however accept it must be dealt with in a tactful manner.
TECHNOLOGY - The tech tree is abysmal. It is not so much a tree as it is a sprig of willow. The ‘tree’ is far smaller than previous Civs. Again this removes more decision making from the player and leads to a position where games become quite indistinguishable from one another. The tree needs to be far more diverse.
DIPLOMACY - It is horrendous. I feel like I need say no more, but I will. What is a pact of secrecy, what is a pact of co-operation? They may have benefits but they are not visible to the player, they are transparent and in playing the game add no further depth.
Agreement deals need to be included in an overall diplomacy menu to show how long they have to run. This is essential to allow the player to plan twenty thirty turns ahead. Ceasefire agreements need to be brought back rather than the ten turn peace treaty which after it expires nobody knows what is going on. Furthermore I want to know what the other Civs think of each other and me.
ESPIONAGE - This must be included in every Civ. Espionage is a fundamental part of human history. It should be in Civ V. It isn’t. Espionage would add an interesting dimension to diplomacy. I want to be able to be treacherous, I want to be able to steal technology, money and bribe military units. I enjoyed the Espionage in Civ IV however I did not enjoy marching spies after they have successfully completed a mission all the way from my capital back to the front line, WTH!?! In any case espionage needs to be in Civ V and so do spy units.
I really don’t understand why I can see the stats of every Civ even unmet players in the top ten lists. This is just daft. I honestly preferred it when you had to establish an embassy in the other Civ to learn their demographics and to conduct espionage missions.
ECONOMY - Money is King. It shouldn’t be. I’ve bought entire armies and then gone on a rampage, far too easy. The buildings in this game are far too costly to maintain and provide little overall benefit. They for the most part tend to be clones of one another.
As to why corruption has been removed is beyond me. Again corruption is an intrinsic part of human civilization. Why isn’t the concept included in Civ V? It has been in every previous Civ, I think.
Another thing that appears to be missing is foreign trade routes, I thought that was the whole point of open borders agreements.
MILITARY - I do like the look of the new units. They finally look like a real battle hardened troop rather than a lonely man with a stick. However wars are far too easy to execute and win. With two siege units and three or four melee units one can steam roller across entire continents.
I did read an interesting post on this forum that different types of units should be able to stack to make battle more interesting, I again apologise to the original poster as I forget your name. Non-combat units should be able to stack to as many as you want. Workers need to stack to complete tasks faster. Siege units and non-siege unit need to be able to stack - I include bowed units in siege units. This offers these units the possibility of a defence when being attacked. Although I have not given it my full consideration I believe one siege unit and two melee units should be able to stack or at the very least a melee unit and a siege unit.
The city tile should be allowed to garrison three to four land units thus balancing the stacking ability of invading armies. I agree with a poster, and again I apologise because I forget the name, currently CIv V is trying too hard to emulate Total War which is a step in the wrong direction in my opinion.
As for the later eras of the game there needs to be a greater diversity in the military units. I know this is usually where the mod community steps in but I believe the developer should be considering such issues in production. For example there should be a range of jet fighters each with there own pros and cons. The same should go for tanks.
Embarking needs t be removed. It is far too easy with an army and this ability, once researched, that no continent is beyond your reach. It makes invasion far too easy - transports etc need to be brought back. Yes it was tedious to build the boats then load them but it made planning invasions more fun in my opinion.
I like the fact units can be upgraded and keep their experience but it does mean if you could hand out defeats early on, after an upgrade you will be dishing out complete annihilation. This results in warfare being quite dull after your empire’s first major war. This leads to another gripe.
VICTORY CONDITIONS - Domination is the only option. It is a good concept that only capital cities need to be captured but makes victory far too easy. In the games I have played with a few military units and superior tactics the AI does not stand a chance. I know I have secured a domination victory but hardly ever play those games to conclusion as by then destroying everyone has just become a chore. One can try and drag a game out to a space race but why? As for cultural victories well....
CULTURE - Culture in this game needs to be entirely reworked. Culture should be linked to national borders not national Government. Government civics should be obtained through tech as in Civ IV. Tied to this is the fact larger empires suffer from culture penalties in gaining government civics. This in effect means a player on a large or huge map is effectively choosing not to play with Governments enabled as large empire will rule out the possibility of obtaining civics in the industrial age or even civics further down the line apart from the initial few civic lines your empire may get at the very start..
In cities you need to be able to choose which tile your city is working towards getting. It is nonsensical as to why the player does not have this control, it adds depth to the game. Furthermore am I the only one who believes the World Wonders provide no where enough culture as they should do? Perhaps the culture values in obtaining hexes should be increased thus allowing the culture of Wonders to be increased and some building as well.
BUILDINGS - These appear all but redundant. I tend only to build the food building and markets and so on for money. Everything else is just a drain on gold that can be used for upgrading, rush buys, keeping city states on side and research agreements.
GREAT PEOPLE - In CIv V the great people aren’t so great. In Civ IV they could claim that accolade but not in Civ V. For example the great scientist can now only build an academy on a city tile which only provides plus 5 science. That is appallingly bad considering an academy in Civ IV gave plus 50% science! Moreover the building in Civ V will replace whatever improvement is on the tile at the time! I honestly believe it is very difficult to set up specialist cities in this iteration of Civ e.g. on for production, gold, science, food etc.
THE AI - Its crap.
CITY STATES - I find the city states can add an interesting dynamic to the game. I found myself eyeing with suspicion those states close to my borders and those my empire has engulfed. I have found on many occasions the AI allied with these states which proved a considerable distraction in my war mongering! However the Angry/Neutral/Friend/Ally is too simplistic an alliance should be a far more long term affair than it is. It should be permanent until one party no longer wants the alliance and the same for peace. There have however been games when I ignored city states all together, just trespassing through their territory at will.
INTERFACE - The main interface in the game is way too clustered again Civ IV had this spot on.
Hovering your mouse over a unit should tell you what its doing and how many turns say if its a worker till it completes its task.
In the city menu setting tiles to work should be in a drop down menu. It is one of the primary reasons you zoom in to a city to change tiles being worked by the city why put it in a altogether different menu, stupid.
There are aspects of Civ V I do enjoy. I believe ‘hexes’ is a step in the right direction, the square was well....just too square. I also like the graphics. The graphics lend a realism to the game while clearly allowing the player to see what the current state of his empire. These positives however float in an ocean of terrible backward steps.
As a final point I would like to comment on the state the game was released in. I was quite busy with work during the week of the release and so I spent my lunches at a friend’s house near my office. He was having a great game crushing the AI Civs and I was wondering at the new Civ game before us. That’s was right up to the point when he made peace with the Romans and then could not return to a state of war EVER. The game came to an end. There is no way this error made it past play testing. This means Firaxis knew of the bug and chose not to fix it but to patch it later as they have chosen to do with numerous other issues. At best it is lazy programming at worst it is blatant exploitation of a loyal fan base.
I would hope my gripes could be fixed in an expansion pack but I doubt it. Heads need to roll.
Not everyone will agree with what I've written but it's my assessment of Civ V. This latest iteration of the Civ universes may well have killed the franchise.
P.S. As a Civ fanatic Civ 5 is Civ: Simple
Moderator Action: This post would have been fine without the PS: warned for trolling
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
When I play Civ V I feel like a spectator just wiling away the turns until something interesting happens. Civ IV is infinitely more complex than Civ V. Civ V is a mass market game. I understand that Firaxis like all other companies must operate to market realities. However in doing so they have produced a game that is not substantial in its quality.
Civ V represents a monumental leap backwards in terms of functionality.
Particular issues of note.
HAPPINESS - I tend to play Civ on large maps. I want to have large empires on far flung continents with vast armies ready to unleash Armageddon. This is not possible due to the new happiness system . Even if one were to have all the luxury resources it would still be difficult to maintain a large empire or even go to war and maintain all the cities captured. I have found myself going to war and razing the vast majority of cities in Civ V.
Happiness cannot be an empire wide factor it must be city specific. I read an interesting point on this forum and please forgive me as I forget the name of the original poster - “A coliseum in my capital Paris will do nothing and should do nothing to appease the militarily occupied city of Thebes” - the fact that it does makes a complete nonsense of the Happiness system as integrated in Civ V.
The natural wonders are a good idea but should only givev you a happiness bonus is it is in your borders.
ROADS/TRADE - There must not be an upkeep for roads or it should be minimal, not one gold per turn. Large empires crumble because large road networks can’t be maintained and units cant move fast enough for defensive purposes.
A side issue while I’m discussing hexes, ‘airbases’ - loved them in Civ II they were like my empire’s Area 51s where I would store bombers, missiles and nukes. They need to be brought back.
GOVERNEMNT/CIVICS - In all the Civilizations I played I honestly believe CIv IV was the one to hit the spot. It is miles if not light years ahead of what Civ V considers to be organising a Government. Choosing occasional bonuses is just lack lustre and again only serves to remove more decision making away from the player. I want to be able to change government from Communism to Democracy or be able to choose ridiculous traits such as free speech with slavery. In Civ V this is no longer possible, what you choose in 3000BC has dire consequences for life in 2000AD. Why? I know Civ cannot be 100% true to human history but this is a major flaw.
RELIGION - I did like Religion in Civ IV. It was fun converting the world to your faith and then watching the money roll in or better yet watching holy wars kick off when two dominant religions spread across several Civs just had enough of each other. Religion needs to be included, again it is a fundamental part of human civilization, to not include it would be akin to not acknowledging the invention of the wheel. I do however accept it must be dealt with in a tactful manner.
TECHNOLOGY - The tech tree is abysmal. It is not so much a tree as it is a sprig of willow. The ‘tree’ is far smaller than previous Civs. Again this removes more decision making from the player and leads to a position where games become quite indistinguishable from one another. The tree needs to be far more diverse.
DIPLOMACY - It is horrendous. I feel like I need say no more, but I will. What is a pact of secrecy, what is a pact of co-operation? They may have benefits but they are not visible to the player, they are transparent and in playing the game add no further depth.
Agreement deals need to be included in an overall diplomacy menu to show how long they have to run. This is essential to allow the player to plan twenty thirty turns ahead. Ceasefire agreements need to be brought back rather than the ten turn peace treaty which after it expires nobody knows what is going on. Furthermore I want to know what the other Civs think of each other and me.
ESPIONAGE - This must be included in every Civ. Espionage is a fundamental part of human history. It should be in Civ V. It isn’t. Espionage would add an interesting dimension to diplomacy. I want to be able to be treacherous, I want to be able to steal technology, money and bribe military units. I enjoyed the Espionage in Civ IV however I did not enjoy marching spies after they have successfully completed a mission all the way from my capital back to the front line, WTH!?! In any case espionage needs to be in Civ V and so do spy units.
I really don’t understand why I can see the stats of every Civ even unmet players in the top ten lists. This is just daft. I honestly preferred it when you had to establish an embassy in the other Civ to learn their demographics and to conduct espionage missions.
ECONOMY - Money is King. It shouldn’t be. I’ve bought entire armies and then gone on a rampage, far too easy. The buildings in this game are far too costly to maintain and provide little overall benefit. They for the most part tend to be clones of one another.
As to why corruption has been removed is beyond me. Again corruption is an intrinsic part of human civilization. Why isn’t the concept included in Civ V? It has been in every previous Civ, I think.
Another thing that appears to be missing is foreign trade routes, I thought that was the whole point of open borders agreements.
MILITARY - I do like the look of the new units. They finally look like a real battle hardened troop rather than a lonely man with a stick. However wars are far too easy to execute and win. With two siege units and three or four melee units one can steam roller across entire continents.
I did read an interesting post on this forum that different types of units should be able to stack to make battle more interesting, I again apologise to the original poster as I forget your name. Non-combat units should be able to stack to as many as you want. Workers need to stack to complete tasks faster. Siege units and non-siege unit need to be able to stack - I include bowed units in siege units. This offers these units the possibility of a defence when being attacked. Although I have not given it my full consideration I believe one siege unit and two melee units should be able to stack or at the very least a melee unit and a siege unit.
The city tile should be allowed to garrison three to four land units thus balancing the stacking ability of invading armies. I agree with a poster, and again I apologise because I forget the name, currently CIv V is trying too hard to emulate Total War which is a step in the wrong direction in my opinion.
As for the later eras of the game there needs to be a greater diversity in the military units. I know this is usually where the mod community steps in but I believe the developer should be considering such issues in production. For example there should be a range of jet fighters each with there own pros and cons. The same should go for tanks.
Embarking needs t be removed. It is far too easy with an army and this ability, once researched, that no continent is beyond your reach. It makes invasion far too easy - transports etc need to be brought back. Yes it was tedious to build the boats then load them but it made planning invasions more fun in my opinion.
I like the fact units can be upgraded and keep their experience but it does mean if you could hand out defeats early on, after an upgrade you will be dishing out complete annihilation. This results in warfare being quite dull after your empire’s first major war. This leads to another gripe.
VICTORY CONDITIONS - Domination is the only option. It is a good concept that only capital cities need to be captured but makes victory far too easy. In the games I have played with a few military units and superior tactics the AI does not stand a chance. I know I have secured a domination victory but hardly ever play those games to conclusion as by then destroying everyone has just become a chore. One can try and drag a game out to a space race but why? As for cultural victories well....
CULTURE - Culture in this game needs to be entirely reworked. Culture should be linked to national borders not national Government. Government civics should be obtained through tech as in Civ IV. Tied to this is the fact larger empires suffer from culture penalties in gaining government civics. This in effect means a player on a large or huge map is effectively choosing not to play with Governments enabled as large empire will rule out the possibility of obtaining civics in the industrial age or even civics further down the line apart from the initial few civic lines your empire may get at the very start..
In cities you need to be able to choose which tile your city is working towards getting. It is nonsensical as to why the player does not have this control, it adds depth to the game. Furthermore am I the only one who believes the World Wonders provide no where enough culture as they should do? Perhaps the culture values in obtaining hexes should be increased thus allowing the culture of Wonders to be increased and some building as well.
BUILDINGS - These appear all but redundant. I tend only to build the food building and markets and so on for money. Everything else is just a drain on gold that can be used for upgrading, rush buys, keeping city states on side and research agreements.
GREAT PEOPLE - In CIv V the great people aren’t so great. In Civ IV they could claim that accolade but not in Civ V. For example the great scientist can now only build an academy on a city tile which only provides plus 5 science. That is appallingly bad considering an academy in Civ IV gave plus 50% science! Moreover the building in Civ V will replace whatever improvement is on the tile at the time! I honestly believe it is very difficult to set up specialist cities in this iteration of Civ e.g. on for production, gold, science, food etc.
THE AI - Its crap.
CITY STATES - I find the city states can add an interesting dynamic to the game. I found myself eyeing with suspicion those states close to my borders and those my empire has engulfed. I have found on many occasions the AI allied with these states which proved a considerable distraction in my war mongering! However the Angry/Neutral/Friend/Ally is too simplistic an alliance should be a far more long term affair than it is. It should be permanent until one party no longer wants the alliance and the same for peace. There have however been games when I ignored city states all together, just trespassing through their territory at will.
INTERFACE - The main interface in the game is way too clustered again Civ IV had this spot on.
Hovering your mouse over a unit should tell you what its doing and how many turns say if its a worker till it completes its task.
In the city menu setting tiles to work should be in a drop down menu. It is one of the primary reasons you zoom in to a city to change tiles being worked by the city why put it in a altogether different menu, stupid.
There are aspects of Civ V I do enjoy. I believe ‘hexes’ is a step in the right direction, the square was well....just too square. I also like the graphics. The graphics lend a realism to the game while clearly allowing the player to see what the current state of his empire. These positives however float in an ocean of terrible backward steps.
As a final point I would like to comment on the state the game was released in. I was quite busy with work during the week of the release and so I spent my lunches at a friend’s house near my office. He was having a great game crushing the AI Civs and I was wondering at the new Civ game before us. That’s was right up to the point when he made peace with the Romans and then could not return to a state of war EVER. The game came to an end. There is no way this error made it past play testing. This means Firaxis knew of the bug and chose not to fix it but to patch it later as they have chosen to do with numerous other issues. At best it is lazy programming at worst it is blatant exploitation of a loyal fan base.
I would hope my gripes could be fixed in an expansion pack but I doubt it. Heads need to roll.
Not everyone will agree with what I've written but it's my assessment of Civ V. This latest iteration of the Civ universes may well have killed the franchise.
P.S. As a Civ fanatic Civ 5 is Civ: Simple
Moderator Action: This post would have been fine without the PS: warned for trolling
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Say it isn't so.
.
