Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Any Civilization veterans perusing this forum?
Civ 5 is being released in just two weeks. Thoughts?
I'm a big Civ fan. Probably my favorite non-MMORPG game and I thought Civ 4 was great. Some of the new stuff described in Civ 5 sounds interesting. Like fortified cities being able to fire directly on attacking units.
But I'm also not sure about some of the other stuff. They're saying espionage is being removed. I always liked the espionage aspect of the game, so that may bother me. We'll see.
No doubt I'm going to buy it. I'll probably play it a while and offer up my opinion after I do.
Comments
I hadn't heard about the removal of espionage, but that kind of bums me out because I often lean towards sneakiness. Although I'm very excited over the fleshed out social policy options, with the major selections and sub-trees within each, it sounds interesting. Some of what I've read about defending cities sounds interesting. I also read something about the different nations having more lasting and interesting national bonuses. Have you heard anything about religion, is it going to be returning or used as part of the social policy tree?
I loved the original Civilization, but I haven't been able to get into any other Civ game since. I haven't tried all of them, but the ones I did try, including Civ IV, just didn't grab me the way the original did. I am definitely planning to give Civ V a try though. I like the change to hexes instead of squares and the addition of neutral city-states.
I'm almost certainly going to preorder within the next few days. I love Civ and I've enjoyed all the games, albeit for different reasons. I'm particularly looking forward to trying out the new combat, but I am a bit bummed that religion got the ax. It was annoyingly powerful early in the game but I loved being called a barbaric heathen by competing religions.
I don't think espionage got canned entirely. I believe there will still be spies, they simply removed the espionage-as-a-resource like it was in Civ 4. I never bothered focusing on it much so I can't say I'll notice the change.
Avidly counting down the days to Sept 21st.
The morning sun has vanquished the horrible night.
I'm a huge civilization fan.
I'm mostly excited about the removal of the "biggest stack wins" problem of the original games. I always felt older civ games were more interesting in the earlier stages because there was so much to play for and that later stages just became unealistic stack-and-zerg-fests.
But now with one unit per hexagonal square, greater attentiion to terrain and support units...well, this game is going to be so much more interesting if they pull it off like I hope they will.
My only annoyance: when the hell are we going to get a Scottish civ!!!! Have it led by our first King MacAlpin with an alt led by Wallace or Bruce.
Cheers
Melmoth
Sleepless nights here I come.
I've played, and loved, all the Civ games including Alpha Centauri. I don't see this one being any different in that respect. I'm kind of hoping they bring back the throne room one of these days
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
I love Civilzation I, Colonization and Civ 4 and even new Colonization. Civ is just one of those games I played along Sid Meiers Pirates !, DOOM and Another World. Great times.
Talking about remakes...I would love to see a new Master of Orion, this time with all great possibilites offered by Master of Orion 2 with some new features. Master of Orion 3 was a horrible mistake in my opinion.
I'm fan of this series ever since it was first released in 1991. I liked every part of the series, including Colonization and Alpha Centauri. I think each new version is something special. Civ 5 hopefully will be no different.
REALITY CHECK
I liked Civilization 1, was veteran in Civ 2, didn't like Civ 3 and didn't play Civilization 4 (What a shame). I think I am going to wait to play 5 now instead of trying 4. Any thoughts?
TOP MMORPG GAMES
Played them all and will pick up Civ 5 in a few hours, we get them a few days after the yanks as usual. I also played the boardgame that is the base for it.
Great games, I never ride a train without a CIV on my laptop, well heroes of M & M have been running a few times too but CIV is the main game for travels.
I have been playin Civ since it came out. I even went outa my way to purchase Civ for the xbox, altho it was not up to par, the basic idea of the game was still there. Overall Civ is the best strategy game out there today. There are no other games that give you the same thrill when you crush others and dominate the world.
I've played Civilization 1, 2, and 4. I played 2 the most, and liked that one the best. Civilization 4 suffers from badly coded, single-threaded syndrome, and doesn't run as well as I'd like even on my Core i7. Europa Universalis II was better than any of the Civilization games, though.
The focus on graphics is a bit scary, but hopefully it won't cannibalize the others areas, namely gameplay.
Like everyone else in this thread, I have loved these games, but...I have to admit and ask a burning question. Who the heck is Sid Meiers and why is his name on all of these games? :P
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sid_Meier_cropped.jpg
Civ 5 is amazing...and so many modifications exist for this game...and its only been out for like a month.
I managed to get the Direct X9 version working on Linux...and then dev/shm ed some of the binaries for the game to stop the lag that occurs when you play on a HUGE map and have 10 civilizations running their turns. Of course I also play it on Windows 7. ^^
I decided to Bump this thread....
New Downloadable Content is Free adds Mongolia. ^_^
Those who enjoyed playing as Ghengis Khan finally are able to do so! *yay!!!!*
Khan's special ability: "All mounted units receive +1 movement bonus. All units receive +30% Strength against all city-states and their units.
They are also the first civilization released which gets a "unique" great person as a unit which rivals the power of Chinese Great Generals with faster movement rates and healing bonuses. The mounted "unique" unit allows players to attack first and move second if they wish. It has higher movement, better attack power and possibly the game's first attempt at a "hit and run" unit.
In testing, Mongolia gets nothing Early-Game until they get their Unique mount that is useful until the end of Mid-Game. It starts off weaker than Japan, but stronger than Germany until midgame comes where Japan loses a slight edge and mongolian players go ranged attack. Mongolia is also balanced against Russia and China as well.
I found Mongolia really sucks at difficulty level 1 - 3, but really shines at difficulty levels 4 - 6. Just don't run my first mistake of trying to play a joke and win a Cultural Win. You'll be happy but feel depressed at not capturing city-states and razing your enemies.
Play to conquer the world and it doesn't disappoint...and you'll need to since Mongolia gets no special building unlike previous games.
Everyone can build Horsemen which can hit and run. Doing that is actually the common approach to all higher difficulty level games. Horsemen rush is even considered borderline overpowered, or an exploit. As the AI can't defend well against it.
So for them to take an argueably imbalanced unit and introduce a strengthened version of it into the game is ballsy at least.
What I do at higher difficulty levels is that I pretty much play as the Ottaman empire on a Archipelago map. I pretty much take control of pirate ships and target all enemy groups at a distant near their capital city. I then make sure one group has Amphibius ability. I do what I can to get Navigation to make Frigates with a nice stash of Iron.
The other way to win is to pick Japan and make horsemen. Horsemen are overpowered at times, but the Japanese ability is closest to a cheat ability (All units fight at full strength regardless damage sustained) and it becomes pretty easy to win early on. ^_^
I kinda like that different civs have very powerful units at a given time. I've had a game where I succumbed to the Japanese Samurai. Granted I was on a stretch of land and a twofront war with Germany and Arabs and Egyptians on the other side. But the Samurai were the ones who got through and took my capital, and I had lost. I've had another game where my expanding Empire suddenly came up against English Longbowmen, and they turned my campaign from offensive into a defensive one.
Both of these games are amongst the games I recall and can distinguish from the other games. I don't really play to abuse a unit power myself, all games become the same if you do. You bottleneck and fence up and click next turn till victory, instead of letting the game evolve and become unique.
The first major achievement I got in the game was "master of the universe" award.
In fact, I like playing a lot as Random Civilizations. It forces me to go with the flow instead of having some premade plan on how to win. Lately I've been having fun with City-States turning puppet ^^.
My only complaint to the game is the lack of structures to help island-cities. You can get Gold and Food from them but little hammers :'(
I have this game, but I cant get into turn base. Just too slow for me
I've been playing Civ since the series began though I missed the last few up until Revolutions, I'm kindof non commital about the removal of espionage since I used it little to none but I'm sure they'll make a great game none the less.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
There are a lot of modfiications. I've tried a lot of them.
I was annoyed at first that they removed religion and espionage. I then thought all the times i was forced to build Religious buildings just to prevent another civilization from doing the very same thing. I hated the entire -3 diplomatic penalty if you were of a different religion than another civiliation, and a point reached where either you will beat other civilization to the apostlic palace construction, or be forced into going as "no religion" and suffering a penalty with all other civs in the game just to not lost to a diplomatic victory. Espionage had too much sabotage....while corporations always went either way. I became happy I could spend more time playing the game and less time having to counter for everything else all other civs did. Religion and Espionage turned the game into a Defensive (or Offensive Game) where once you pick your way you had to stick with it to the very end or lose.
What I like about Civilization V is that the base game is actually very good. Civilization III and IV base games were not as great. In fact once expansions were released, players forgot about the base game entirely. The Civ V base game is a of high quality and has a lot of potential to expand it in many directions.
The trick is now on how will Firaxis formally expand the game as to not ruin it.
I'm disapointed in Civ 5. The denounce system is bunk. I hand over captured citizens to a freindly nation and they denounce me. Once one country denounces me at least half to most of the rest automatically denounce you. There are quite a few other beefs I have with the game but I hope that they are still working on fixing this game. Also, they lied about tanks and planes not being able to be taken out by spearmen and archers. Whenever you attack you always lose 1 hp no matter what. They also have the animation for archers shooting at stealth fighters. Not to happy with Civ 5. This game does have some pros to it like not being able to stack units I thought that was pretty cool instead of being able to stack 30 units in the same spot and then attacking over and over now you have to plan how to move troops across the board. Overall this game is like a kick in the choad.
In America I have bad teeth. If I lived in England my teeth would be perfect.
A new patch was released very recently and Polynesian Civilization DLC was released as well.
Polynesian Civilization gives you the leader "Kamehameha I" with a very POWERFUL ability. From turn 1, all units can embark and enter Ocean tiles. This gives them the advantage in any archipelago map, They can build Moai statues which increase cultire. I have played twice as them so far and my judgements on Hawaii itself (yes, Honolulu is the first city built) are as follows:
1) Moai statues are ok at first, But you are dependent on building many of them to make them work.
2) You want a lot of triremes at first and dominate the waters and exploire the world...and then settle as many islands as possible. In short, you want Rapid Expansion..
3) You want a web of moai statues made for Combat Bonus to those nearby.
Its true you can go the cultural route thanks to the moai statues, but the science way is a little better in my opinion. The moai statues give combat bonus to units near them or on them, so science is better for military units. Going culture makes you lose your advantage too....Its actually better to use Great Artists for the +6 culture vs the +1 culture on the statues unless you plan on replacing all your coastal trading posts with moai statues when you invent flight.
The patch made Aztecs powerful due to the combination of the new "Landed elite" stacking with Floating Gardens. I've literally have had Populations of 45 - 50 due to setting it to "food priority." The +4 food and +30% food combined with an Aquaduct (just added in patch) and granary + Maritime city states easilly can have four cities all break 40 population each.