Hey, I actually like Civ V

Quoting tetleytea,

IMHO, the whole "you're a noob, so you're not qualified to speak to the game" is a cop-out, anyway. If someone said, "I have logged 600 hours on Steam playing Civ V, and I can say with authority that Civ V sucks," then what would people say? How much expertise do people tend to acquire in games they don't like?

They would say something to the effect of "Then why did you spend 600 hours playing a game you didn't like? Noob."

Firaxis just announced their Civ V expansion's release date today. June 19, I believe. Diablo III is in mid-May, Civ V is in late June. It'll be interesting to see how it all times with Elemental:FE.

Quoting tetleytea,

reply 27

Firaxis just announced their Civ V expansion's release date today. June 19, I believe. Diablo III is in mid-May, Civ V is in late June. It'll be interesting to see how it all times with Elemental:FE.

I think E:FE is more of a fall release IIRC.

Quoting tetleytea,

reply 25

IMHO, the whole "you're a noob, so you're not qualified to speak to the game" is a cop-out, anyway. If someone said, "I have logged 600 hours on Steam playing Civ V, and I can say with authority that Civ V sucks," then what would people say? How much expertise do people tend to acquire in games they don't like?

It's not a cop out, go read the forums of experienced civ players. They pick up on things in the game that people like you would miss because you're not experienced or intelligent enough to grasp the games fundamental flaws. Things like exploits for instance that make the game too easy and stupid behaviors of the AI in diplomacy, etc.

Expert players are part of what keeps game quality from dropping off a cliff. I've been gaming for 30 years and the game quality of PC and modern console games has gone down as games have been noobified to cater to the masses. First person shooters are a case in point. Halo with it's recharging shields and two weapon limits that every fps has copied, even duke nukem forever had recharging ego ffs.

No offense but you're just wrong. There's abundant evidence that noobs have brought down game quality because they don't know what makes a good game and will buy anything with shiny graphics and cinematics.

I'm not saying you can't like a game and buy it, but I'm saying you won't pick up on a games flaws because you are incapable of grasping what makes a game good and fun for a wide variety of players. Expert players don't hate noobs, they just hate that developers can get away with cutting features from games and noobs who whine and have no idea what makes a good game are a part of this problem. Instead of doing the thorough legwork of designing a better game for everyone they just cut features that they know a large section of the audience is too dull to even perceive.

because you're not experienced or intelligent enough to grasp the games fundamental flaws

First off, I am no longer a noob. I have beaten Immortal. Second, calling someone not intelligent enough to understand a game is openly insulting, and I'm going to ask nicely this once that you retract that.

The fundamental problem with Civ V is that it was released in a broken state. I beat the game on standard settings at Immortal difficulty my second game. Thats how bad the AI was at release.

It's nice that its gotten better, but its taken so long to get the game even to an OK state.

I own Civ5, like it, and think 1UPT is a interesting system that adds a lot of strategy. That said Civ5 has a lot of flaws.

1. Plainly ridiculously bad tactical AI.

2. Bad Pacing.

3. It's way to hard to conquer cities.

4. It's way to easy to city spam

5. It's broken on a competitive level.

This site chronicles the problems that competitive players have well.

@nix032,

Actually your opinions are invalid. I can say that because you are missing subtle nuances of the game. You need to play it more and make several mods before your opinion matters at all. Right now it doesn't. People like you reach a mediocre plateau in the game and think you know everything. The real gamers go beyond that. Every time I play I have to mod a new difficulty setting to challenge me. It really sucks that the makers of the game are pandering to people like you. I wish they would just focus on the talented players. Everyone else is worthless. What they think is irrelevant. Only I matter.

See how that might seem arrogant?

Quoting seanw3,

reply 33

@nix032,

Actually your opinions are invalid. I can say that because you are missing subtle nuances of the game. You need to play it more and make several mods before your opinion matters at all. Right now it doesn't. People like you reach a mediocre plateau in the game and think you know everything. The real gamers go beyond that. Every time I play I have to mod a new difficulty setting to challenge me. It really sucks that the makers of the game are pandering to people like you. I wish they would just focus on the talented players. Everyone else is worthless. What they think is irrelevant. Only I matter.

See how that might seem arrogant?

Those opinions of the other opinions are pretty short-sighted and naive. I mean, you you just sit there and make new mods every time you play, but you never actually have to make new games for all those noobs that do nothing but play and mod in an infinite cycle that extends the game's lifespan. Sheesh, get some perspective...!

Are there articles or something somewhere where Jon Shafer shares his thinking behind the design of Civ V? I've heard many reasons behind 1UPT and hexes, but I'm thinking in terms of modding. Well at least besides the mod where I gave myself access to Giant Death Robots in the ancient age. I won deity that way.

Now I want to do a new civilzation, the Playhouse. Barney the Dinosaur is the leader. His UU is Barney himself. Replaces the Giant Death Robot, no longer requires Uranium, +5% city assault bonus as he stomps on skyscrapers. I just need the graphic where the other guy's swarmed artillery pounds Barney and he goes down bleeding, tongue hanging out of his mouth.

Quoting niz032,

reply 29

Expert players are part of what keeps game quality from dropping off a cliff. I've been gaming for 30 years and the game quality of PC and modern console games has gone down as games have been noobified to cater to the masses. First person shooters are a case in point. Halo with it's recharging shields and two weapon limits that every fps has copied, even duke nukem forever had recharging ego ffs.

One thing I just had to add here is that just because every FPS nowadays has recharging shields and a two weapon limit does not make it "noobified". Remember the olden days of FPS when you could have every weapon in the game and collect max ammo for every one of them? Yeah, every player would just use their favorite mid-level weapon for normal guys, save up the big guns for the bosses or heavy fights, rinse and repeat. Maybe you'd switch to a different mid level gun if you're running low on ammo for your other favorite gun or just use the big guns for fun because you're already at max ammo and you just ran into a stash. It certainly was fun, don't get me wrong, but a two weapon limit gives the player many more tactical choices than "run around and collect everything".

Same thing with the regenerating shields. Maybe it's just a problem of looking through nostalgia glasses, so let's remember your options after taking a lot of damage in a firefight in an older FPS: 1) Reload. 2) "Well, I took some heavy damage in that firefight, so before I progress in the level I'm going to spend 3 minutes backtracking through the level and find health packets I left behind." Your options in a new FPS: 1) Die, reload closest checkpoint. 2) Hide behind object to accomplish health regen without hassle of either reloading or backtracking through the level. Sure, it sucks in multiplayer, but remember those players in older FPS's that would just turtle and stock up on health/shields the minute they were damaged anyways? Yeah, if anything the new regen makes it easier to kill those types of players.

Saying those mechanics dumb down today's games is like ranting about young people that look up someone's address on a smartphone instead of looking through a phonebook.

Quoting DsRaider,

reply 32

I own Civ5, like it, and think 1UPT is a interesting system that adds a lot of strategy. That said Civ5 has a lot of flaws.

1. Plainly ridiculously bad tactical AI.

2. Bad Pacing.

3. It's way to hard to conquer cities.

4. It's way to easy to city spam

5. It's broken on a competitive level.

This site chronicles the problems that competitive players have well.

These, plus:

6. We lost the explanations, present in Civ IV, for AI opinions about other players.

7. The removal of religions. From a game design standpoint, I find it a useful, abstract strategic element.

For these reasons I don't like Civ V, and much prefer Civ IV. That said, I can easily see why somebody would prefer Civ V, and their opinions would seem in no way inferior to my own. There are a lot of personal factors that go into judging a game. Admiring Civ V doesn't seem to me the equivalent of preferring something braindead.

I'm also a big fan of some Civ IV mods, especially Master of Mana (the heir of FFH), Realism Invictus, and Rise of Mankind: AND.

I could agree with this.

Civ V is a pretty fun game ... and while Civ IV inspires high level competitive play, Civ V does not.

And yes, I've kept with Civ IV because of the mods as well

FFH2 all the way!

---------------

There are a couple teams that seem to be making some pretty nice fantasy mods for Civ V, and that's not even mentioning Warlock:Master of the Arcane (what, that isn't a Civ V mod? Ah ... I'll wait for fantasy mods for Civ V in that case, don't need to pay any extra for the same product)

*ahem*

Where was I? Oh yes, if the mods are good enough for Civ V, I think I will return there eventually.

The Civ V expansion (Gods & Kings) is bringing religion back. Should be on time for July 4th weekend.

Quoting tetleytea,

reply 39

The Civ V expansion (Gods & Kings) is bringing religion back. Should be on time for July 4th weekend.

Each person must judge from themselves, but I honestly can't see paying the team for having "fixed" one of the main problems they themselves introduced into Civ V. Not when the others remain, at least.

Quoting DsRaider,

reply 32

I own Civ5, like it, and think 1UPT is a interesting system that adds a lot of strategy. That said Civ5 has a lot of flaws.

1. Plainly ridiculously bad tactical AI.

2. Bad Pacing.

3. It's way to hard to conquer cities.

4. It's way to easy to city spam

5. It's broken on a competitive level.

This site chronicles the problems that competitive players have well.

I own every Civ game made. I love the idea of 1UPT but item #1 made it not so good in Civ5.

I think Civ5 is a good game and with a few small changes and a much better AI it would be the best Civ game so far.

Many of the features other Civ games had that were removed in Civ5 were mostly fluff and the game is faster and cleaner without them.

Arguing about time spent?

I have 128 hours in Civ V and i think it is awesome, just waiting for the expansion.

I loved the previous titles aswell, and I am glad that they make changes.

The only thing keeping me from logging more hours is this pesky thing called real life.

Before I discovered Unofficial Patch and Vanilla Enhanced mod maybe handful of games with my friends against ai and some by myself 100-120hrs. After I discovered Vanilla I am well over 300hrs. I hope to god multiplayer gets mods. Its sad how few achievements I have because I only play with mods.

Just waiting to see what the Steam preorder for Gods and Kings. Also wondering what won't be hardcoded any more in game.

Is it just me or is Civ V the most plodding game ever? Looks like an '80's throwback.

Quoting MalaiseofElite,

reply 46

Is it just me or is Civ V the most plodding game ever? Looks like an '80's throwback.

Actually, it's Art Deco in style, which means 20's. That style is 90 years old.

More to the OP. I also really like Civ V. Now, it's true that it has fundamentally changed many things from the predecessors, which does make it a bit of a Fallout 3 (great game with an unfortunate name), but it is not so fundamentally different that the name is a crime.

Most of all I love what the policies and countries do for supporting different playstyles, and the tactical nature of combat in the game. That change alone makes where you build your cities twice as important. Not only do you have to account for economic inputs (gold, food, etc), but if you build in a chokepoint or on a hill or near a river, your city is inherently better at defense and becomes exponentially stronger as a result. This is something that is more difficult to quantify, but has a significant impact on the game. The extra levels of strategy I find there FAR outweigh the marginal loss of complexity in city management seen in the transition from 4 to 5.

I dare say that I find Civ 5 more "fun" to play, if perhaps it is a tad bit less strategically rich overall.

I wanted to like Civ V. I really did. I even went back to it when Gods & Kings came out.

Can't do it. The combat AI is dumb as rocks, and everything else just flows downhill from that. I don't bother making units except a couple of very early game ones. There's no particular need to. You can buy one or two if someone dares to attack you, and that's all you need to beat an army double your size.

Without massive cheats the AI stands no chance against even a halfway competitant player, let alone a really good one. The new systems are also boring. Religion is just yet another type of points that you pile up for a while using some building and then spend on some goodie, like all the other systems in the game. It doesn't integrate particularly well with anything else and the whole thing feels tacked on. Espionage is so absurdly limited in terms of what missions you can run that it ruins what could have been something interesting.

The community's got this one right (as did Tom Chick's scathing review).

I love Civ V. I think it's the best of the series.

The Forums Are Now Closed!

The content will remain as a historical reference, thank you.