Finally got CIV V

[sparkyal]

Well, I waited to get CIV V until i thought most of the bug were done with . now i am playing and I have a couple of comments:
- CIV V is a very good game. I know people rag on the AI and stuff, but gameplay wise i like it. I am glad the slider is gone (no more 100% research for a few turn)
- I like the buying system for tiles (although you should be able ot speed up production without using a Great eng)
- I like the single unit on a tile
- I like the new happiness rules
- the limited resources i think it a good idea too
- and I really really like the social policies aspect
so there are quite a few very good things about the game. I do have a couple of questions if you guys wouldn't mind.....
1) Transports are really gone? Everyone has to "embark" now? so to invade a land i have to send off these units at their 3 moves per turn????
2) How do you tell the relationships between other civs. I would like to know who likes who. that was great in CIV IV
3) Spying is completely gone...is there a way to see what the enemy is working on?
4) is there a place i can see all of my cities' great people progress at the same time?
5) It seems like the limit of two national wonders/city is gone...right?

[mkorin]

1. Transports are really gone, you get used to embarking.
2. Diplomacy, Diplomacy Overview and Global Politics
3. No more spying and to my way of thinking that is an advantage.
5. I believe so.

Welcome to the game. I too think the gameplay is great. AI is no stupider than it was in IV.
Mike

[sparkyal]

Honestly I really like it. I would like for them to add something about wonders...like listing the ones that have been built like it was before. and when you scroll over a unit it should tell you what it does and stuff...like when you scroll over an enemy unit, some readout about its strength and all would be great.

I am playing my first game of it now and it seems to run ok (except it will only run in Direct x 9....not sure why it would run in 10/11)

[Boris Godunov]

You'll learn not to like 1UPT so much when you spend many frustrating minutes unit shuffling. And you'll soon see the AI can't handle the tactics necessary for it.

Still, I also enjoy the game for what it is. It's not as good as Civ IV complete, but I'm hopeful they'll keep improving it and really listen to feedback.

[sparkyal]

I am sure the AI will do a terrible job. but the AI in CIV IV was terrible at war too. It would send a stack of death and you would just pound it with planes. and it would never finish the attack...they would still have 5 good units and not attack when there was only like 1 heavily damaged unit left.

I think after they do some key things to CIV V (like being able to see what wonders have been build and by whom) it will greatly improve the gameplay. Ad for the AI's ability to attack....well, the programmers need to find a good AI strategy for it to use so it sets up its units properly.

And have you all noticed some information missing? Like, what is the benefit of the road?? 1/2 movement cost? Railroad? How many turns are in a game? And other little things.....

[sparkyal]

Ok, I just finished my first game of CIV V and overall, I like it. It is VERY different than my beloved CIV IV, but that is not a bad thing. In CIV IV everything was about economics and this is much better in that regard. So, I played on Warlord (first game, wanted to take it easy), continents, standard map, standard length and I was Arabia. At the end I had 3 ways to win all within about 5 turns (domination, space, and diplomatic). I went with domination since i just built Giant Death Robots and i wanted to see them in action.

Here are some things I noted:
1) Arabia is awesome! Really, the trade bonus, a good unit in the camel archer, and the bazaar is great!
2) diplomacy really is weak, it had far less depth than CIV IV. I was a bit surprised by that. but, the AI is no dumber
3) The AI is much tougher than previous games about trading stuff.
4) world opinion is too string in the beginning of the game. Really in the 18th century no one cared how other governments treated its people. Only after a certain point this should be important.
5) The tech tree is underdeveloped. It6 loos like it has lots of holes in it...almost like it can be filled in later (more on that below).
6) the AI still cannot fight to save its life....literally
7) City states are really cool. I like dealing with them...actually, having a mix of all three types as allies is important to win the game. They are well worth the gold.
8) I really like the new system of government....the social policies. I think it is much more flexible than any other other systems. I can see taking different approaches to it each time. And for the first time really, a cultural victory may be possible.
9) You go from modern armor strength 80 to GDR of 150...really????? I think there are things missing in between!
10) there is a long point where there are no wonders to build! Odd...very odd.
the game truly does seem to be missing something. I cannot say for sure what it is, but is lacking. but here is my theory...I could be wrong, but looking at the game I think this is right. It was designed like this on purpose. there seem to be holes in there for an expansion pack to fill in. the tech tree is way too small. there are only really few military units. and there are way too few civ's.

I think they basicalyl decided to get something out the door to bring in some cash as soon as possible. then using that cash they would throw it back into the product to produce the CIV V we all want. In essence, they build an incomplete game. I thin that is what is at the heart of all of this and why there are so many complaints. Just wait, in maybe 6-7 months they will have this huge expansion for like $30 that will bring the game up to what we want it to be. We will see if that happens.


what do you think?

[Boris Godunov]

1) Arabia is awesome! Really, the trade bonus, a good unit in the camel archer, and the bazaar is great!

I think the Chinese are probably the best overall. You get more great generals, the Chu-Ko-Nu gets two attacks per turn which is awesome, and the paper maker subs for the library and produces gold in addition to the science.

4) world opinion is too string in the beginning of the game. Really in the 18th century no one cared how other governments treated its people. Only after a certain point this should be important.

Oh sure they did. Part of the justification of the Crusades was based on the supposed ill-treatment of Christians under Moslem rule.

7) City states are really cool. I like dealing with them...actually, having a mix of all three types as allies is important to win the game. They are well worth the gold.

The Militaristic city-states are pretty useless, IMO. I always ignore them in games unless they're right on my borders and there's no other types around. Maritime ones are easily the best, because befriending several of those will get your capital city exploding population-wise.

8) I really like the new system of government....the social policies. I think it is much more flexible than any other other systems. I can see taking different approaches to it each time. And for the first time really, a cultural victory may be possible.

While I agree they're neat at first, after a while you realize the promised variety really isn't there. Certain policy combos are become obviously superior and there's little reason to deviate from them in subsequent games.

10) there is a long point where there are no wonders to build! Odd...very odd.

Hmm, I think that's true of all the Civ games. Once you get to the Industrial eras, the number of wonders always seems to be limited.

Regarding the number of techs, Vanilla Civ IV had 85, Civ V has 74. But Civ V did away with dead-end techs, which Civ IV did have. I don't think it's that dramatic a difference, personally. And I'm not sure the number of units in Civ V is dramatically smaller than Civ IV. Seems to me it's about the same.

[sparkyal]

Well, i still think world opinion is too strong in the early parts of the game. While there may be exceptions, world opinion holds a much larger sway than it did as little as 100 years ago. and that was mainly because people did not know what was going on.

As for the wonders, I have not checked, but i am pretty sure there are less wonders in this version. As for units...the number in civlopedia might be the same, but there are quite a few nations that have 2 special units which increases the variety, but not truly different units. There is one knight unit, but there are two other civ's that have "knight" units with slightly different abilities.

Well, you are probably right about the social policies, but i am thinking they can be easily expanded in patches and expansions. It just seems like it is a better setup than CIV IV (which by the way, there were only a few important civics there too).

In my next game i will go up a level and try a larger world. I think that should make it a bit harder. Especially keeping people happy, that seems like a real challenge.

Oh, and i am hoping that later o they add some ability to see what wonders have be3en created and i like the graphs that we used to have too!!! Oh, and the "you've won" screen is pathetic. That seems like something they just slapped on at the end to get it out the door.

[gdijedi7]

I waited to get Civ 5 until I had a computer that could run the dern thing.

But, I do love the game, and I love my B-17s and Minutemen! The Giant Death Robot, though, I could most certainly do without. It was a bad idea.

The win screens are, indeed, pathetic. They could have done better. Shoot, I could have done better. But oh well.

Nation-wide happiness bugs me. Just because New York is having riots doesn't mean Chicago will be.

One unit per hex is good. I like it. Now make the AI able to do something with it.

Having to juggle strategic resources can be a pain, but causes you to make some hard choices. Or lead you into a war, which can be much easier. Not every unit requires a resource, and that is a good thing. I was so relieved on my first game (a low-oil situation) when Destroyers and Subs (which are finally worth something in combat) required nothing. I end up spending it all on planes in most situations.

Which brings me to another annoyance. It's not right for a B-17 or an F-22 to attack a Crossbowman or a Brute and get shot. That's just messed up. But again, oh well.

[LzPrst]

play it 5 more times.

[ElDonReal]

The Militaristic city-states are pretty useless, IMO. I always ignore them in games unless they're right on my borders and there's no other types around. Maritime ones are easily the best, because befriending several of those will get your capital city exploding population-wise.

I wouldn't rank them useless. First they may have luxury resources as well that raises your happiness. I usually don't try to befriend CS that have the same resources. Second if you're a builder and like to focus on improving cities you can "outsource" unit building and save the turns to build other buildings in your cities. Often the military CS is the equivalent of having an extra small city just for unit building, but without the happiness/culture penalty. When your main cities are busy building library, granary, circus, colloseum, water mill, temple, market, workshop, university, bank, garden, public school etc, a military CS can be used to grow and freshen your army. But of course, military CS have to be close to my empire to be really useful. Far away military CS are really only useful for their resources.

I think I have not yet tried a game where I'd be ignoring city states. I wouldn't even known what to do with all the money. Are there good CS-less strategies?

[sparkyal]

ok, into game two and i found where i can see how many turns it will take for a worker to finish, that is nice. Maybe i can find where it tell sme about enemy units too? and i do see where it tells me about Wonders, so that is cool.

I keep making errors with the one unit thing, but in general i am getting better at it. Way better than the AI. One thing that is pretty important is the ability to move after firing.

A couple of things that are pretty important. the AI is a bit....what is the word.....sensitive in diplomatic relations. So...Iam very freindly with the Japanese, then all of the sudden they denounce me for no reason and then everyone else does, and now no one will trade stuff with me. I seem to have all of the gold resources in the world, so you have to come for me for it. but no one will trade with me for it...even things they have like 4 copies of. that is plain ridicules. There are many countries that do not like the USA, but they still trade with them. the AI does not seem to care about happiness. Oh, and of course someone started a war with me...but i FINISHED it. and i am the war monger! that is terrible. They should develop a wonder or social policy of free press that helps report the truth about things. that would be cool.

[Dinner]

play it 5 more times.

That's it's Achilles heel unfortunately.

[India (DoE)]

@ spark

as you will begin to see, the best strategy for diplomacy is ignoring all other civs as much as possible. my most successful game (diplomacy-wise) was based on me saying no to all friend agreements, all denouncements, all everything. for some reason I was then able to trade with other nations since no one hated me or loved me. I started no wars and conquered no cities when others declared war on me (I razed a few iirc). Of course, this made the game quite boring as I instead focused on peaceful development. Which is very linear and honestly, just boring.

I have written extensively on the reasons for why the builder part of civ 5 is boring, but in a quick summary, there are very few decisions to make, very little happens each turn (unless you are in a war), so you end up hitting end turn again and again, getting bored and beginning to want to do something else.

[mkorin]

Don't let the neigh sayers affect your opinion. I've easily played 50 games and I enjoy it much better than IV. Sure, it has it's AI flaws, but they are working on them, and it is slowly getting better.

Mike