Civilization V- Might actually be good now. Stay tuned.

[Ingmar]

And multiplayer should have been in Civ 3 from the start, and they shouldn't have waited til the 2nd expansion of 4 to fix espionage, etc., etc., etc.

EDIT: Maybe you should hold out for an apology too.

[Paelos]

You'll argue with me on pretty much anything, but you're really reaching if you believe that adding back a feature that was in the old game but removed is somehow a selling point.

[Ingmar]

Personally I hope it is optional, I didn't really care for the mechanics of it in the old game.

EDIT: I also don't really think the game needs 'fixing', I like it as is. Better than 4!

[Stormwaltz]

I hold up a lonely torch in hopes that they junk the shoehorned-into-Civ single unit per space model and replace it with a sensible form of stacking.

[Merusk]

They didn't "Puss out" on religion.  It was one of the most reviled aspects of Civ 4 because it was pointless and people cheered when they first heard it and corporations were both being removed.

[Sky]

Yep.

And then Kael showed them how religion should be implemented, except you could never implement it with modern religions because people are nuts.

[Paelos]

They didn't "Puss out" on religion.  It was one of the most reviled aspects of Civ 4 because it was pointless and people cheered when they first heard it and corporations were both being removed.

Just because they did it wrong didn't mean it had to be removed. They pussed out the first time they put it in there by making "all religions are equal let's hold hands", then they took the even bigger pussy route by removing it instead of creatively fixing it. 

[Tannhauser]

The addition of religion is awesome, one of my favorite parts of IV.  But I will not do a Day One purchase of this, Firaxis has dropped down to Paradox in my trust.  After being in IV, it was really odd religion wasn't in V. 

Here are my ideas for some unique units

Christanity
Inquisitor-No one expects him!
Tele-evangelist-Collects gold and has no other function.

Islam
...you know what?  Nevermind.

[Ingmar]

I know I judge game developers by the relative manliness of their approach to design problems.

[naum]

They didn't "Puss out" on religion.  It was one of the most reviled aspects of Civ 4 because it was pointless and people cheered when they first heard it and corporations were both being removed.

Just because they did it wrong didn't mean it had to be removed. They pussed out the first time they put it in there by making "all religions are equal let's hold hands", then they took the even bigger pussy route by removing it instead of creatively fixing it. 

Yes, they did "puss out" in Civ 4 on religion, rendering it a bland option instead of opting for more distinct changes, that, yes, might potentially infuriate overly fundamentalist devout religious followers.

I am still stunned on what was once a grandiose, glorious AAA game title is treated not much better than an indy-game now… …Mac OS X version treated an afterthought (see Blizzard / FM / etc. for game developer that gets it right), expecting players to play test and ferret out bugs and balance issues that should have been identified and corrected pre-release, etc… …I reckon all the attention now is diverted to the Facebook variant(s)…

[rk47]

AI fix? You mean there's an actual AI thinking there's a reason why THEY build so close to you AND hate you for encroaching on their territory?
Single hex wars are great...if the AI can actually battle within the system. But they can't. And the whole 'Play to Win' AI doesn't encourage the player to work together with other nations. All they had to do is make lumpsum cash deals and break it straight away, because they simply can.

[Malakili]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajY0oGbsxyI

Gods and Kings presentation from PAX.  Actually looks pretty good to me.  I'll pick it up.  Despite the fact that the game has its shortcomings, I'll still easily get the price worth out of the expansion.

[Tannhauser]

I've actually been playing a lot of Civ V lately.  They have patched it into a decent game.  You can form a battle line, infantry in front, catapults in back, to march on an enemies territory.  They have made some maps very big and that more suits the 1 unit per hex gameplay.  I have been playing a lot on the 'wargamer' map (f10) and it's a fun change of pace and lets you see the units and hexes much easier.

Espionage and Religion looks pretty cool, thanks for the link Malakili.  Both are complete revamps of Civ IV's systems.  Looks interesting and fun.  I like Inquisitors and 'crafting' your religion.  Also the spy missions look simple but I didn't want a really big sub-system there, glad it's a drop down menu.

 

[Sir Fodder]

I want to play some more of this singleplayer but the AI was so horrid I would describe it as semi-functional at best, have they improved it after the initial tepid futzes they did? It seemed odd that such a big, mostly awesome, game would have so absurdly poor an AI. It also seemed odd that they did such a poor job supporting the game post-launch and wringing DLC dollars that people were ready to spend when the game was hotter.

[rk47]

I've actually been playing a lot of Civ V lately.  They have patched it into a decent game.  You can form a battle line, infantry in front, catapults in back,

AI can't do this.

[Sky]

I gave up bitching about AI years ago, because the 'professionals' decided it wasn't important.  Tired of fighting the good fight, doubt I'll live to see the day people get their heads out of their asses and realize it's one of the most important things in single players gaming.

[Tebonas]

Since I can play Maria Theresia in this expansion it is a given I will buy it. I hope I can marry the shit out of my enemies and thus destroy them!  

[Tannhauser]

I've actually been playing a lot of Civ V lately.  They have patched it into a decent game.  You can form a battle line, infantry in front, catapults in back,

AI can't do this.

AI seems to compensate by zerging. Had trouble exploring an island controlled by America because most hexes had a unit on it.  They can field HUGE armies and "quantity has a quality all its own".  On land, the AI can be very aggressive, but it's still afraid of the water.  I've had trebuchets (sp?) retreat from my melee units.  I've had the AI actually try to flank my battle line. 

Here's hoping they improve the naval game.  The preview looked great, but we'll see.  Both IV and V have tiny, very un-adventureous navies. 

[calapine]

Gods & Kings, the first expansion, is out for pre-order on Steam and will be released june 19th.

Main feature and innovation is religion. Judging from what I read about it I quite like the implantation, seems to be a step up from the bland version Civ IV had. Diplomacy has been fleshed out and is supposedly less erratic. So did land (units have 100 hp now, slower battles) and naval combat (Melee ships, ships can take cities). Plus of course the typical expansion changes of new Civs and more units.

On top my head: Austria, Byzantium, Netherlands, Ethiopia, units being mainly a new set of WWI area types (fighters, bomber, infantry) and new ships.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/16870/

[Malakili]

Will pick this up.  Despite the general Civ 5 hate, and even my own occasional luke warm feelings for it, I still enjoy it and the preorder price is only 26.99, a price at which I'll certainly get my money's worth.

[Tannhauser]

I'm a Civ 5 sorta fan here.  Not going to do a day one purchase, but will hope you guys come here and tell me what you think of it.  Really glad to see religion added and new civs. Carthage!

 Just wish someone would do a good Game of Thrones mod.  There is one, the map is great, everything else is kinda bad.

The scenarios look really great as well.

[Jeff Kelly]

Would anyone be so kind and give me an executive summary on the state of Civ5. The Mac version is reasonably cheap and I'm not too fond of Civ 4 (hate the interface). Should I stick to Civ 4 or does Civ 5 offer anything worthwile?

[Tairnyn]

Based on the progress made with Fall From Heaven 2 mod for Civ IV a well designed religion option seems like it should have been in the game on day 1 rather than sold for what I would consider a premium cost for an expansion.

[naum]

Would anyone be so kind and give me an executive summary on the state of Civ5. The Mac version is reasonably cheap and I'm not too fond of Civ 4 (hate the interface). Should I stick to Civ 4 or does Civ 5 offer anything worthwile?

Game did not grab me at all, and I am a huge fan of the Civ series…

…but I felt that way about Civ 3 and Civ 4 after release too, and warmed too it, after patches and expansions addressed much of what soured me.

I will, no doubt, succumb and pluck money down for this expansion, as it looks like it might cure enough of the gameplay ills for me.

Though part of me wishes to remain steadfast and not give any more money to a game maker that makes me plop down money again just to get what should have been a polished product at initial purchase time.

[Ingmar]

Would anyone be so kind and give me an executive summary on the state of Civ5. The Mac version is reasonably cheap and I'm not too fond of Civ 4 (hate the interface). Should I stick to Civ 4 or does Civ 5 offer anything worthwile?

I like it better than 4 by a good margin but that is a minority opinion amongst f13ers.

[JWIV]

I like what 5 is trying to achieve, and that current patches have gone a long way to fixing some of the basic AI flaws and diplomacy.  Gods & Kings does look to be interesting (the religion system race could be fun), so I'll probably pick it up at some point. 

[Paelos]

I plan to reload it this June at some point for my yearly "Does it still suck?" summer gaming check.

[Sky]

Civ IV was made decent by the BtS expansion. Civ V hopefully will get the same treatment with G&K, but at the end of the day it will still be vanilla civ, where blandness rules the day. FFH2 is really the best thing to happen to the franchise since Brian Reynolds left (Civ 2/SMAC).

I bought Civ V at launch (some day I'll learn to wait) and I don't think I've really gotten my money's worth. At the current pricing, I would have. I'll be getting G&K when it hits deep discount and hope for the best.

[calapine]

I really like the game itself. Problem is it feels shallow in some parts. An example is diplomacy which is a) rather limited b) made difficult by an AI that hates you for everything or City States, which are a great new addition, but boil down to "pay gold - get benefit". Imho a good indicator of that is that peace time often feels 'boring'...there just isn't so much to do. G & K promises to fix some of these issues, i.e. diplomacy rule changes, new non-aggression treaties, city state interaction more "task" based...etc etc

To summarise, in my eyes there is nothing gravely 'wrong' with the game, but it could need some more "meat on the bones". If the expansions delivers that I will be very happy with it.

[WayAbvPar]

I would love to see the importance of city states turned WAY down. Pretty annoying that this expansion is adding in 2 game features that were IN THE LAST FUCKING VERSION OF THE GAME (and popular!). Being the good consumer I am, I will probably pre-order. I am weak.

[Daeven]

Well I guess they wanted to add depth to combat but went the wrong way by making it like the panzer general series. I'd say they should have made it more like Dominions 3... You have a stack (limited in size by logistical supply), you can deploy them as you want on the field, and then set a tactical order for them (defend, generala dvance, hold for flank, etc.). Maybe even offer a little cinematic of the then automated battle with the units participating.

Copying Guderian or PG could have worked if they went all the way: Zones of Control, Artillery rules, interdiction, logistics, morale, CAS...

But they didn't do any of that. They used the map rules, skipped the AI and forgot to include the number of units to make it work.

*shrug*

[Maledict]

I would love to see the importance of city states turned WAY down. Pretty annoying that this expansion is adding in 2 game features that were IN THE LAST FUCKING VERSION OF THE GAME (and popular!). Being the good consumer I am, I will probably pre-order. I am weak.

Welcome to civisliation? Its unfortunately the nature of the beast with the series, was the same with Civ 4 in many respects.

[Jeff Kelly]

Combat was always the most infuriatingly bad thing in Civ. Since at one point anything you did was a declaration of war (no, I won't trade mechanical infantry for calligraphy. This means WAR!) it always was such an integral part of Civ but it also always was the most awkward and broken.

Modern era units losing to bronze age units due to city fortification being such a huge bonus
No stacking so you have to kill every individual unit (which makes conquering cities take several rounds even if you fight against bowmen and phalanx units with mobile infantry and tanks)
No tactical options (flanking, stacking defense and offense units) etc.
Resource limits being way off
Dogmatic interpretation of systems of government (you should be able to go to war if another nation attacked you first even when you are a democracy)

They should integrate a few things from turn based strategy games just so that combat is not the drag it is.

Making a decent hex-based system that is fun but not to complex to understand and handle is not that hard. There are literally hundreds out there.

[Malakili]

Combat was always the most infuriatingly bad thing in Civ. Since at one point anything you did was a declaration of war (no, I won't trade mechanical infantry for calligraphy. This means WAR!) it always was such an integral part of Civ but it also always was the most awkward and broken.

Modern era units losing to bronze age units due to city fortification being such a huge bonus
No stacking so you have to kill every individual unit (which makes conquering cities take several rounds even if you fight against bowmen and phalanx units with mobile infantry and tanks)
No tactical options (flanking, stacking defense and offense units) etc.
Resource limits being way off
Dogmatic interpretation of systems of government (you should be able to go to war if another nation attacked you first even when you are a democracy)

They should integrate a few things from turn based strategy games just so that combat is not the drag it is.

Making a decent hex-based system that is fun but not to complex to understand and handle is not that hard. There are literally hundreds out there.

To be fair, I would say Civ 5 is a "decent hex based system" and the 1 unit per hex thing does solve the no tactical options thing you complain about a bit.   That being said, the AI is pretty stupid and doesn't handle it real well - although apparently they are releasing new AI with the expansion.

[Tannhauser]

At higher difficulties, the AI will team up and zerg you without warning.  Makes a hash out of Diplomacy, but keeps it interesting.

That steampunk scenario sounds really interesting, but I want Diplomacy, naval and land combat and the new stuff to work well.