Civilization V

oh man. best news ever. if you guys want something to hold you over, check out the rise of mankind mod for civ4 BTS. i'm about 60 hours into a game right now, and it is basically like a brand new game, and as polished as a good expansion.
 
Man, I can't wait. There goes all of my free time...

ihmcguinness said:
oh man. best news ever. if you guys want something to hold you over, check out the rise of mankind mod for civ4 BTS. i'm about 60 hours into a game right now, and it is basically like a brand new game, and as polished as a good expansion.
Click to expand...

Just checked it out - wow, it looks nice.
 
Maybe it's just not my type of game but I remember playing Civ4 and basically it felt like I was installing a program... with long wait periods while someone on the other end tells me it's okay to press "Next".
 
Term-X said:
Maybe it's just not my type of game but I remember playing Civ4 and basically it felt like I was installing a program... with long wait periods while someone on the other end tells me it's okay to press "Next".
Click to expand...

Mmmhm, I don't find it any fun, either. Concept is great and all, but the turn based gameplay I think really spoils it.
 
Am I the only one who looks at the hexagonal tiles and immediately thought it was a downgrade? I mean we effectively had octagonal tiles before. I guess the hexagonal tiles will make it easier to block off an advancing army, but it just seems like a sidestep/gimmick at best.
 
Erasmus354 said:
Am I the only one who looks at the hexagonal tiles and immediately thought it was a downgrade? I mean we effectively had octagonal tiles before. I guess the hexagonal tiles will make it easier to block off an advancing army, but it just seems like a sidestep/gimmick at best.
Click to expand...

hexagon tiles would be an upgrade as it provides more possible movement routes.
note really seeing how it would be any easier to block off an army.
 
JoNo216 said:
hexagon tiles would be an upgrade as it provides more possible movement routes.
note really seeing how it would be any easier to block off an army.
Click to expand...

His thought is that this is a downgrade since you can only move in 6 directions (vs. the 8 you could with Civ IV by being able to move to any adjacent square tile.)
 
I'm pretty excited for this - I've lost many a night playing CIV...well, all of them.

I just wish there were a logical way to stop the ancient units from killing modern units. There should be no way for a trireme to sink a battleship or an archer to kill mechanized infantry.
 
While I agree with the sentiment in principle, UberSwank, I don't see the developers completely negating the chance of it happening for game balance. However, it should be a heckuvalot rarer than we've seen in past Civ games.
 
I wonder if Civ V will fix the error in all previous versions in which it is thought that cities invented religion, rather than the other way around:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/233844

The very short summary: they found a religious temple 7,000 years older than the Great Pyramids. That predates villages, pottery, domesticated animals, and agriculture.
 
evilsofa said:
I wonder if Civ V will fix the error in all previous versions in which it is thought that cities invented religion, rather than the other way around:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/233844

The very short summary: they found a religious temple 7,000 years older than the Great Pyramids. That predates villages, pottery, domesticated animals, and agriculture.
Click to expand...

that was a great article..i recently watched some vids on youtube talking about 'civilizations' older than egypt..some guy even mentioned 30 thousand years ago as a possibility..and that really messes up all the current science. i heard a long time ago that the sphinx was basically built by another civilization and that the pharohs just 'modified' it to their culture.

anyway, thanks for posting the article.
 
as for the killing of tanks by archers, you'll notice that that really doesn't happen in CIV4, at least not at the non-ridiculously-easy levels. But if a tank is down to like 1/40 health, and and archer is at full health (3), I think it should win. Think about it. A tank that's got almost no health left would have no tracks left, be full of holes, and, in point of fact, the tank would probably be gone, and it would just be the crew. if they're all beaten up and out of ammo, a regiment of archers would easily kill them.
 
ihmcguinness said:
as for the killing of tanks by archers, you'll notice that that really doesn't happen in CIV4, at least not at the non-ridiculously-easy levels. But if a tank is down to like 1/40 health, and and archer is at full health (3), I think it should win. Think about it. A tank that's got almost no health left would have no tracks left, be full of holes, and, in point of fact, the tank would probably be gone, and it would just be the crew. if they're all beaten up and out of ammo, a regiment of archers would easily kill them.
Click to expand...

haha, thats exactly how I use to justify it in my mind too... like a helicopter that had low health would basically be shot down a la black hawk down with just the injured crew with pistols holding out :)

ahh civ rules
 
Erasmus354 said:
Am I the only one who looks at the hexagonal tiles and immediately thought it was a downgrade? I mean we effectively had octagonal tiles before. I guess the hexagonal tiles will make it easier to block off an advancing army, but it just seems like a sidestep/gimmick at best.
Click to expand...

Hex tiles mean 2 less sides for my unprotected settlers to get raped by bears. lol. It looks like it allows for things to be more circular and that's about it.
 
Allowing 8 directions on a square grid is NOT octagonal movement. On a square grid that allows diagonal movement, the diagonal movements are longer than the non-diagonal movements. On a hexagonal grid, all 6 directions of movement are equal in distance. The measurement of movement is a big freaking deal in Civ games. You have to admit that you always used diagonal movement when possible on a square grid because it was advantageous over non-diagonal movement.

By the way, you don't and won't see octagonal maps because they don't tessellate perfectly like square and hex maps. You need to insert squares.
 
ihmcguinness said:
as for the killing of tanks by archers, you'll notice that that really doesn't happen in CIV4, at least not at the non-ridiculously-easy levels. But if a tank is down to like 1/40 health, and and archer is at full health (3), I think it should win. Think about it. A tank that's got almost no health left would have no tracks left, be full of holes, and, in point of fact, the tank would probably be gone, and it would just be the crew. if they're all beaten up and out of ammo, a regiment of archers would easily kill them.
Click to expand...

Yup

That about covers it. Once in a while it's possible you see a fortified longbowman in a city with walls and a castle beat something silly, but that's about it. I figure they're probably pouring boiling oil on the tank or something.
 
LHC as a new modern wonder. :D


Allows: flying cars, trips to Mars, intergalactic space battles and antimatter weaponry.

Take that, archer.
 
evilsofa said:
Allowing 8 directions on a square grid is NOT octagonal movement. On a square grid that allows diagonal movement, the diagonal movements are longer than the non-diagonal movements. On a hexagonal grid, all 6 directions of movement are equal in distance. The measurement of movement is a big freaking deal in Civ games. You have to admit that you always used diagonal movement when possible on a square grid because it was advantageous over non-diagonal movement.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Especially when exploring early on in the game.
 
evilsofa said:
Allowing 8 directions on a square grid is NOT octagonal movement. On a square grid that allows diagonal movement, the diagonal movements are longer than the non-diagonal movements. On a hexagonal grid, all 6 directions of movement are equal in distance. The measurement of movement is a big freaking deal in Civ games. You have to admit that you always used diagonal movement when possible on a square grid because it was advantageous over non-diagonal movement.
Click to expand...

Well said. The hex 'board' has always been my favorite since playing Panzer General and it's a nice touch.

Ranged units will be a big game changer. Hopefully they have something like Panzer General's reinforcing units (arty for ground, aa for air).

My major gripe with Civ IV is that time moved quickly enough (on the settings I played, which were generally biggest world and slowest time) that I wound up with too many ancient units in modern times. I agree that a squad of archers could ambush and take out a tank crew--but in real terms there should be no squad of archers in the first place (or else the empire with archers is backwards and about to be obliterated.)

Civilizations should be relatively homogenous and to that end, I hope to see an option for forced upgrade/retirement for obsolescent units, with a difference of no more than two total 'eras' in a single civilization.

I'd also like to be able to limit games to a single era (eg ancient only). I don't remember if Civ IV had an option like that.
 
Some new info:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=355764

About 50 persons are currently working on the game, which has been in development for over two years, but is now reaching the final phases.

City states:
These are small, AI-controlled civilizations. They never grow big and doesn´t desire to win. The player must choose if he is to be friendly, indifferent or hostile towards a city state. The attitude you has towards a particular city state will have a big effect on diplomacy. If for example your units is approaching a city state that have friendly relations with another civilization, he will warn you, and if you ignore them, there will be consequences.

Barbarians:
The barbarians originate from a barbarian city and will get more advanced units later in the game. You need to wipe out all barbarian cities to get rid of the barbarian hordes.

City expansion:
Borders does no longer expand in large areas, but one hex at a time. Remote hexes like marshes, forests and mountains will be harder to acquire.

Economy:
You can invest money in your neighboring hexagons, for example trying to acquire an important resource before your opponent.

Research:
You can also sign a research-deal with another civilization. This way, both civs will cooperate to reach the new technology and both will gain it when the discovery is made. This was included to encourage cooperation between civilizations.

Diplomacy:
The civilizations will have an all-new advanced AI. All opponents will have fixed characteristics. Based on this unique personality, every AI-player will have their own agenda, which the AI will use to plan how to best play to win the game. But there will also be a certain randomness to avoid having the AI be too
Click to expand...


http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=355763


Tech trading is abolished.

Alliances give special boni (per example the possibility for a quicker research of a technology)

Cut-out of religions as known in Civ 4 confirmed

Cities can grow bigger than in former versions of the civ series as they there are 3 tiles for a city in every direction to be worked on.

New troops must leave a city at once, as there is only one unit per tile

Distance fighters (archers, artillery and so on) can shoot over the front units, lakes and other tiles

One philosophy is to form front lines for battles far away from the cities.
Click to expand...


http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=355773


Leaders/Civs
German leader: Otto von Bismark
China leader: Wu Zeitein/Zetein
American leader: Washington
Japanese leader: Oba Nobunaga
Arabian leader: Harun al-Rashid
Other confirmed leaders mentioned in the article (Genghis Khan, Caesar, Napoleon, Gandhi)

Units
Basic military units move two tiles in combat instead of one.
Click to expand...
 
I'm really curious to see how they plan to deal with city defense if there can only be one unit per tile, unless you can have a stack inside cities. But judging that new troops have to leave a city at once it doesn't seem likely. I hope they don't dumb down religions too much either, I quite liked how they were implemented in Civ IV. I can't wait to see some videos or a demo to really see first hand how all of these changes are going to be handled. Part of me is leery on a lot of these changes but I think it's more important for CiV to be an entirely new game rather than just Civ 4.5.
 
i think 1 unit per tile is a great idea....

having entire armies inside of cities isn't realistic, as in real life *most* major battles and such take place outside or near them, and usually once those pivotal outside battles are resolved, the fate of the cities are essentially sealed with them...
 
I guess that means you would have to defend the country side so to speak, it seems they want to make the game more tactical in terms of combat where as before combat involve you have the correct types of units for every contingency.
 
Cool beans, that sounds like terrain influence on battles will become more subtle.
 
Combat changes sound good, no more getting 2 stacks of 15+ units each, and running people over with the Stack Of Doom. Civ 3 was even worse then 4 in that regard.

Civ 4 is to me the top of the 'Classic' style civ, and there was a large need to improve things in the next version of civ, and change things, other then being a dx 10/11 reskin of it in 5.
 
kioras said:
Combat changes sound good, no more getting 2 stacks of 15+ units each, and running people over with the Stack Of Doom. Civ 3 was even worse then 4 in that regard.

Civ 4 is to me the top of the 'Classic' style civ, and there was a large need to improve things in the next version of civ, and change things, other then being a dx 10/11 reskin of it in 5.
Click to expand...

I agree that Civ 4 was pretty much perfect for what it tried to be. There really would have been no need for a new game if there wasn't going to be very significant changes.
 
Yeah, they made strides on the stack of doom thing on civ4, but still, it just became tons of catapults + stack of doom, to some extent.
 
kioras said:
Combat changes sound good, no more getting 2 stacks of 15+ units each, and running people over with the Stack Of Doom. Civ 3 was even worse then 4 in that regard.

Civ 4 is to me the top of the 'Classic' style civ, and there was a large need to improve things in the next version of civ, and change things, other then being a dx 10/11 reskin of it in 5.
Click to expand...

exactly, firaxis knows what its doing, and barring any unforeseen stupidity, this will probably end up being 1 of only 2 game purchases i make this year...
 
Are the civ series similar to the age of empire series? AOE has been my favorite RTS type game since forever. I'm looking to play more like it. I never really got into supcom
 
mobusta1 said:
Are the civ series similar to the age of empire series? AOE has been my favorite RTS type game since forever. I'm looking to play more like it. I never really got into supcom
Click to expand...

Similar in the same way that Lord Of The Rings is similar to Warcraft. The AOE series is Microsoft's ripoff of the Civ series. You should definitely try Civ 4. The Civ 4 Complete Edition is on amazon for $36, and be aware of the CivFanatics web site.
 
AOE is not a rip off of civ.. my god they arnt even in the same genre of game.
 
Only one unit per tile will make movement difficult, unless you can pass over a unit on the way to your final tile. Even then, movement points will be a big deal - getting stuck with nowhere to go because you can't get past a nearby unit.
 
Forceman said:
Only one unit per tile will make movement difficult, unless you can pass over a unit on the way to your final tile. Even then, movement points will be a big deal - getting stuck with nowhere to go because you can't get past a nearby unit.
Click to expand...

Yes it will be interesting to see how they handle this. I'm guess you can pass through another unit but not directly land on an already occupied space? Otherwise, the maps need to be generated in a way to ensure there aren't any serious choke points.
 
Preview:
http://pc.ign.com/articles/107/1075587p3.html


Some fans feared that the leaner (and loonier) style that Civ displayed on the consoles might bleed over into subsequent PC sequels. Based on the pre-alpha version we saw, that doesn't seem to be the case. There's a fine line between making a game easier and making it easier to play, of course, but Firaxis is committed to maintaining the depth the fans have come to expect.
Click to expand...

Now when an invading army enters your territory, you'll want to send your spearmen and warriors and swordsmen out to fight them in the fields around your towns. Cities will automatically defend themselves now, and can benefit from increased defense based on certain structures or technologies, so you don't necessarily need to garrison a unit for defense but you can if you want to.
Click to expand...

In another battle, a small group of powerful units were able to hold off a much larger attacking army in a narrow mountain pass.
Click to expand...

Fortunately, the game will allow adjacent allied units to swap positions, so you can keep fresh troops engaged with the enemy and rescue your ranged units from contact ith melee fighters.
Click to expand...

A lot of effort is being made to ensure that the AI in Civilization V behaves in a way that makes sense. As we watched a test game play out in front of us, AI programmer Ed Beach explained the way the AI uses subsystems to create and execute its strategies. At the lowest level, the tactical AI uses the forces at hand to win a battle on a local scale. One step up from that, the operational AI picks which battles to fight and makes sure that the necessary forces are available. Moving even higher, the strategic AI manages the empire as a whole, focusing on where to build cities and what to do with them.

At the top of the ladder is the grand strategic AI, which decides how to win the game. If the grand strategic AI decides to go for a conquest victory, the strategic AI will build the infrastructure needed to wage war and the operational and tactical AIs will choose and fight the battles. That way the tactical AI won't be fighting battles merely for the sake of fighting battles, but because those battles are relevant in the grand strategic AI's big picture. In the case of the conquest victory, the AI will be aiming to capture the other civ's capitals, which is all that's needed for a military victory this time.
Click to expand...
 
DennisK4 said:
Preview:
http://pc.ign.com/articles/107/1075587p3.html
Click to expand...

very nice preview, thanks!

from what I can tell they aren't dumbing down the game at all, on the contrary, they are just eliminating the seriously unrealistic stack of doom, culture bombs, and other such annoyances, while making other things even more detailed (the thing that really caught my eye was that a resource such as iron would only permit, say 5 units to be produced from it before you had to find another mine).

just seems really, really excellent, as long as firaxis makes the enemy AI a bit better, this will be the game of the year....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top