|
Are you, in fact, a pregnant lady who lives in the apartment next door to Superdeath's parents? - Commodore |
|
Civilization 5 Announced
|
Dr. Nomadic Wrote:Looks like Civ4 > Civ5 is also the critical consensus. As of 24/9/2010. I still think the basic mechanics have a lot to offer, and if the game gets balanced and the AI gets repaired it will be a worthy successor. That's a big "if", given how far behind Civ 5 is from a "polished on release" perspective. Darrell
As everything else culture generation is too slow. For my second game I tried a cultural victory with France and it was really boring. I settled 3 cities, captured two neighbouring capitals because I got bored and just built every culture building/wonder available, adopted the culture boosting policies and befriended the 2 cultural city states. I got around 400 culture per turn with my 5 cities which amounted to ca. 10 turns for the next policy, but there were still around 12 of them to go! This would have taken me another 140 turns of just hitting end! And naturally those left were the most boring and useless ones, +1 production per city really didn't excite me much.
Of course a culture victory in civ IV wasnt that exciting either after you shut down research but at least setting it up was quite interesting. Setting it up in civ V was a mind numbing experience. There was no finesse to it and plain nothing to do! Even with my 5 cities geared for culture I got to make a worker-descision every 10 turns. And because you get culture only from buildings, you just need production for them and enough money not to go broke and bribe the culture city-states. And deciding what to build was also a no-brainer: culture-buildings. Thats it. Boring. It might have been more interesting if there had been any threat to my civilization and the need to make some hard descisions, but seeing how incompetent the AI is, you just play in a vacuum without any real competition. Dr. Nomadic Wrote:.....It probably wasn't so appropriate to bring discussion on the other games into this thread, but whatever. At least I have Super Mario Galaxy 2 (and others have Mass Effect 2 and Red Dead Redemption...) to rebel and say that this has been an awesome gaming year.  Do you read what you write?
darrelljs Wrote:I still think the basic mechanics have a lot to offer, and if the game gets balanced and the AI gets repaired it will be a worthy successor. That's a big "if", given how far behind Civ 5 is from a "polished on release" perspective.I completely agree.
There are two kinds of fools. One says, "This is old, and therefore good." And one says, "This is new, and therefore better." - John Brunner, The Shockwave Rider
This is the most interesting thread I've found so far at CivFanatics. Someone is thinking along the same lines as we are: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=381932
I'm still getting the feeling that the designers of Civ5 don't fully understand their own game. I can't imagine that they actually want us to play the game like this, with the entire economy revolving around gifts from city states. I also think that the cost of buildings needs to be drastically re-evaluated, because I'm only constructing something like 20% of the available buildings in my games. New techs keep coming in and the buildings just piling up in the queue, because I can't possibly complete their gargantuan shield costs in timely fashion. Alexfrog argues that the only way to construct buildings is to configure your cities to take advantage of bonus Golden Age production, which feels really off to me. Unit costs actually feel OK to me, since if units were any cheaper they would simply get in each other's way with the new tile rules. The buildings, however, feel like they need to be 30-50% cheaper across the board. Either that or the techs need to be significantly more expensive (like double or triple their current cost) to stretch out the game and give players a chance to actually build some stuff. The whole situation feels "off" at the moment.
I ran a test now with Greece and tried to milk the city states for all they are worth and thanks to the insane growth I ran into severe happiness caps. (Basically as soon as they are happy every city grows and they grow unhappy..) 4 mar, 2 mil, 2 cul
Imo the quickest and dirtiest fix would be to reduce city states boni by eliminating the free ressource. Then you could: Mil C states gift units Cul C stats gift culture Mar C stats gift one happiness ressource Sullla Wrote:I also think that the cost of buildings needs to be drastically re-evaluated, because I'm only constructing something like 20% of the available buildings in my games. New techs keep coming in and the buildings just piling up in the queue, because I can't possibly complete their gargantuan shield costs in timely fashion.That may very well be the designer's intention for this game: That you will not be able to build every building in every city like in previous Civ games, but that you are forced to specialize. If that is really the intent, I like that change even if it's not easy to lose old habits. Of course we can only speculate if the AI is capable of specializing its cities... 
There are two kinds of fools. One says, "This is old, and therefore good." And one says, "This is new, and therefore better." - John Brunner, The Shockwave Rider
Quote:Issues fixed include: If this is legit, then ok, good job with patch speed. But that makes me stand behind what I wrote at Apolyton even more: sunrise089 Wrote:@Yin - Ok, so a good beta tester has to walk a line between honesty and not giving away too much publically. Fine. But if the final words from the Beta testers were anything other than "THIS GAME IS TOTALLY BROKEN, DO NOT RELEASE IT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES IN PRESENT FORM" than I think Krill's criticism is pretty valid.
Ky... even if that was the case, it sounds like I can't even build enough buildings to specialize, so let's not even head into building every building. And by the time i get a city specialized, it's too late in the game to matter or something like that.
Ok guys, I have started with an AW game as Monte since every victory gives you 3 culture points. (on rather low difficulty)
And guess what, I am having a fun time, really. I guess Civ 5 AI is a little like Civ 3 and that is what makes AW fun, no matter whether you all say the AI is dumb. Coupled with 1upt, it is really tactical play. I took 3 city states with a combo of an archer, horse archer, and 2 melee units, one of which was a medic. Via smart placement of units I could slowly take the city down with the ranged units, though they also got their share of city bombardment. Anyone, who looks for a nice challenge, try it out. And guess what, no exploits as city states are enemies too! |
