I agree with Hans, I love the road system. It’s a definite improvement in a list of new systems which could be argued one way or the other.

So you ignore not only the demo but also most reviews and 100 pages of detailed discussions in favor of nitpicks from one stupid blog post? Were you just looking for an excuse not to buy the game…?

Obviously.

The new systems aren’t perfect, but they are fun and interesting enough to make me not care. They also an improvement over previous systems. After 50 hours of playing, I don’t get the hate.

His points about balance are quite right though, and need to be addressed over the long term. Factions like the Ottomans and English are really at a slight disadvantage, and factions like Greece that have big bonuses to City State diplo are given a significant boost…

Kael, from what you’ve seen, is it possible to add more than one trait per Civ?

Road spam in previous Civs may have been ugly, and vaguely annoying to build, but I don’t see how it was “gamey.” Roads are a useful improvement that humans create any place where there are people or industry; look at any map. If anything, making it so you don’t build them on every tile you work is gamey. Not that gamey is necessarily bad, mind you, just that the world we actually live in is crawling with road spam.

Not really “gamey”, merely an adjustment of scale. Civ was always a grand strategy game mixed with tactical combat on the same map, so it does make sense that the roads are on a tactical scale, too – meaning there’s lots of space without roads around them.

To hell with balance. There’s nothing that says every faction has to be equal to every other one.

I’ve been trying a warmongering game where once I start conquering and happiness becomes a problem, I ignore it, and plunge into unhappiness. It’s working ok.

I’m playing as France, on Emperor difficulty, standard size archipelago map.
As usual, my first war began from trying to save a city state. Genoa was having some trouble with Greece on the island next door. But by the time I had called back my scouting spearmen and sent them over, Genoa had already fallen. So my rescue force was now on a liberation mission. Greece’s Sparta was closer, on a little outcrop two tiles from a similar outcrop on my island, so I decided to conquer that first. My entire landing part was dead the turn after they disembarked.

I reached archery not long after that, positioned an archer on that little outcrop, and he began shooting at Sparta every turn. I prepared another group of spearmen units to storm the beaches once the city was weakened. Again, my forces were crushed immediately after landing on his island, although I managed to extract one unit this time. Greece was using both of his unique units now, so I guess I was a little outclassed.

I eventually broke in due to that little archer gaining ungodly amounts of experience from his constant shooting and being bombarded. Which wasn’t a very satisfying way to win a war. If I didn’t get that archer with +1 range (plus two attacks a turn and healing while shooting), I would probably have lost the game by now from my war with Greece. I think perhaps being bombarded by a city should not give experience, as the attack is so weak.

Anyway, I captured and annexed Sparta, Athens and Sidon, and liberated Genoa. This put me into serious unhappiness. I started selling off my luxuries to other empires, and switching all my farms to trading posts. My cities wouldn’t be growing any more, but I was making good money. Enough to buy any more units I’d be needing in the future. I would be getting a -33% penalty to combat, but that could be overcome with generals and lots of use of ranged power.

I moved on to a war with Songhai on the same island, at the request of Copenhagen. This war took a long time. He had seemingly unlimited numbers of pikemen, and there was just a narrow path between the sea and mountains for me to fight from. Again, my super archer (now a crossbowman with the ability to shoot over mountains) pretty much won me the war. When I got gunpowder tech and my french musketeers, I pushed out and captured the Songhai capital.

About this point, Egypt declared war on me, and landed three spearmen, two longswordmen, an archer and a war chariot next to one of my undefended cities on the other side of my home island, backed up by two caravels and more units in the water. Yikes.

I made peace with Songhai, which they were quite happy with, and started to recall my forces. It was going to take them about ten turns to make it back, though, and my city wasn’t going to get that much time.

I got on the phone to Catherine, and sold her some luxuries for all of her gold. I spent that gold on a cannon in the doomed city. There was so much incoming ranged fire on the next turn, I figured I wasn’t going to be able to prevent the city being weakened. What I did instead was focus my fire on the strongest melee unit in attack range each turn. On about the third or fourth turn of the siege, he attacked with his last wounded longswordman, taking the city to 0 hitpoints, but losing the unit in the process. He was now out of melee units. The city was still surrounded by caravels, archers and war chariots, but it was safe for now.

My frigates have just turned up and cleared out the units in the water, and my veteran armies have landed on the other side of the island, and are moving in to clean up.

Not really “gamey”, merely an adjustment of scale. Civ was always a grand strategy game mixed with tactical combat on the same map, so it does make sense that the roads are on a tactical scale, too – meaning there’s lots of space without roads around them.

Yeah, but that’s changing the game to suit the subsystem you’ve settled on, rather than changing the subsystem to suit the game series that’s been around for 20 years. Civ is a grand strategic game, period. What’s in Civ 5 isn’t a tactical scale game, it’s a weird mishmosh of scales where stone age archers can bombard troops on the other side of the English Channel. It’s playable, but quite arbitrary and unrealistic.

Tactical combat frankly just doesn’t feel right on the main Civ map (by which I don’t mean it’s unplayable, I mean it has the wrong flavor.) If they really wanted tactical combat they should have gone the MOM route, with a strategic map and a zoomed-in tactical map. As an added bonus it would have been easier to make the tactical AI Not Stupid with tactical maps, since there are far fewer edge cases.

I’ve moved up to the Prince difficulty and am trying for a cultural victory with Persia on an islands map. From what I’ve read, keeping my civ small is going to be key, so I’m trying to make a go with only 4 cities. Weirdly, the Ottomans started on my same little three city sized island, and I’ve discovered what appears to be a decent little continent nearby (at least five cities that I know of, two of which are city states.) So we’ll see how it goes, but with the Ottomans, Japanese, and Aztecs as my neighbors I’m not optimistic about avoiding a lot of wars.

Mind you, I am having a lot of fun with Civ 5, but it was annoying that discover that my brand new gunpowder troops couldn’t attack at range like archers could but had to attack like infantry. I had Mech Infantry attacked from distance by crossbowmen they couldn’t shoot back at. Weird.

So far I prefer the Civ5 approach of minimizing road spam and giving units more MP to compensate. Wallpapering the countryside with roads didn’t really add to the enjoyment of Civ4 and IMHO gave homeland defenders too much of a mobility advantage over the invading force.

My first experience with Civi involve road spam. A friend showed a game to me. Aparently the game glitched, so he was alone in the world, only his civilization, he continued rushing science Future Tech 45, Future Tech 46, and so on, and he spammed all the continents of a criscrox of roads. He even built a bridge over the ocean, using a trick: you can build roads on boats, so he made a bridge crossing the ocean made of boats.

You can do this in Civi 1

And is probably a bug.

Now… I cant lie to you. These “Future Tech” messages, and these criscrox of roads gained me, and I fall in love to the game because of these things. So a Civi withouth road spam and “Future Tech #44”, is not Civi to me.

But this is totally personal, 1 person in 1 billion, and I am Mr. Random Internet Person.

Here’s something to try:

Instead of relying on someone else to tell you if you’ll like the game, play the free demo a few times through and ask yourself one simple question…

Is it fun?

Works for me. ;)

Yeah, that’s something I figured out a long time ago. I remember playing Morrowind on my old PC and being perfectly happy with the experience, and then going online and seeing people complaining about the framerate. So I enabled the framerate monitor in the game and once I saw that my rates weren’t particularly good, it impacted my experience. Sometimes ignorance is bliss!

I really enjoy reading threads for games when they are first released because there is a fun sense of being part of a group that are all experiencing something together for the first time. You don’t get that feeling if you ignore the threads and just play the game. But the downside is that the threads can become focused on negatives, and all games have warts. And then, as above, your experience can be influence by that negativity.

civ 5 really needed to be a reboot and firaxis succeeded. yeah the game does have issues and its not as detailed and balanced as civ 4, but its a great game on its own and not as a comparison. it just gets it right overall without dumbing it down. i’d say civ 5 is the best strategy game to introduce players to the 4x genre imo.

I already bought the game, and played it a bit; I’m just waiting for a few rounds of patches to make it worth playing. Note I’ve developed a very high bar for “worth playing” over the last year; I’ve pretty much had it with half-baked games. Especially if they’re a sequel and don’t bring anything fundamentally new.

I don’t care at all about multiplayer, I don’t care all that much about balance as a result, I don’t want it to be a copy of civ 4, but I think it needs another month or two of polish.

I like it… Dunno if its better or worse than other civs…

but who cares… its FUN!

I agree (other than the multiplayer part, I’m an oddity that plays these games almost exclusively in MP). It’s a combination of a lot of issues, both big and small, that really makes Civ5 fall flat for me. It’s the only Civ game I’ve played that I have no desire for one more turn. I’ve fired it up probably a dozen times and just quickly grow bored and do something else. It doesn’t help that the AI may as well drown all it’s troops in the ocean for all the good their military does them.

Normally I’d just chalk it up to a very mediocre/meh game and move on, but the fact that it’s part of the Civilization franchise is very disappointing for me.

I don’t know if a patch or two can fix the problems I have. I think for me it might be an expansion pack or two, we’ll see.