Has anyone played this?

[Dinner]

I honestly haven't played this at all and I don't know anyone who has. Has anyone here played it? What exactly is it like?

[ColdWizard]

It's not done yet.

[princepratt]

I have it and have played it several times. It is a lot of fun and really does a good job of emulating the console games it is based on. The core system is actually pretty nifty and can be tweaked a lot of different ways to suit your tastes. It does require a couple tables to play but, they are relatively simple and fit easily on a character sheet. I had actually started a Diablo II mod for the game but that goat a bit lost in the shuffle.

[King XII]

Which Sports are you talking now?. I Need further Explanation you than i told answer of your Question..

[Pattinson]

No haven't played yet, but i am looking forward to play it..

[LzPrst]

played for 1 week then lost interest completely. it is farmville.

[Lambiorix_be]

played for 1 week then lost interest completely. it is farmville.

Exactly...I just tried again but not only is it boring there is also a bias to only build soldiers and not in creating a civ. In comparison, I played Grepolis a lot longer than this game...

[Zoetstofzoetje]

Barna, respond to this thread by saying "scoobydoo" so we all know you're not a spammer?

[qazw]

No haven't played yet

[Donegeal]

Yes, but I gave it up a couple of months ago. The only thing 'Civ' about it is the name.

[vorlon_mi]

Finally got around to trying it out this month, long after the furor died down.

It's well suited to the platform, in that it *is* a social game and requires that you cooperate with others to succeed. For people like me who play Civ 2,3,4 as single player, that's a big change. There are mini-games, and a marketplace where you can buy resources. For me, not enough happens in a single play session. Your resources are collected by performing a "harvest", which only become available every hour or two. There's no sense of turn-based-strategy, and the famous "just one more turn" addiction.

There is some strategy, but it's not nearly as deep as Civ 2,3,4 or 5. There are some players who are figuring out exploits, and a team of players who are tightly organized can dominate the casual single player. Since it includes "CivBucks" that are tied to real world currency, there are also folks who are willing to spend their way to an advantage, which is less fun for me.

Yup, the little animations remind me of FarmVille or other Facebook games. I'm going to stick with it for another week or so, but since I don't have a strong team, I'm not sure I will keep going.

[dl7481]

I haven't but would like to

[vorlon_mi]

I've played a couple of other FB games, and CivWorld is probably in the middle of the pack.

Basically, I'm a fan of single-player strategy games. I enjoy the FB game "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" because I like trivia games, and it's basically a single-player game. You can succeed, even if none of your friends are actively helping you.

Some other FB games send you on quests, where the only way to get a certain scarce item is to ask one of your FB friends to give it to you. I have a fair number of real-life friends and family in my FB circle, but they don't like to play the same games I do ... so those games get boring after a while. One simply cannot complete many of the quests or tasks.

In CivWorld, you can make progress on your own. You can discover some techs, obtain great people (simplified version of the Civ 4 GP), and watch your little animated citizens do their thing. It's fun to visit, for a few minutes at a time, a couple of times a day. Unlike the main Civ games I love, you can't sit there for a couple hours and just immerse yourself in the game. There simply aren't enough tasks to do in CivWorld to occupy your full attention for more than 15 minutes at a stretch.

Please, do log in and give it a try. The wiki (which serves as the documentation) is pretty complete.

[VRBones]

I played it quite heavily when it launched and won both games I played. There is certainly a lot of strategy in this game, but it's more of the social engineering type than traditionally found in Civ titles. Think of it as a glorified game of diplomacy.

The reason for this is is due to the victory mechanic. Each time an Era is won the civ gets a large amount of fame points, but the fame points are split between nation members according to rank. You want to work together as a team for your civ to win as many eras as possible, but be King / Queen when the victory actually occurs. You can be promoted by being the first inside the civ to reach certain short term goals, and multiple promotions will keep moving you up in ranks (only to be pushed out eventually by other people promoting).

You will get a lot more out of the game by playing with at least one other person you know, or by becoming very chatty with other serious players in your civ. You will also need to keep tabs on your civ's strength relative to other civs, your position inside the civ and the next medal rounds to be gained. I'd recommend at least 5 visits a day (maybe only for a couple of minutes each though) for the duration of the game (~2 weeks), otherwise it will be just a FarmVille game with puzzles.

I know some people have complained about the CivBucks, but I really didn't see too much evidence of heavy buck spenders. If you have time to watch the market, you'll be better off than someone dumping bucks into the game. I didn't feel the need to use CivBucks at all.

The problem at the moment is that those still playing the game will know the swings of the market and other little tricks to eke out an advantage. Start a couple of games to get the feel before jumping early into a new world.

[kingsly]

I am sorry ,but I still do not know what you want to know?Anyway there is actually some great points on this post.