New Civilazation V ???

[Otterbear]

I'm not certain where to post these questions/problems, I guess here is better then other places.

Having purchased multiple copies of Civ IV, due to new packaging, over the years, I was a very happy to see what I thought was a new version of the game. NOT!

What I got was the same buggy game with (computer killing), graphics. Even with the great system I have...it cost me a fortune in time AND money...I still can't play past turn 111 with any of the larger maps...EVEN if I take most of the players out of the game.

Scouts/military units that are tasked with exploring unknown territory, still make a bee-line to the far side of the planet leaving my city in a cloud of uncertainty.

While it is nice (Rolls Eyes), to be able to zoom so far into the map that you can see "the whites of their eyes"'; it serves absolutely NO purpose! I cannot imagine somebody actually playing this game "Zoomed in"...the demand on you graphics card would leave your computer "FRIED" in a cloud of ozone smoke.

Diplomacy, in ANY true sense of the word, is non-existent.

I tried the game with the "RAGING Barbarians" option turned on...LMAO!...I saw no change in their behavior at all! (Alright, maybe I got lucky on that one game.)

Early Units are SEVERELY limited in experience upgrades which almost make it better to lose them then to worry about raising their experience levels.

The same bugs are there that have been around for TEN YEARS now!...Seriously??
In fact they have made this game far WORSE than it ever was.

1) Icons that wont disappear...for one ....is STILL there.
2) Meaningless Diplomacy...(backstabbing is nice..not!)
3) Units that wander aimlessly, forcing you to manually search the map.(so much for automated.)
4) Units that will walk right past the enemy with no notification what-ever!
5) Pointless notifications that constantly pause the game...
6) Meaningful notifications that WONT pause the game...forcing you to end turns yourself or loose!
7) No way of observing your units actions.
8) Workers that run across sea and land to improve the settlement you just started, while leaving your capital a ruin...which is where most of your production should be in the beginning stages of the game.
9) NO option to tell workers what city to focus on improving.
10) NO WAY anybody without a gov grant/Trust fund is going to have a computer capable of playing this game on the highest graphics settings period. (Speaking of the great theory of using larger maps.) Seriously, larger maps have been ask for, as long as this game has been around. Now that we HAVE larger maps ....nobody can use them! At least it looks pretty before it crashes! BRILLIANT!
11) The tech tree has somehow managed to become even MORE simplified, totally linear, and pointless. Should I go for option A(30 turns), or go for option B(60 turns), um, gee, let me think, I know, I'll go for option A and then when that's done, its time for option B and it will only take 30 turns..yuk, yuk!

If this is supposed to be an improved version of the game...Somebody needs to be FIRED! (of course after ten years of the same bugs...this option is apparently never going to be implemented...Does some idiot have Tenure?)

Whats the freakin point of the Mind numbing graphics? Other then the obvious boost to the graphics card industry...or are they trying to bring down Google? I feel sorry for those who are now searching desperately for a card that can play this game. Good luck!

If I've missed something please feel free to inform me.
(Yea, I noticed the new City-States...I like that.)

[Nemesis7884]

well im not a civ hardcore fan and i havent played previous civs but can agree on some statements...overall, i reaaaally dont see why other people made such a fuss about this serious...its good but regarding the possibilities we have now and the games that are being released its way not what it could be...especially diplomacy wise which is not better then the deplomacy from master of magic which is 20 years old

[Superbig]

Whats the freakin point of the Mind numbing graphics? Other then the obvious boost to the graphics card industry...or are they trying to bring down Google? I feel sorry for those who are now searching desperately for a card that can play this game. Good luck!

If I've missed something please feel free to inform me.
(Yea, I noticed the new City-States...I like that.)

lol I agree for that. me and my that go to FRY, Best buy,and other electronics store but can't seem to find the graphic card that good enough. so he have to spend almost a week to finally find one. (in Amazon)

what you miss? do you notice the first thing you saw when you about to play CIV 5 is the old man in the hut in a scene that can't be skip.

[Haggbart]

Let me get this straight - you complain about the tech tree being simplified, but you still use automated worker actions???
Well first of all - automated scout and worker actions aren't SUPPOSED to be fantastic. It's the same with how a city works its tiles, if you want to achieve something specific, you must do it yourself. That's why it's called a STRATEGY game, right?

Diplomacy has become more transparent since the patch, but backstabbing should always be part of the game. Sure you build enough military units?

Oh, and my $700 laptop(!) from mid 2009 runs the game fine in medium settings, no crashes.

[Otterbear]

Let me get this straight - you complain about the tech tree being simplified, but you still use automated worker actions???

Yea, for me its a game. Simple coding that would tell SCOUTS to work outward from your civ, instead of liner, would suffice.
(Like in Civ IV)
The option to tell workers what city to improve. (Like in Civ IV).
It's like this game is a step backward in a lot of cases.

Well first of all - automated scout and worker actions aren't SUPPOSED to be fantastic. It's the same with how a city works its tiles, if you want to achieve something specific, you must do it yourself. That's why it's called a STRATEGY game, right?

See previous statement.

Diplomacy has become more transparent since the patch, but backstabbing should always be part of the game. Sure you build enough military units?

LOL, That defeats the whole purpose of having diplomacy! If diplomacy doesn't do what it says...IT'S NOT DIPLOMACY! LOL
If my ally is NOT my ally, then why bother getting an ally? That's not diplomatic relations...that game is called "Screw your neighbor."

Oh, and my $700 laptop(!) from mid 2009 runs the game fine in medium settings, no crashes.

Yes, that is why I specifically said "HIGH settings". If I wanted to play on med or low settings, I wouldn't have bothered buying a $500.00 graphics card. I am sure your not playing large or huge maps either. (If I'm wrong, then I am jealous.)

[Nemesis7884]

i have to agree that diplomacy is a bit blaa...but thats also cause often i can not see the reason why somebody is doing what he does so i often assume its random...its probably not, but it would be nice if the other leaders would also tell you why they denounce you/attack you etc.

[Haggbart]

Two comments.

First of all - automated worker actions sucked in Civ IV as well. Workers were putting forts on resources and spamming cottages like there was no tomorrow. And IMHO that's fine. If you don't wanna manage your workers but complain the AI doesn't do it well enough, you'd might as well complain on the lack of "automate warfare", "automate research", automate settler action" or other KEY elements. If you don't like it, there's always Super Mario Galaxy or Counter Strike to play..

Secondly - Backstabbing has always been a part of international diplomacy IRL. If you look back at pre-WW2, Germany and Poland had a non-aggression pact against Soviet from 1934. However, Germany withdrew from this pact in 1939 and formed a pact with Soviet to attack Poland (the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact), which was also a non-aggresion part in case of attack from any third party. And as we all know, Germany subsequently withdrew from this pact and attacked Soviet in 1941. Backstabbing enough for you?

In the context of the game, you might want to check what leaders you are dealing with, and how you'd expect them to
act, the state of your current military, the standing forces in your border cities and if you are seen as a threat to win the game. Diplomacy IRL is not set in stone, and neither should it be in this game.

[Vizigot]

Secondly - Backstabbing has always been a part of international diplomacy IRL. If you look back at pre-WW2, Germany and Poland had a non-aggression pact against Soviet from 1934. However, Germany withdrew from this pact in 1939 and formed a pact with Soviet to attack Poland (the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact), which was also a non-aggresion part in case of attack from any third party. And as we all know, Germany subsequently withdrew from this pact and attacked Soviet in 1941. Backstabbing enough for you?

Also, Stalin signed that pact planning to break it, but he had to buy some time to prepare for war with Germany. Just to add bit more backstabbing spice Try surfing Wikileaks just to see how honest and straightforward today's diplomacy is...

[Otterbear]

Two comments.

First of all - automated worker actions sucked in Civ IV as well. Workers were putting forts on resources and spamming cottages like there was no tomorrow. And IMHO that's fine.

I didn't mind the automated workers actions that much either. HOWEVER, 2k did have the option IN CIV IV, to tell workers what cities to improve. That was a nice option that just disappeared in Civ V. Now they simply run to the next built settlement and begin work there. I've never had the patience to micro-manage every action of my workers. If they built something I didn't like, I could replace it.
Also the option of telling all workers not to improve already improved tiles did make this much simpler as well, - This option actually did make it into Civ V.

If you don't wanna manage your workers but complain the AI doesn't do it well enough, you'd might as well complain on the lack of "automate warfare", "automate research", automate settler action" or other KEY elements. If you don't like it, there's always Super Mario Galaxy or Counter Strike to play..

Actually, I'm just upset that some of the terrific improvements made to the game in Civ IV were not carried over into the "Improved" version.

Secondly - Backstabbing has always been a part of international diplomacy IRL. If you look back at pre-WW2, Germany and Poland had a non-aggression pact against Soviet from 1934. However, Germany withdrew from this pact in 1939 and formed a pact with Soviet to attack Poland (the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact), which was also a non-aggresion part in case of attack from any third party. And as we all know, Germany subsequently withdrew from this pact and attacked Soviet in 1941. Backstabbing enough for you?

In the context of the game, you might want to check what leaders you are dealing with, and how you'd expect them to
act, the state of your current military, the standing forces in your border cities and if you are seen as a threat to win the game. Diplomacy IRL is not set in stone, and neither should it be in this game.

Haggbart; that is exactly my point. Germany and the Soviet Union, had REASONS for taking the actions they did. Germany coveted Polish AND Soviet land, they also hated each other for various ethnic reasons. IF THIS GAME would give ANY indication as to why Country A is the way it is...this would be quite fun. Like playing Poland, KNOWING that both Germany and the Soviet Union covet your land (your culture is starting to upset them or something.) would be a nice touch. Maybe an adviser could say something to that effect. Having them feign friendship or even an alliance without any CLUE as to their feelings toward you is meaningless diplomacy. Poland and the Soviets KNEW that Germany was not to be trusted and the Germans KNEW that the Soviets were not to be trusted. All this was due to poor diplomacy in the first place. If the Poles and the Germans had been friends from the beginning MAYBE the war would never have happened. Just a guess.

The WHOLE purpose of diplomacy is to prevent hostilities, and to gender good feelings between the countries involved. If that doesn't work...then what is the point? I can understand breakdowns in diplomacy for a REASON...but if I have given country A, NO reason to dislike me, then FLAT OUT they shouldn't. At the very least, your diplomatic adviser should warn of cooling relations between countries. Fair enough?

[Haggbart]

I didn't mind the automated workers actions that much either. HOWEVER, 2k did have the option IN CIV IV, to tell workers what cities to improve. That was a nice option that just disappeared in Civ V. Now they simply run to the next built settlement and begin work there. I've never had the patience to micro-manage every action of my workers. If they built something I didn't like, I could replace it.
Also the option of telling all workers not to improve already improved tiles did make this much simpler as well, - This option actually did make it into Civ V.



Actually, I'm just upset that some of the terrific improvements made to the game in Civ IV were not carried over into the "Improved" version.



Haggbart; that is exactly my point. Germany and the Soviet Union, had REASONS for taking the actions they did. Germany coveted Polish AND Soviet land, they also hated each other for various ethnic reasons. IF THIS GAME would give ANY indication as to why Country A is the way it is...this would be quite fun. Like playing Poland, KNOWING that both Germany and the Soviet Union covet your land (your culture is starting to upset them or something.) would be a nice touch. Maybe an adviser could say something to that effect. Having them feign friendship or even an alliance without any CLUE as to their feelings toward you is meaningless diplomacy. Poland and the Soviets KNEW that Germany was not to be trusted and the Germans KNEW that the Soviets were not to be trusted. All this was due to poor diplomacy in the first place. If the Poles and the Germans had been friends from the beginning MAYBE the war would never have happened. Just a guess.

The WHOLE purpose of diplomacy is to prevent hostilities, and to gender good feelings between the countries involved. If that doesn't work...then what is the point? I can understand breakdowns in diplomacy for a REASON...but if I have given country A, NO reason to dislike me, then FLAT OUT they shouldn't. At the very least, your diplomatic adviser should warn of cooling relations between countries. Fair enough?

Let's agree to disagree on the worker issue. On general principle I'm strongly against functions making it easier not to think. Especially since you can also use the function in multiplayer. In its current state you're better off doing it yourself, as has always been the case in the Civ-series. There are real issues with Civ V, but this is IMHO not one of them.

Diplomacy however, here you are simply wrong. Poland was primarily important for tactical reasons in Hitler's grand scheme, to connect East Prussia and Germany, and this was off course recognized by Soviet. Another example is Norway, who sought to be neutral but proved to be tactically important for both Germany and the allied forces. There were no ethnical or cultural conflict per se, the reasons were primarily access to ice free harbors in the North Atlantic, access to iron ore from Sweden and such.
As for everbody KNOWING the Germans were not to be trusted, that was simply not the case. In fact Neville Chamberlain advised Czechoslovakia to give in to Hitler's demands to give up territory as late as 1938, on the ground that Hitler's intentions were "limited".

The equivalent to this in Civ V is that EVERY leader has a grand scheme - winning the game. So what you really are complaining as I see, is the tendency in Civ V to try to win the game and eliminate dangerous opponents. IRL most nations don't have that kind of "grand scheme", so it makes sense that diplomacy in the game is more the goal oriented "war diplomacy" described above. The different leaders have different preferred victory conditions and thresholds for war and backstabbing, but you have to see it in the context of winning the game, or at least preventing the most threatening opponent of winning.

So no, as IRL, on the level of different countries having a conflicting grand scheme, diplomacy has never been transparent. And in Civ you should always expect the backstab.

[Nemesis7884]

i think it would allready be a vast improvement if you other leader would at least tell you why they do what they do and if they would get asigned a specific personality (which is randomly chosen so not to become boring) for example, if he's back stabbing me out of the friendly blue it would be nice if he would say something like - i declare ware, i just pretended to be your friend to exploit your weakness etc. etc.... this way you at least know and it doesnt feel that random...but if im having real good relationships with someone, lots of agreements and trade, and friendly atmosphere and then he saddenly goes berserk telling me its for all my evil deeds thats kinda irritating

[Otterbear]

Haggbart; I don't think we disagree at all on the worker issue. I'm in agreement with everything you said.

Still, kinda fuzzy on the diplomacy thing. What it sounds like your saying is that Germany, and the Soviet Union, DID have reasons for what they did, just not MY reasons. It still begs the question "Why deal with anybody at all?" I may trade with them for stuff I need, but as far as pacts or ANY friendly diplomacy...its seems quite pointless.

I must agree with Nemesis; "..but if im having real good relationships with someone, lots of agreements and trade, and friendly atmosphere and then he saddenly goes berserk telling me its for all my evil deeds thats kinda irritating."

One wouldn't expect Canada or Great Brittan, to suddenly attack the U.S. (Granted nothing is out of the question.) But we don't have half our army sitting on our northern border for quite obvious reasons. Being attacked by a friend is rare IN THE EXTREME, and I don't see why THAT particular nuance was added to this "Sequel" while more meaningful and, already used options were not. Just my thoughts, maybe I'm weird or something.

[thedocy]

I have to disagree here, not only have I never had any issues with graphics on my fairly cheap laptop (unless I set it to a huge map with more then 20ish main nations and 28 city states), but the diplomacy in the game is fairly good.

Your main complaint seems to be that you can't get any idea as to why a nation acts as it does, but if you hover the mouse over the relationship status (as in where it says friendly, neutral, hostile, etc) and it lists what is going on between your nation and theirs, it fully spells it out, if they want your land it says "they covet our land" and it is generaly pretty good. The only real improvement would be a charachter telling you why they denonced you when it happens, but if you have any memory its pretty easy to figure out generaly.

[Otterbear]

"...if you hover the mouse over the relationship status (as in where it says friendly, neutral, hostile, etc) and it lists what is going on between your nation and theirs, it fully spells it out, if they want your land it says "they covet our land" and it is generally pretty good."

Good point!...I did not know that. (said like Johny Carson)

I wish I had your computer.

Not that it matters but...

Windows 7 64bit
I have over 8GB of RAM (not that it does much good over 4 or 6 game wise)
Quad core 2.33Ghz processor (not that THAT does me any special favors game wise either)
Video card ATI Radeon HD 5700 Series, with 1GB of on-card Video Memory
ALL device drivers are current.

I cannot get very far on any map larger than standard...and I never have more than 3 main civs and generally keep the city-states low as well.
I wish I knew what your doing right.

I currently have my Video settings set to LOW for just about everything...and I'm still crashing every few turns. ( I'm currently trying a large map.)

I generally start to see slow video fill on the screen as it moves from unit to unit, and sometimes unit icons that move with the camera..(wont leave the screen). It seems like a graphics card issue...but my card is giving no overheating indications. My fan which speeds up as it is needed, never gets above slightly elevated. When I manually turn it up, it sounds like a lawnmower, I can barely hear it when I'm getting these crashes. Still, it does have me scratching my head.

Should I try forcing this game to run in 32bit mode?

[Nemesis7884]

yeah but the more the game progresses the more the nations spread, sooner or later they are always going to want your land regardless of where it is or how little you have...i simply think that diplomacy should be one of the biggest parts of the game and it is simply lacking depth...right now its simply trading and then war...

[Haggbart]

Haggbart; I don't think we disagree at all on the worker issue. I'm in agreement with everything you said.

Still, kinda fuzzy on the diplomacy thing. What it sounds like your saying is that Germany, and the Soviet Union, DID have reasons for what they did, just not MY reasons. It still begs the question "Why deal with anybody at all?" I may trade with them for stuff I need, but as far as pacts or ANY friendly diplomacy...its seems quite pointless.

I must agree with Nemesis; "..but if im having real good relationships with someone, lots of agreements and trade, and friendly atmosphere and then he saddenly goes berserk telling me its for all my evil deeds thats kinda irritating."

One wouldn't expect Canada or Great Brittan, to suddenly attack the U.S. (Granted nothing is out of the question.) But we don't have half our army sitting on our northern border for quite obvious reasons. Being attacked by a friend is rare IN THE EXTREME, and I don't see why THAT particular nuance was added to this "Sequel" while more meaningful and, already used options were not. Just my thoughts, maybe I'm weird or something.

Yes the USSR and Germany indeed had their reasons, they had a "grand scheme". Unlike Canada, Great Britain and the US have today (as far as we know, lol). The thing is, that diplomacy in Civ V differs from Civ IV because (and this is from Jon Schafer) now every Civ is playing to win the game. So everybody does have a reason to stab your back at any time if they see you as a threat to win - the chance of them doing so however does depend on a lot of modifiers, it seems. And this does make sense, because that's how most human players do play the game. I guess you wouldn't hesitate attacking somebody to win the game, or to stop them winning the game, only because you had good relations. And now the AI also has modifiers for meta-thinking.

http://forums.2kgames.com/showthread...cy-Demystified

Here you can see more of the modifiers. I do agree that more positive modifiers could have been added for years of good diplomatic relations, but I think you will find that most of your complaint is due to the fact that the developers wanted the AI to act more like a human player would in the case of somebody being a threat to win.

[Otterbear]

That makes more sense. Thanks for all the help.

[Black Gate of Mordor]

The same bugs are there that have been around for TEN YEARS now!...Seriously??
In fact they have made this game far WORSE than it ever was.

They built the game from the ground up. And when you're working with billions of lines of code, it's a bit hard to notice bugs until you release the game.

1) Icons that wont disappear...for one ....is STILL there.

You should be posting this in the support section. This should not be happening.

2) Meaningless Diplomacy...(backstabbing is nice..not!)

It's realistic.

3) Units that wander aimlessly, forcing you to manually search the map.(so much for automated.)

Automated doesn't mean good.

4) Units that will walk right past the enemy with no notification what-ever!

What version of the game do you have?

5) Pointless notifications that constantly pause the game...

What?

6) Meaningful notifications that WONT pause the game...forcing you to end turns yourself or loose!

I'm very confused.

7) No way of observing your units actions.

It's called not automating them.

8) Workers that run across sea and land to improve the settlement you just started, while leaving your capital a ruin...which is where most of your production should be in the beginning stages of the game.

Don't automate.

9) NO option to tell workers what city to focus on improving.

Do I have to say it again?

10) NO WAY anybody without a gov grant/Trust fund is going to have a computer capable of playing this game on the highest graphics settings period. (Speaking of the great theory of using larger maps.) Seriously, larger maps have been ask for, as long as this game has been around. Now that we HAVE larger maps ....nobody can use them! At least it looks pretty before it crashes! BRILLIANT!

$800 laptop can run high settings with no crashes, Huge Map all the way to 2050.

11) The tech tree has somehow managed to become even MORE simplified, totally linear, and pointless. Should I go for option A(30 turns), or go for option B(60 turns), um, gee, let me think, I know, I'll go for option A and then when that's done, its time for option B and it will only take 30 turns..yuk, yuk!

I don't think you understand how science works.

If this is supposed to be an improved version of the game...Somebody needs to be FIRED! (of course after ten years of the same bugs...this option is apparently never going to be implemented...Does some idiot have Tenure?)

First, the lead developer has already left Firaxis (willingly) for Stardock. Second, civ5 is a good game, you are just stuck in the past.

Whats the freakin point of the Mind numbing graphics? Other then the obvious boost to the graphics card industry...or are they trying to bring down Google? I feel sorry for those who are now searching desperately for a card that can play this game. Good luck!

It's 2011. People should have a good computer. And the point of the graphics? It's the 21st century.

Something else I noticed: The original civilization was released in 1991. I count 20 years, not 10.

[Otterbear]

They built the game from the ground up. And when you're working with billions of lines of code, it's a bit hard to notice bugs until you release the game.

And yet, they have managed to re-create most of the same "bugs" from all previous version.
I'm saying that a lot of meaningful and useful Features/options from the previous version of this game are not in the "improved" version, but a lot of the same bugs/shortcomings are. Talk about being stuck in the past!

You should be posting this in the support section. This should not be happening.

This is already documented in the support section. But, I just wanted to add one of the reasons I was concerned/disappointed.

It's realistic.

Some people punch their mother in the face...that's realistic too, just not so realistic as to cause EVERYBODY'S mother to wear a HOCKEY MASK!
Backstabbing by nations with friendly relations is about THAT ridiculous and RARE.

Automated doesn't mean good.

It was a heck of a lot better in Civ 4...I was looking for improvement in this new version...my bad.

What version of the game do you have?

The latest patched version.

What?

Pointless in that they pause the game turn to tell you that City-state X wants you to kill city-state Y...and so forth.

I'm very confused.

When units such as barbarian, or any other enemy for that matter show up near your borders...there is no notification, and the game continues to the next turn until the boogers are standing on your doorstep. Also, often you will see a notification of a barbarian city...but the game continues without pause, leaving you to stop the turns manually and go searching for the city without knowing exactly where, because the notification disappeared without giving you the option of actually reading it. (granted I should have never used that option in the first place...but IT'S there for some reason...and would be quite handy if IMPORTANT information like that would pause the game turn process.) Still confused?

It's called not automating them.

Boy there's another handy option they put into this game, that I'm told I shouldn't use.
Now I'M starting to get confused!

Don't automate.

That odd, I'm starting to see a pattern here. So the automate feature that would follow each unit during your turn, that was in the old version of this NEW game, doesn't work and therefore I shouldn't use the options that DID make it into this NEW game. Wheres the Advil?

Do I have to say it again?

No, but I WILL. Another great feature of the previous version of the game that was left out. Are you starting to understand why I'm not thrilled with this NEW version...Its a GIANT LEAP BACKWARD to 1991.

$800 laptop can run high settings with no crashes, Huge Map all the way to 2050.

Sorry, stupid me, I went and spent $5,000.00 on a desktop.

I don't think you understand how science works.

Well, all I can say is that, since this is 2010, and since this is the FIFTH version of this game, and since there are several ways of winning this game, you would think that byy now the tech tree would be improved, and have the flexibility to allow for differing approaches and specific research trees. As it stands now, you can go straight for whatever techs you want, but the time-frames are set up such, that you may as well research every tech, due to the times constraints. (I'm not staring at the tech tree; but for an example....to go from cave man to rockets will take you almost as long making a bee-line approach, as would researching everything in between...and that isn't even possible in most instances.) Just my opinion.

First, the lead developer has already left Firaxis (willingly) for Stardock.

Well, he obviously isn't the problem then, is he?

Second, civ5 is a good game, you are just stuck in the past.

IF this had been the FIRST version and NOT the FIFTH, it would be a great start/game. Seeing that it is in fact the FIFTH version of this game, YES, I am stuck in the past and THEY PUT ME THERE!

If I buy a car, I don't expect WOODEN WHEELS! I don't care if its the first model or the last. Rubber has been around long enough, so nobody expects to get wood wheels. Buying this product has been THAT kind of experience.

It's 2011. People should have a good computer. And the point of the graphics? It's the 21st century.

LOL, so everybody should be able to run this game? You might want to look outside...it sounds like it may have been a while. Check the support forums. They are chock full of people with great setups and great computers who cannot get this game to function. But lets just say there all idiots because it works for you.

Something else I noticed: The original civilization was released in 1991. I count 20 years, not 10.

Good point! What happened in twenty years? We got a game that isn't as good as the first one! But, hey it's got a great look to it. I rest my case.

[Haggbart]

I do agree the game has some tech issues. However, the performance issues seem to be compatibility issues rather than optimalization issues. Have you posted the setup of your rig at the support forum?

The notifications.... This is a tricky one. The reason you can see "City state X attacks city state Y" and such, is that it is meant to be a public announcement. Barbarians would probably not make an announcement before approaching. Watching your borders has always been part of Civ, I might remember wrong, but has this been any different before? There is, however, a social policy that will warn you about barbarian activity (in the Honor branch).

As for the automated workers being a leap backwards to 1991. The original Civ didn't even have workers as far as I remember. It had settlers, who could do "engineering actions". And no automated actions. Civ III had automated workers, but no "improved nearest city. So we're talking 2001 at most, lol :-D

The tech tree.... Bee-lining has its limits, and has been further nerfed post-patch, and the reason you have to research different stuff and not just go in one direction is game balance. Generally you don't wanna allow a branch to be expanded in a certain direction more than a couple of tiers without broadening the prerequisites for the next level. Example: if you could go directly from iron working, via metal casting to steel and further to gunpowder/metallurgy without making other prerequisites, you'd be looking a wars between musketmen/lancers for those who beelined, and horsemen/swordsmen for those who didn't. That would make an exploit just too easy. Also, it's not very realistic going to war with combination of triremes and tanks, is it? So you could also say that the combining of different branches on different tiers of the tech tree represent the GENERAL tech development of a given civilization.

BUT how you research DOES matter - a lot. If you beeline to education, and get your universities up, you would save A LOT of turns researching the other techs on the same tier. And if you beeline ironworking, get your swordsmen up, and go the quickest way possible to steel, you could upgrade the same turn and have an army of longswordmen ready the next turn. Go to war, and you could be longswordmen against swordsmen or pikemen. A HUGE advantage! The same goes with riflemen/infantry/mech infantry. It's all about planning and timing.

Btw - One of the reasons for condensing the tech tree, by the way, is the inclusion of social policies. Many of the old techs are now social policies - and more have been added.

[Otterbear]

I do agree the game has some tech issues. However, the performance issues seem to be compatibility issues rather than optimalization issues. Have you posted the setup of your rig at the support forum?

I'm thinking about it. Seeing the myriads of others with the same problem, it just seems to me that my particular setup would just end up on the stack...but I probably will get around to it.

The notifications.... This is a tricky one. The reason you can see "City state X attacks city state Y" and such, is that it is meant to be a public announcement. Barbarians would probably not make an announcement before approaching. Watching your borders has always been part of Civ, I might remember wrong, but has this been any different before? There is, however, a social policy that will warn you about barbarian activity (in the Honor branch).

The problem there is, I HAD that social policy and it would give me a notification, just wouldn't pause to let me read it. LOL
I agree, watching my borders is my problem, and I shouldn't have used that auto-turn feature with barbs turned on for that particular aspect.

As for the automated workers being a leap backwards to 1991. The original Civ didn't even have workers as far as I remember. It had settlers, who could do "engineering actions". And no automated actions. Civ III had automated workers, but no "improved nearest city. So we're talking 2001 at most, lol :-D

Yea, you got me there; but it has been quite a while since that ability was implemented. You would figure something that handy would have made the new version. *You would of course be wrong.

The tech tree.... Bee-lining has its limits, and has been further nerfed post-patch, and the reason you have to research different stuff and not just go in one direction is game balance. Generally you don't wanna allow a branch to be expanded in a certain direction more than a couple of tiers without broadening the prerequisites for the next level. Example: if you could go directly from iron working, via metal casting to steel and further to gunpowder/metallurgy without making other prerequisites, you'd be looking a wars between musketmen/lancers for those who beelined, and horsemen/swordsmen for those who didn't. That would make an exploit just too easy. Also, it's not very realistic going to war with combination of triremes and tanks, is it? So you could also say that the combining of different branches on different tiers of the tech tree represent the GENERAL tech development of a given civilization.

Yes, your right, of course. I guess I was looking forward to say a Peaceful tech branch, a Warlord tech branch, Maybe a random tech branch...anything to change it up a bit. Something like you decide that your particular civ isn't going to invest in, the tech branch would still let you "invent" units that don't use that particular tech. Like the wheel, although that would be a tough one, its the only one I can think of at the moment. lol I do bee-line some of those tech you mentioned.

BUT how you research DOES matter - a lot. If you beeline to education, and get your universities up, you would save A LOT of turns researching the other techs on the same tier. And if you beeline ironworking, get your swordsmen up, and go the quickest way possible to steel, you could upgrade the same turn and have an army of longswordmen ready the next turn. Go to war, and you could be longswordmen against swordsmen or pikemen. A HUGE advantage! The same goes with riflemen/infantry/mech infantry. It's all about planning and timing.

Agreed, I just figured that this being a new version, things would have gotten a little more in depth(?) *see previous and last comments.

Btw - One of the reasons for condensing the tech tree, by the way, is the inclusion of social policies. Many of the old techs are now social policies - and more have been added.

Good point. It would be nice to see some trully unique techs, like a civ that is good with fire, having modern weapons that could use that tech, because for example, they failed to stumble upon the invention of gunpowder. (just was expecting a little more I guess from this latest version.)

[thedocy]

When units such as barbarian, or any other enemy for that matter show up near your borders...there is no notification, and the game continues to the next turn until the boogers are standing on your doorstep. Also, often you will see a notification of a barbarian city...but the game continues without pause, leaving you to stop the turns manually and go searching for the city without knowing exactly where, because the notification disappeared without giving you the option of actually reading it. (granted I should have never used that option in the first place...but IT'S there for some reason...and would be quite handy if IMPORTANT information like that would pause the game turn process.) Still confused?

..but the notifications are still their once its your turn...

Boy there's another handy option they put into this game, that I'm told I shouldn't use

That odd, I'm starting to see a pattern here. So the automate feature that would follow each unit during your turn, that was in the old version of this NEW game, doesn't work and therefore I shouldn't use the options that DID make it into this NEW game. Wheres the Advil?

No, but I WILL. Another great feature of the previous version of the game that was left out. Are you starting to understand why I'm not thrilled with this NEW version...Its a GIANT LEAP BACKWARD to 1991.

maybe automate most of your workers for convinence but leave one or two (well, how ever many you need) off automation (or take them off) so you can still priorotize when you want to?

[Otterbear]

That is a good idea, and I do, do that.

[Prefekt]

Two comments.

First of all - automated worker actions sucked in Civ IV as well. Workers were putting forts on resources and spamming cottages like there was no tomorrow. And IMHO that's fine. If you don't wanna manage your workers but complain the AI doesn't do it well enough, you'd might as well complain on the lack of "automate warfare", "automate research", automate settler action" or other KEY elements. If you don't like it, there's always Super Mario Galaxy or Counter Strike to play..

Secondly - Backstabbing has always been a part of international diplomacy IRL. If you look back at pre-WW2, Germany and Poland had a non-aggression pact against Soviet from 1934. However, Germany withdrew from this pact in 1939 and formed a pact with Soviet to attack Poland (the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact), which was also a non-aggresion part in case of attack from any third party. And as we all know, Germany subsequently withdrew from this pact and attacked Soviet in 1941. Backstabbing enough for you?

In the context of the game, you might want to check what leaders you are dealing with, and how you'd expect them to
act, the state of your current military, the standing forces in your border cities and if you are seen as a threat to win the game. Diplomacy IRL is not set in stone, and neither should it be in this game.

How about automated victory?1 turn,from 2049-2050.You own the whole world,and all the tecs.Congratulations,you win!

[King_Course]

Also, Stalin signed that pact planning to break it, but he had to buy some time to prepare for war with Germany. Just to add bit more backstabbing spice Try surfing Wikileaks just to see how honest and straightforward today's diplomacy is...

Yup, he expected Germany to be bogged down in a war with France for a long time, giving him ample time to mobilise and attack Germany in the back. When Germany blietzkrieged and threw England back into the Channel, Stalin panicked and even ordered his troops away from the border and to halt mobilisation. Playing the peacefull guy hoping that Hitler would honour the agreement he himself had planned on breaking. Hitler did no such thing as we all know.

Oh yeah, the game of scoundrels. Gog and Magog, if the Bible ever had something to say.

[Mega-Dolphin]

I don't understand the thing with notifications going away. They should stay on the side-panel and if you click on the notification for a new barbarian encampment, the game should scroll over to the encampment itself. Just click on the notification orb. Also, a barbarian approaching your borders should prompt a message at the top of the screen saying that an enemy is near a city.

[mekk]

5) Pointless notifications that constantly pause the game...
6) Meaningful notifications that WONT pause the game...forcing you to end turns yourself or loose!
7) No way of observing your units actions.

First I thought it is "just another complaints thread", but then saw these.
I am glad to see the game design issues of point 5 to 7 once again, and really hope the devs fix it in the next patch.

(For the automated workers, I won't even try it until city of preference AND per city improvement focus could be given, I think everyone are brave who gives any opportunity to the current one..)

[phidelta42]

5) Pointless notifications that constantly pause the game...
6) Meaningful notifications that WONT pause the game...forcing you to end turns yourself or loose!

Have to agree on these two points, if you play marathon you're very likely to use auto-end-turn for parts of the game. You end up getting spammed with pauses on city state statuses, but things like trade agreement completions won't bring up a pause.

I also really hate the way, when you're trying to observe your own civ, the game constantly scrolls round to far flung places to show irrelevant conflicts between turns. I like the animations and don't really want to play quick combat but an option to see combat animations involving only my troops and cities would be a huge improvement for me.

[Furball]

1+2...old news.
4+7...most definitely an example of some basic features which were in older versions and should have been in the base design of this version.
3...If you want a unit to explore a specific part of the map then obviously your going to have to manually do so. If you just want to discover all the undiscovered parts the auto explore works fine. Well i would add one slight flaw in that they have a tendency to wonder through CS territory and thus annoying them.
5...possibly, depends on what you consider meaningless really. I would say some customization of what notifications do what would be nice though.
6...can you give examples of a meaningful notification which doesn't pause they game?
8+9...even with the best AI around workers will still make mistakes as they are not you. For maximum efficiency you should always be manually using workers and this has been the case since forever in all games.
10...I only ever play huge maps with max settings and have never had an issues apart from some slowness between turns after around half way and i would say my specs are average compared to any type of serious gaming machine.