r_rolo1
King of myself
This
Your top two things that would make Civ 5 better
- Thread starter Xiao Xiong
- Start date
So far, after two playthroughs :
1) City states. I like the concept and most ideas around them, but they should play a more subtle role. There are just too many of them, especially in the early game. Because of their sheer number, there is really no popularity contest between civilizations. I think in the early game, there should be 1 CS per civ, with more appearing gradually as the game progresses.
2) UI issues. I like the new UI philosophy but there are informations that are just not there at all (like luxury resources, which are impossible to track). Fortunately, most of these UI quibbles have already been solved by mods, but it's still strange that such a fundamental information is lacking, while there is just no purpose in hiding them (contrary to the opaque diplomacy, which is probably an intended, though debatable, feature)
Nothing fundamental so far, then, my limited experience with Civ V has been a happy one.
If the AI is as dumb as people claim, it certainly should replace my n°2, but since I don't play at high difficulty levels yet, I don't feel qualified to comment on the AI.
1) City states. I like the concept and most ideas around them, but they should play a more subtle role. There are just too many of them, especially in the early game. Because of their sheer number, there is really no popularity contest between civilizations. I think in the early game, there should be 1 CS per civ, with more appearing gradually as the game progresses.
2) UI issues. I like the new UI philosophy but there are informations that are just not there at all (like luxury resources, which are impossible to track). Fortunately, most of these UI quibbles have already been solved by mods, but it's still strange that such a fundamental information is lacking, while there is just no purpose in hiding them (contrary to the opaque diplomacy, which is probably an intended, though debatable, feature)
Nothing fundamental so far, then, my limited experience with Civ V has been a happy one.
If the AI is as dumb as people claim, it certainly should replace my n°2, but since I don't play at high difficulty levels yet, I don't feel qualified to comment on the AI.
r_rolo1
King of myself
^^The AI is the exact same at all levels, it just gets more bonuses in high levels. So ,you can tell if the AI is good or not by playing in any level.
JP1
Warlord
Another vote for:
1. Better AI
2. Diplomacy that actually feels interactive and deterministic.
1. Better AI
2. Diplomacy that actually feels interactive and deterministic.
1) The way the AI (even the barbarians) fights wars needs an overhaul. Examples...
- Barbarian archers guarding a camp will never fire at incoming units. They fortify.
- AI never seems to guard ranged units.
- AI rarely capitalizes on weakened units. On a few occasions I've had severely injured units within safe striking distance. They would have been absolutely risk-free guaranteed kills, but the AI chose to fall back.
- Haven't seen any AI navies yet (except for embarked units. EASY PICKINGS!
)
2) Diplomacy. Aside from the trade interface, it just feels empty.
- What, practically, does a "pact of secrecy" do? How come I can still trade and enter agreements with the "victim" party while my "partner" state seems to be ok with that?
- What, practically, does a "pact of cooperation" do?
- Barbarian archers guarding a camp will never fire at incoming units. They fortify.
- AI never seems to guard ranged units.
- AI rarely capitalizes on weakened units. On a few occasions I've had severely injured units within safe striking distance. They would have been absolutely risk-free guaranteed kills, but the AI chose to fall back.
- Haven't seen any AI navies yet (except for embarked units. EASY PICKINGS!
)2) Diplomacy. Aside from the trade interface, it just feels empty.
- What, practically, does a "pact of secrecy" do? How come I can still trade and enter agreements with the "victim" party while my "partner" state seems to be ok with that?
- What, practically, does a "pact of cooperation" do?
okay outside of the obvious (better AI anyone?), from every other poster before me....
1) I've noticed my cavalry upgrading to tanks from goody huts... I want to be able to buy this promotion.
2) Let Crossbows upgraded to cannons or artillery. All those ranged promotions are wasted going to riflemen.... or let me reassign their promotions.
1) I've noticed my cavalry upgrading to tanks from goody huts... I want to be able to buy this promotion.
2) Let Crossbows upgraded to cannons or artillery. All those ranged promotions are wasted going to riflemen.... or let me reassign their promotions.
JP1
Warlord
As far as I can tell, this is what these mean:
Pact of cooperation: Would you, the AI, like to increase your relationship with me? (In practical game terms, you appear to be asking the opponent AI to willingly increase their relationship modifier with you.)
Pact of secrecy: Would you, the AI, like to decrease your relationship with this other AI? (In practical game terms, you appear to be asking the opponent AI to willingly decrease their relationship modifier with some other AI.)
I believe Pacts of Secrecy between AIs are the main cause of sudden bursts of 'angry-face diplomacy' and cancelling of all deals without any real provocation.
And I really hope I'm wrong about these characterizations, because they feel incredibly hollow. The main things determining how world leaders in the real world react to each other are usually past events broken treaties, and so on, and not, "Well, Otto von Bismark told me to use my angry face when I talk to him."
- Better AI
- Trade routes should add up money for every 2 cities connected (not just city to capital), 1 road tile can only be used for 1 connection between 2 cities, harbors just create 1 extra traderoute, with 1 other city with a harbor. This way I get more money, so I can actually afford to buy buildings in cities, atm I simply build as little buildings as I can, because of the gold limit. It's also going to create more realistic road networks, because sometimes now I end up with a spiral labyrinth roadnetwork. Traderoute money should be about both city's gold output, it gets higher as both cities have more.
- Trade routes should add up money for every 2 cities connected (not just city to capital), 1 road tile can only be used for 1 connection between 2 cities, harbors just create 1 extra traderoute, with 1 other city with a harbor. This way I get more money, so I can actually afford to buy buildings in cities, atm I simply build as little buildings as I can, because of the gold limit. It's also going to create more realistic road networks, because sometimes now I end up with a spiral labyrinth roadnetwork. Traderoute money should be about both city's gold output, it gets higher as both cities have more.
ond_magiker
Chieftain
Global happiness. It just sucks. Yes it does, you're wrong, don't talk back! This is the main reason I fear 5 will never be as good as 4, as it seems such a fundamental part it will never be fixed. I could be overly pessimistic here, so still fingers crossed.
Better AI, as everyone knows.
First of all Firaxis needs to fix the horrible bugs and game balance, but that goes without saying.
Better AI, as everyone knows.
First of all Firaxis needs to fix the horrible bugs and game balance, but that goes without saying.
skallben
Diplomat
1. AI that can fight tactically.
2. Penalty on puppet-regime science. Maybe even until you have Courthouse up.
2. Penalty on puppet-regime science. Maybe even until you have Courthouse up.
1. And improved diplomacy system plz. I'd like to know why Gandhi always hates me. 
2. Better AI. I liked how civs weren't all about world domination in Civ IV, and actually formed their own little empires without invading and conquering every single thing and travelling thousands of miles to place a city next to my capital.
2. Better AI. I liked how civs weren't all about world domination in Civ IV, and actually formed their own little empires without invading and conquering every single thing and travelling thousands of miles to place a city next to my capital.
markieness
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2003
- Messages
- 81
1. A better puppet system
2. Diplomacy
2. Diplomacy
I think both my proposals can be implemented by modding (#2 should be easier).
1. More types of city states - it's boring when there are only 3, there should be ones that give production, gold, research, naval units etc.
2. More bonus resources, not only increasing food but also production - wood, stone etc. (also the yields of resource tiles should be better, but it's already done in some mods)
1. More types of city states - it's boring when there are only 3, there should be ones that give production, gold, research, naval units etc.
2. More bonus resources, not only increasing food but also production - wood, stone etc. (also the yields of resource tiles should be better, but it's already done in some mods)
Paeanblack
Prince
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2001
- Messages
- 518
The problem with the Maritime City States is mostly an AI problem, not a balance issue.
The CS alliance is auctioned to the highest bidder. If the AI players actually competed in the auction, the benefits would balance out, because the prices would go way up.
Only two. That's going to be hard. First is clear but for second I had few options.
1. Better AI (not just combat AI but the complete package) - This one's pretty obvious as other changes would be meaningless if the AI is unable to do anything properly.
2. Religion - An improved version of what IV had. Also give all religions some effects like social policies have (both for flavor and to balance out the religions emerging at different times).
1. Better AI (not just combat AI but the complete package) - This one's pretty obvious as other changes would be meaningless if the AI is unable to do anything properly.
2. Religion - An improved version of what IV had. Also give all religions some effects like social policies have (both for flavor and to balance out the religions emerging at different times).
younflancy
Warlord
- Joined
- May 26, 2008
- Messages
- 111
I just need more hammers!!!!!!
Mark the Bold
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2010
- Messages
- 156
(1) Less emphasis on gold; more on hammers.
(2) Ask Sid Meier to publish a letter explaining to all the haters here that this is Civ V and not CivIV part II. He's sorry if you hate it. Truly. He was trying to do something new with the series (God forbid) and wasn't intentionally trying to piss you off. He will redouble his efforts to allow all you Civ IV pros to spam infinite stacks of Jaguar Warriors and conquer all opposing civs in the ancient era on the next patch. Because ONLY combat it fun in Civ. Building stuff / empires is for "the general public". Sheesh.
(2) Ask Sid Meier to publish a letter explaining to all the haters here that this is Civ V and not CivIV part II. He's sorry if you hate it. Truly. He was trying to do something new with the series (God forbid) and wasn't intentionally trying to piss you off. He will redouble his efforts to allow all you Civ IV pros to spam infinite stacks of Jaguar Warriors and conquer all opposing civs in the ancient era on the next patch. Because ONLY combat it fun in Civ. Building stuff / empires is for "the general public". Sheesh.
