Civilization V

Bit confoozed now.

Aside from missiles in Civ 4. I dont know of any other unit which lets say, is 3 tiles away from an enemy (e.g. lets say Archer Vs Warrior) and the archer can do a ranged attack 3 tiles away?
(Not saying an archer has ranged attack or can fire 3 tiles away but just giving an example).

You can't do this in civ 4.

You could do something similar to it in previous games.

It makes a 'comeback' and its viewed as some new improvement they have just come up with :rolleyes:

Balls. They could have done any of this to IV, and the various expansions. Graphics don't look that impressive, not like when I first saw IV.

Enjoy being a cash cow! :p
 
You can't do this in civ 4.

You could do something similar to it in previous games.

It makes a 'comeback' and its viewed as some new improvement they have just come up with :rolleyes:

Balls. They could have done any of this to IV, and the various expansions. Graphics don't look that impressive, not like when I first saw IV.

Enjoy being a cash cow! :p

Yea thats right I remember I think it was Battleships in Civ that could bombard up to a few tiles away?

Graphics seem better than Civ 4, more polished, but tbh, Civ 4's graphics are great imho, so if they improve upon it and even if its the same game, all the better for me :)

If they introduce new mechanics and concepts then that will be also refreshing. Will be interesting to see how intricate they made diplomacy, as in all previous games the diplomacy aspect was a bit stale.
 
Yea thats right I remember I think it was Battleships in Civ that could bombard up to a few tiles away?

Yup, but they removed it because it would make the AI ship spam fest on Prince upwards too difficult apparently.

Yet it will be fixed now. I just don't trust firaxis and 2k anymore.
 
Yup, but they removed it because it would make the AI ship spam fest on Prince upwards too difficult apparently.

Yet it will be fixed now. I just don't trust firaxis and 2k anymore.

Ooh I dunno. Sids doing this one isnt he? (He didnt do 4 I think).
Even thought theyre all called "Sid Meiers Civilization" :)

Didnt you like Civ 4?
 
I've never managed to enjoy a civilization game as much as i did with the original. I have had them all too, and just lost interest. I will be buying this though and hope it changes my re-occurring disappointment . I dont know why i dont enjoy the new ones as much, maybe i've been spoil by other games and have just lost contact with these sort of games since the original. Shame, as I do enjoy them in theory lol
 
I've never managed to enjoy a civilization game as much as i did with the original. I have had them all too, and just lost interest. I will be buying this though and hope it changes my re-occurring disappointment . I dont know why i dont enjoy the new ones as much, maybe i've been spoil by other games and have just lost contact with these sort of games since the original. Shame, as I do enjoy them in theory lol

Never enjoyed a Civ game? Well I would say that if you havent enjoyed it after 4 renditions of the game, Id recommend spending your 29.99 (or 24.99 or whatever it will be!) on something else. ;)
 
What I'd like is more individual units (only available to each civilization) and numbered units so it becomes more personal when you send them to fight e.g. the 18th regiment of foot or sending the 7th Navy etc and being able to see battle victories for each unit. The experience points were ok but should be automatic for the type of battle they won.
 
I've never managed to enjoy a civilization game as much as i did with the original. I have had them all too, and just lost interest. I will be buying this though and hope it changes my re-occurring disappointment . I dont know why i dont enjoy the new ones as much, maybe i've been spoil by other games and have just lost contact with these sort of games since the original. Shame, as I do enjoy them in theory lol

did you try iv online? it was great multiplayer not so much fun single player
 
did you try iv online? it was great multiplayer not so much fun single player

I loved both. But it does indeed work so well as a multiplayer game. Just so long as you are prepared with something like a book or PSP to keep you entertained when the opponents take their turns. If the game goes on for a long time, the later turns can take ages, especially if the other guys' equipment isn't up to scratch.

This has reminded me though, I've got a game going on against my brother where I need to finish annihaliting him! :D
 
At first I assumed Hex would improve things over squares as it's 6 sides v 4 sides. Thinking about it it's actually lower and 6 sides v 8 sides as the squares have diagonal movement?

So is this part really any better?
 
At first I assumed Hex would improve things over squares as it's 6 sides v 4 sides. Thinking about it it's actually lower and 6 sides v 8 sides as the squares have diagonal movement?

So is this part really any better?

I was about to come and say Hexagonal has more sides but no you are absolutely right.

Hmm good point :confused:
Basically it means defending units have lesser surround squares, increasing liklihood of potential attacks.
 
i would say its to make maps look bigger, but yes not much improvement tactically imo. Hard to say what it will do to a city until we can see a 'fat cross' of sorts. although, clearly with hex it won't be a cross.

i don't think the land tiles and their early improvements look very good either, particularly the green field rolling off into the sea.. only thing i like the look of is the fort.

i did like civ IV yes lost a lot of time to it, also got completely bored of smashing stacks into stacks for life i fear.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom