|
| Thread: Civilization V - Brave New World officially announced |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · NEXT» |
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
posted March 15, 2013 05:50 PM |
|
|
Civilization V - Brave New World officially announced
It might not come as a lot of news to CiV players that a second expansion is in the work, since we've pretty much had leaked info of a steam file being in beta for months, but today came the official announcement. The title will be Brave New World (as supposed to the beta name One World) and is scheduled for "summer" release.
The expansion will include:
- 9 new civs including Poland.
- New world wonders.
- All new late-era cultural game and revamped cultural victory.
- World congress and international trade routes to enhance inter-civilization diplomacy.
Read a lot more about the content here.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Darkshadow
Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
|
posted March 15, 2013 05:56 PM |
|
|
....Bleh
seems like a very generic expansion to meh 
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted March 15, 2013 07:54 PM |
|
|
I'm looking forward to it. I'm very interested to see what the new civilizations will be. I imagine there will be more central and south American representatives.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
Lexxan
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
|
|
posted March 15, 2013 08:22 PM |
|
|
OMG POLAND <333333333333333
about time this one was added to the Survivor canon. I think we can also expect Portugal and the Zulu's?
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted March 15, 2013 10:05 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I think we can also expect Portugal and the Zulu's?
Those are the ones labeled as certain by most fans, so I guess so.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Lexxan
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
|
|
posted March 16, 2013 12:05 AM |
|
|
omg apparently the Polish unique trait gives them a free social policy whenever they advance to a new era. That sounds ridiculously imbalanced to me. That equates a FREE policy tree by the time of the endgame o_O
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted March 16, 2013 08:17 AM |
|
|
Quote:
omg apparently the Polish unique trait gives them a free social policy whenever they advance to a new era. That sounds ridiculously imbalanced to me. That equates a FREE policy tree by the time of the endgame o_O
Yes - but do notice that cultural victory will be changed, so while it does sound very powerful, it will not hand them a cultural victory for free.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted March 16, 2013 06:45 PM |
|
|
Well, I don't think anybody expected Poland to have some great military advantage...
I do like the proposed changes to culture. I always thought culture was a half-baked concept and like the idea of your culture negatively impacting your enemies.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted March 16, 2013 07:51 PM |
|
|
What do you guys think of CiV5 overall. Worth a purchase, or should I just stick with Civ4, which IMO was damn near perfect?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted March 16, 2013 08:16 PM |
|
|
Quote:
What do you guys think of CiV5 overall. Worth a purchase, or should I just stick with Civ4, which IMO was damn near perfect?
I loved Civ4, but I also love Civ5 to death. I think Civ4 (in it's finised state) was - perhaps - a better game than Civ5 (in its current state), but I find Civ5 more enjoyable. Confused? Let me try to explain.
The most crucial difference between the two games is the combat system. As you may know, Civ5 introduced 1UPT (one unit per tile), which means you can't place more than one military unit in each tile (a bit bizarely, you can also only put one civilian unit in each tile, which is a bit of an unnecessary and annoying thing, but that's a detail). The 1UPT has huge impact on how combats in the two games play out, as you may well imagine. I think Civ4 was an almost perfect game - it did pretty much perfect on any aspect of the series - but in Civ4, as with any other game in the series prior to it, I didn't like combat. I found the "stack of doom" tedious, and I hated how an AI that was behind me in technology would roll in with a stack of 50 outdated units and crush my technologically superior but numerically inferior empire.
This has completely changed in Civ5. Because you now can only stack one unit in each tile - which is accompagned by actually ranged units that can attack over two or more tiles, thus standing behind their allies and attack at a distance - numbers means far less, and strategic application of your units means far more. You can indeed pull a "300" with the right placement of your units. I prefer this style, and I would hav said this was an undisputable advance for the game if not, and this is a bit IF, for the fact that the AI is terrible at coping with these new features. At release it was downright moronic, and at this point it's still only mediocre at best. At higher difficulty level it will still prove a challenge because the advantages it gets simply lets it threaten you with sheer numbers, at least for a while, but still ... if a challeging strategic opponent is what you're after, you'll probably be disappointed. On the other hand, you'll get the possibility to prove your superior skills and win with fewer but better units, which I find a satisfaction.
When all that is said, there are some other things you need to take into account. Multiplayer aspects of Civ5 is seriously lacking from what I hear (I only play SP myself). There are some other changes on management, most notably happiness has gone from being local to being global, which means less micromanagement (one city can have more unhappiness than happiness if another provides surplus happiness from luxury resources etc.) - whether one sees that as a good thing or a bad is a question of taste. I say it has approx. the same number of advantages and disadvantages to cut even, but there are players who see this as a big flaw.
You need to buy expansion pack Gods and Kings also to get game elements like Religion and Espionage. Religion is far evolved and much better than in Civ4 - now you customize the benefits you get from your religion by picking certain beliefs, but it's a first-takes-first principle, so if you downscale this aspect, someone else might take the good beliefs from you! Espionage is plain horrible imo. - it's much less elaborate than in Civ4, which I didn't really like either, but the new one is also horrible, so I play with it turned off.
On the bottom line, I'd say deffinitely buy the Gold Edition - I think it's on sale or has just been on sale on steam for -75 % which is a steal. Imo. it's a fantastic game, and I believe with the upcoming expansion it will be even better. It seriously lacks in late game currently (as did Civ4 before BtS) and I think new expansion will help with this (even though they won't have coorporations apparantly, bwah). But if you can't imagine a Civ game without stacks of doom, or MP is your only focus, you might want to think twice.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted March 16, 2013 10:45 PM |
|
|
I have greatly enjoyed the single player so far. I have the expansions and plan to get Brave New World.
I did not buy the game when it first came out. I first noticed it on my Steam library a few months back. I guess it came with the X-Com preorder. I was quite bored with my current stock of games at the time, so I fired it up. I have gotten a lot of enjoyment out of the game and would have easily paid full price for it.
As a bonus, the games stirs my interest in the various cvilizations and I have spent quite a bit of time reading about their fascinating contributions to the world.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
Miru
Supreme Hero
A leaf in the river of time
|
|
posted March 18, 2013 06:18 AM |
|
|
Quote:
What do you guys think of CiV5 overall. Worth a purchase, or should I just stick with Civ4, which IMO was damn near perfect?
Definitely stick with civ4. I played Civ 5 for a total of 19 hours ever, it is balls. They tried to make the game simple and accessible and in the process completely destroyed the game. In Civ 4 there were like 50 different units with varying strategic uses and different bonuses. In Civ 5 there is a 4 way rock-paper-scissors combo (I think it was sword - pike - horse - archer) that just upgrades the first three eras, then turns into gun / tank or something stupid. Civ 5 has a pitiful number of things to build with simple bonuses that really fail to capture the feeling of developing a city. And everywhere you go there is an unending slough of things that make you think in a disappointed tone "really?  ".. roads cost money to maintain, units don't stack in combat, the technology choices are absurd (they have archaeology, dynamite, acoustics, and globalization, but not paper, assembly line or guilds), archers can shoot over tiles (tens, to hundreds of miles depending on what map size you are playing) and on.
They improved a number of things -- religion and government are tons cooler, and borders are awesome. But at the end of the day, it doesn't feel like you are managing a growing empire, as much as playing a tutorial for a real game.
____________
I wish I were employed by a stupendous paragraph, with capitalized English words and expressions.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted March 18, 2013 01:22 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Definitely stick with civ4. I played Civ 5 for a total of 19 hours ever, it is balls. They tried to make the game simple and accessible and in the process completely destroyed the game.
Wow, so after a total of 19 hours of play, you totally know this game? 
But like I said, depending on the priorities of the individual, it may or may not be a better game, but I think the units are actually more different than in previous games (or maybe I don't even understand your point on that) and writing it off just because the techs are called something different doesn't really make a sensible argument imo.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted March 18, 2013 01:35 PM |
|
|
Thanks for the nice review alci. Given I've owned every other Civ game, it's probably inevitable that I give it a try.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted March 24, 2013 01:59 PM |
|
|
Kotaku has some videos from the PAX panel on the new expansion. Brazil and Assyria are new civilizations you can choose. The video shows off tourism and new great works.
The expansion releases on July 9, 2013.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted March 25, 2013 08:16 AM |
|
|
Quote:
The expansion releases on July 9, 2013.
And the 12th for us lowly non-Americans.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted March 25, 2013 10:38 AM |
|
|
btw alci, is Civ 5 still about amassing towns?
I never liked that in Civ 4 city-spam was so badly encouraged. Managing empires with 20-30 cities was dull... it also made resource management unimportant. I.e. it didn't really matter if your towns weren't placed at perfect spots, as they would make up for it by sheer numbers
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Lexxan
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
|
|
posted March 25, 2013 11:13 AM |
|
|
Beating Civ5 with only a few cities is perfectly possible. Actually, some, more peaceful playing styles ENCOURAGE small empires. Some Civs get bonuses from being small (Ethiopia gets a combat bonus vs larger Civs, India gets a happiness bonus if they have less cities, Austria doesn't need to found Cities to expand as it can annex City States, the Huns raze Cities more quickly than any Civ etc)
Being large gives you a big edge militaristically, but that also makes you a big target of the AI. Small pacifistic empires that focus on a few cities with large populations are often the dark horse that can grab a Cultural or Science victory while everyone else is busy combatting one another)
ANYWAY: two confirmed new Civs: Brazil and Assyria.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted March 28, 2013 07:53 PM |
|
|
Quote:
btw alci, is Civ 5 still about amassing towns?
I never liked that in Civ 4 city-spam was so badly encouraged. Managing empires with 20-30 cities was dull... it also made resource management unimportant. I.e. it didn't really matter if your towns weren't placed at perfect spots, as they would make up for it by sheer numbers
I think compared to Civ 4, going tall (i.e. few very large cities) is a more viable option in Civ 5. In fact, some people complained that in vanilla Civ 5, this was the strategy that would give you the easiest scientific victory. Some tweaks in G&K tweaked balance a bit away from this, and perhaps some of the Mods I use cause this further, but I think since I stepped up to Emperor, I have a hard time pulling a win with a very narrow and tall empire - the obvious problem being that a wide empire will generally sustain a larger number of military units, which means that a runaway wide AI will be able to crush you. This makes diplomacy much more crucial when you play tall, and sadly, Civ 5 AI is notoriously erratic - it will backstab you if it finds you an easy target, almost no matter how "nice" you have played with it entire game.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted March 29, 2013 09:21 AM |
|
|
In other words, the vanilla was close to my taste, but since then it moved away from it
Oh well, I'll pass.
I recall the torture of going through wiping a big enemy in Civ 4. He could (and he did) plant new cities faster than you could raze his old ones. 100 turns of searching for another of his 9001 1pop cities that he made as soon as you declared war... ugh.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
|
|
