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

[dusematic]

Civ 5 sucks.  If you were a fan of Civ 3 or Civ 4, you may still like Civ 5 but it won't be because you liked its predecessors.  It also lacks the "just one more turn" feel for me.

[Merusk]

I miss getting random techs when you crush an enemy. Be it capital or any city.  Really hurts you in the higher difficulties when you're so far behind on tech and you can't pillage your way up.

Unless I'd somehow managed to stay ahead of everyone, but I doubt that.

[Malakili]

Civ 5 sucks.  If you were a fan of Civ 3 or Civ 4, you may still like Civ 5 but it won't be because you liked its predecessors.  It also lacks the "just one more turn" feel for me.

It sort of has that one more turn feel for me, but it doesn't have that one more GAME feel.  In Civ 4 when I finished a game I could hardly wait to start a new one. In Civ 5 by the time I finish a game I feel like I need a break from it for a month.

[dusematic]

Civ 5 sucks.  If you were a fan of Civ 3 or Civ 4, you may still like Civ 5 but it won't be because you liked its predecessors.  It also lacks the "just one more turn" feel for me.

It sort of has that one more turn feel for me, but it doesn't have that one more GAME feel.  In Civ 4 when I finished a game I could hardly wait to start a new one. In Civ 5 by the time I finish a game I feel like I need a break from it for a month.

Fair enough.  Just curious, did you play much of the earlier Civs?  Or are you coming at this game relatively fresh eyed?

[Malakili]

Civ 5 sucks.  If you were a fan of Civ 3 or Civ 4, you may still like Civ 5 but it won't be because you liked its predecessors.  It also lacks the "just one more turn" feel for me.

It sort of has that one more turn feel for me, but it doesn't have that one more GAME feel.  In Civ 4 when I finished a game I could hardly wait to start a new one. In Civ 5 by the time I finish a game I feel like I need a break from it for a month.

Fair enough.  Just curious, did you play much of the earlier Civs?  Or are you coming at this game relatively fresh eyed?

I played the bejesus out of Civ 2 when it was new, skipped Civ 3, and played a fair amount of Civ 4, though nowhere near as seriously as you and some of the others around here did.\

Edited to add: I'd probably say Civ 2 is my favorite Civ, but I'm probably just dating myself and it might just be nostalgia talking.

[Strazos]

I somehow found a rocket launcher vehicle...while still in the Bronze age or something...it was pretty silly.

[Murgos]

I somehow found a rocket launcher vehicle...while still in the Bronze age or something...it was pretty silly.

I've had that happen in Civ Rev, in Civ V the most that's happened is my warriors got upgraded to spearmen.

[Sheepherder]

I somehow found a rocket launcher vehicle...while still in the Bronze age or something...it was pretty silly.

  ?

[Strazos]

No, I think I got a catapult or something upgraded to...something like this:

[Murgos]

I guess I never thought to have a catapult discover a ruin.  By the time I've got catapults my scouts or warriors have already pillaged everything.

[Amaron]

Civ 5 sucks.  If you were a fan of Civ 3 or Civ 4, you may still like Civ 5 but it won't be because you liked its predecessors.  It also lacks the "just one more turn" feel for me.

It was just the opposite for me and I've been a huge fan since 1.  No matter how many times I tried 4 (never tried FFH) I could never even finish a game with it.    Every time a new expansion came out I'd try it again.    In the end I think Civ4 failed to deliver a style that the normal Civ player could enjoy.  The huge popularity of Civ 5 says they successfully fixed that at least.   Considering how hard "make it fun" is I think that's actually fairly impressive.

[Tannhauser]

I played the hell out of Civ 5 and never finished a game.  It just bogs down in tedium in the later stages.  I have finished several Civ 4 games.  FWIW.

Civ 5 is too money-focused and actually discouraged building up your cities.  Diplomacy was almost completely broken.  I hope they keep hexes, one unit per, and re-add religion to the next one.  Civ 5 had some good stuff, it was just another half-baked game rushed out of the door.  It tarnished the franchise.   Tarnished I say!

[Murgos]

Civ 5 is too money-focused and actually discouraged building up your cities. 

This is sort of fixed.  A large city is still a money and unhappiness hole BUT, it's more than capable of producing more money and happiness than it uses.  You do have to be fairly active in citizen management and be on a good location though.

[dusematic]

Civ 5 sucks.  If you were a fan of Civ 3 or Civ 4, you may still like Civ 5 but it won't be because you liked its predecessors.  It also lacks the "just one more turn" feel for me.

It was just the opposite for me and I've been a huge fan since 1.  No matter how many times I tried 4 (never tried FFH) I could never even finish a game with it.    Every time a new expansion came out I'd try it again.    In the end I think Civ4 failed to deliver a style that the normal Civ player could enjoy.  The huge popularity of Civ 5 says they successfully fixed that at least.   Considering how hard "make it fun" is I think that's actually fairly impressive.

Basically I said that if you were a big fan of Civ 3/4 then that fanaticism wouldn't carry over to Civ 5 (i.e. you might still like Civ 5 but it would be on its own merits), which seems to be the case with you.  You didn't like Civ4 4 but you do like Civ 5.  Whereas, I liked Civs 1-4 and dislike Civ 5.

[naum]

Basically I said that if you were a big fan of Civ 3/4 then that fanaticism wouldn't carry over to Civ 5 (i.e. you might still like Civ 5 but it would be on its own merits), which seems to be the case with you.  You didn't like Civ4 4 but you do like Civ 5.  Whereas, I liked Civs 1-4 and dislike Civ 5.

I want to like Civ 5.

I remember being extremely disappointed with Civ 3, but a year later, patches remedied a great bit of what was wrong with the gameplay. Ditto for Civ 4.

Civ 5 looks pretty, and I was all for move to hexes, but thus far, it really lacks that "one more turn" vibe and seems more on par with a game like Spore.

Is there an upcoming patch that will transform my indifference?

[Maledict]

There's already been one huge patch that changed a lot of the game (made buildings much more valuable, increased bonus of terrain stuff, smarter AI, more emphasis on deeper city building rather than lots of tiny cities). The's another patch coming soon with some more good changes in it. If you played at launch, the game is a lot better now.

Personally, I've enjoyed (and played to death) every civ game. They all start off broken when released and improve through patches and expansions, and civ 5 is no different. I really enjoyed what they tried to do to the game and still play it occasionally. They couldn't just make civ that was 'more' civ 4, and they used the opportunity to remove some stuff that ultimately didn't work out. (controversially - religions, which seemed great and ultimately just became a 'join me or be fucked' at the higher difficulty levels).

[Sky]

Hey, Kael fixed religions, too. 

Firaxis not hiring him is  You have a guy who takes your busted-up vanilla game and makes it work in more ways than you imagined and gives it a ton of personality, flavor and replayability. And you let him get hired at STARDOCK, ffs. Along with your Civ V bigwig.

[Maledict]

I have to be honest - I don't rate FFH2 at all, and I doubt you'll find someone alive who played more Master of Magic than me. Whilst it had some clever ideas, it was hugely overburdened and needed excessive pruning to be a good game. You could cut half the races and concepts out of the game and you'd have a much better product.

I look forward with interest to see how the author can fix Elemental, because he obviously has huge talent, but I don't rate FFH2 like a lot of folks here do.

[Reg]

It's just Sky really. Nobody else is quite the Kael fan boy he is heh.

[Teleku]

I've played the hell out of every civ, and I don't think I've ever actually finished a game.   

[Sky]

I have to be honest - I don't rate FFH2 at all, and I doubt you'll find someone alive who played more Master of Magic than me. Whilst it had some clever ideas, it was hugely overburdened and needed excessive pruning to be a good game. You could cut half the races and concepts out of the game and you'd have a much better product.

I look forward with interest to see how the author can fix Elemental, because he obviously has huge talent, but I don't rate FFH2 like a lot of folks here do.

Ooh, yeah. Streamlining is working so well for the state of AAA games.

[Amaron]

Basically I said that if you were a big fan of Civ 3/4 then that fanaticism wouldn't carry over to Civ 5 (i.e. you might still like Civ 5 but it would be on its own merits), which seems to be the case with you.  You didn't like Civ4 4 but you do like Civ 5.

I do like Civ 4 though.  I just couldn't finish any games in it.  I was speaking specifically about the "one more turn" thing.   I also basically agree Civ 4 is a superior product.   It's sort of a crime that we have to wait for Civ 5 to be patched up to that level.   When it is though it will clearly be the best Civ ever.

[Maledict]

I have to be honest - I don't rate FFH2 at all, and I doubt you'll find someone alive who played more Master of Magic than me. Whilst it had some clever ideas, it was hugely overburdened and needed excessive pruning to be a good game. You could cut half the races and concepts out of the game and you'd have a much better product.

I look forward with interest to see how the author can fix Elemental, because he obviously has huge talent, but I don't rate FFH2 like a lot of folks here do.

Ooh, yeah. Streamlining is working so well for the state of AAA games.

You mean like Resident Evil 4 or Mass Effect 2? ;-)

There's nothing wrong with having grand sweeping designs, but creativity needs some limits, and FFH2 suffers very much from the feeling the author threw everything he'd ever read in a fantasy book into the mix, and then the kitchen sink. Rather than go for huge breadth in his choices, I think it would have been a superior game had he gone for depth instead. Master of Magic only had 5 spell schools, but far more depth  than the multitude in FFH2. Combine the huge array of options (some that, due to the engine limitations are very impractical to use) with lore that doesn't hold well together and I'm left feeling he would have been better off taking a scalpel to some of the choices.

(one of the things that always strikes me about FFH2 is that it's much more fun to read than play. Often I feel the players are projecting a lot into the game that's never actually there when I play it. If you can work with that then more power to you - it's obvious a lot of folks do love what's  he's done!)

Streamlining isn't always bad. Some of the best games made come from taking existing concepts and stripping them down to the good stuff, or developing from a complicated base to a much simpler game. Or heck, just being outright simple to start with!

[Merusk]

Enjoy FFH for what it is.

MOM had the advantage of being written from the ground-up with separate spell research and construction (unit and building) paths.  They didn't interact at all so you could focus one or the other.  Also, MOM, as you mention, let you min/ max your spell schools and focus on being "mage lord" "warlordr" or a hybrid of either.

 FFH had to work within the Civ guidelines of Tech research and building being tied.  It also couldn't let you pick "I'm going to be a mentalist" because the architecture simply wasn't there.  Even given that, Kael DID manage to pull-off mana types and some semblance of mage specialization.  

There was no way in hell he was going to be able to do more than "x promotions gives you y spell" without simply building a game from scratch.

In fact, I'd call FFH a "streamlined", modern MoM.   I'm not the only one of that opinion, considering someone went so far as to create a custom load screen for Kael that called it Master of Magic 2.

Now, if you didn't get that feel in the game, then you're either too busy comparing it to MoM - which we're never going to get a true sequel to - or haven't taken the time to learn it.  It does take a few focused games with one race just to get the hang of things.  Once you do, however, it's probably the best Magic TBS since MoM itself.

[Tebonas]

It's just Sky really. Nobody else is quite the Kael fan boy he is heh.

Thats not entirely true. I'm just not as outspoken about it because Sky says everything about it thats worth knowing  

The learning curve IS steep in this game, and usually the story in your head is better than the actual gameplay. But it certainly is the only Strategy game I would take on the proverbial island. That is, currently the Master of Mana modmod because it streamlined magic and made it both less of a hassle and feel more like Master of Magic.

[Sky]

I guess part of it is knowing the game well. I don't feel there are too many civs, I really like the variety that gives a game. Like in my current game where I'm set up on a continent with Clan of Embers and Lanun. I know I can't slack on army OR navy, because they'll both be powerful in those respective areas. And that Lanun can be dealt with but Sheelba is a war-mongering bitch. And after exploring a bit, I see that it's a mostly evil world, so there's not much help for me and I feed all my tech to Bannor or whoever it was on the other side of the world, so he can fend of the hordes (keep them busy and off me). In turn, he's now gifting me techs.

But as Merusk points out, you're looking at a mod, not a full game. A mod that influenced a lot of the development of the expansion that made Civ 4 a good game, btw (BtS). I like Age of Wonders, but it's pretty limited when you throw in Civ4's empire building and random worlds.

I like complexity in a game I love. I hate it in a game I'm just cruising through. I like the Civ line of games, and Kael has given me one worth spending the time to get to know. And honestly, it's pretty simple once you get the basics down, most civs are pretty simple but bring their own way of playing. You trade a bit of flexibility for flavor, I again agree with Merusk that it's pretty streamlined. And it works well together. The whole Clan of Embers/barbarian angle is a great example, imo. And the game events like Orthus or the dragon. I can't think of a civ I'd remove without reducing the overall synergy of gameplay, each has a pretty cool mechanic they bring to the table and has to be played or defended against differently.

As far as the story, yes I have a good imagination. But not good enough to play an ancient DOS game and think it's better than a modern(ish) empire builder.

(I haven't gotten around to Orbus or MoM mods yet)

Anyway - let's wrap up this tangent or take it to the FFH2 thread. Bottom line is Civ V needs an FFH2 to redeem itself in my book. And to reiterate, love FFH2 or hate it, the things Kael (and friends) twisted that game engine to be able to pull off were nothing short of great and it's a damned shame Firaxis didn't snap up their best developer. I would sooooo love an updated FFH3 in Civ V's great UI.

[Ingmar]

Maybe he wouldn't go to a company that wouldn't let him indulge his shitty fiction-writing. 

[Reg]

Hah, there's only room for one shitty fiction writer at Stardock I guess.

[pxib]

I liked Alpha Centauri more than I liked any of the later Civ titles.

[Paelos]

I liked Alpha Centauri more than I liked any of the later Civ titles.

We all did. There's nothing to be done for it though. They never bothered updating THAT game to the umpteenth degree.

[rk47]

Maybe he wouldn't go to a company that wouldn't let him indulge his shitty fiction-writing. 

Yeah, agreed. He should try Bioware. I heard they make good fictions there. A group of sacrificing Wardens, Blood-dealing mages and evil that rises every few centuries. Very original, grim and dark. I like it.

[Ingmar]

Maybe he wouldn't go to a company that wouldn't let him indulge his shitty fiction-writing. 

Yeah, agreed. He should try Bioware. I heard they make good fictions there. A group of sacrificing Wardens, Blood-dealing mages and evil that rises every few centuries. Very original, grim and dark. I like it.

I can only assume you didn't try any of the FFH2 scenarios accompanied by his short stories.

[Sky]

Hell, I haven't done that.

[rk47]

Hell, I haven't done that.

Who would want to do that? The moment I realized the tech trees are locked and the sand box elements are removed, it was completely ignored. My first scenario campaign lasted 5 seconds before I head back to main menu and roll another Bannor in Earth - Russia HUGE map. FOR RIGHTEOUS FURY!

[Tebonas]

Yeah, those Scenarios are not why you play Fall From Heaven. I tried the Lanun one (capture Animals for the Balseraphs) and when I felt like in a bad MMO (wait for the game to spawn the right Animals so you can capture them before something else happens to them) I quit that part and never looked back.