Civilization V |OT| of Losing My Religion, And I Feel Fine...
- Thread starter XiaNaphryz
- Start date
Hari Seldon
Member
Mael said:
Well Civ V is using Direct X 11.
I've fortunate to have spent most of my Civ IV time in BTS. I played a good bit of vanilla Civ IV, but most of the tweaks that came with Civ IV BTS made it a much better game.HooCares said:
Since the series is going through a thorough reboot, I'm more than happy to jump headfirst into Civ V. There will be some bumpy game mechanics at first (it's hard to find a game that doesn't), but nothing seems game-breaking so far.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
Look up a few posts. ;PGuled said:
platypotamus
Member
Zero Hero said:My biggest decision is whether or not I'm going to have to take off work next Wednesday. I suspect I'll be going to bed pretty late on Tuesday.
My vacation starts on Tuesday
I really hope I can have a diplomatic victory like in the previous games. It's really nice to have a chance to win the game without fighting any wars. Peacefully.
But that Gandhi picture just ripped my heart off. Is that real? does that happen often? It's Gandhi we're talking about. If Gandhi does that often (All aggressive ai, no personalities anymore), I can only imagine no dimplomatic victory is going to be acheived.
My worst fear is that a more aggressive AI is incorporated to make the game more "insteresting" who constantly just wants to kill you like in every single rts game.
I am talking about things like historic personalities, like for examble rulers like Gandhi should have diplomatic goals and should engage in wars very rarely.
But that Gandhi picture just ripped my heart off. Is that real? does that happen often? It's Gandhi we're talking about. If Gandhi does that often (All aggressive ai, no personalities anymore), I can only imagine no dimplomatic victory is going to be acheived.
Ofcourse it is. But I am largelly talking about the AI here.platypotamus said:
My worst fear is that a more aggressive AI is incorporated to make the game more "insteresting" who constantly just wants to kill you like in every single rts game.
I am talking about things like historic personalities, like for examble rulers like Gandhi should have diplomatic goals and should engage in wars very rarely.
platypotamus
Member
raphier said:
Diplomatic victories are in. There's even an achievement for winning a game without killing a single unit or entering into a single war.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
Gandhi's always been like that from the first game. :lolraphier said:
No way! He was the most diplomatic ruler in my Civ IV !czartim said:
I have to be honest when I say I like Civilization for a chance not to fight any wars. I really loved to win the game just by diplomacy, culture and religion, hope that hasn't changed, but it looks V's taken a turn-around with remade combat, so...
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
What? All the non-combat victory conditions are still in. As I mentioned earlier, the lead designer has often played games where he has a civ with just three cities and still does really well. If anything, it sounds like Civ V will make it easier to win with non-combat methods since internal growth seems to do just as well as territory expansion. Overhauling the combat engine doesn't mean the other stuff goes away.raphier said:No way! He was the most diplomatic ruler in my Civ IV !
I have to be honest when I say I like Civilization for a chance not to fight any wars. I really loved to win the game just by diplomacy, culture and religion, hope that hasn't changed, but it looks V's taken a turn-around with remade combat, so...
I guess I'll add the victory conditions to the OP. I've also added the awesome Gandhi shot to the OP.
raphier said:No way! He was the most diplomatic ruler in my Civ IV !
I have to be honest when I say I like Civilization for a chance not to fight any wars. I really loved to win the game just by diplomacy, culture and religion, hope that hasn't changed, but it looks V's taken a turn-around with remade combat, so...
He always declares wars against me. :lol Brings his friends too.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
OP updated with Victory Conditions.raphier said:
* Domination: Victory now only requires capture of all of the other civilizations' original capitals. Capture of an enemy capital does not eliminate a civilization from the game, as a different city will be designated as a new capital. However, the original capital is the one that's necessary for Domination victory - a civilization cannot achieve Domination if it is not in possession of its original capital.
* Culture: Victory requires construction of the Utopia Project, unlocked by filling 5 of 10 Social Policy trees purchased with Culture.
* Science Victory: Win the Space race by building a starship to launch towards Alpha Centauri. Each starship module produced must be transported to the Capital, allowing for other civs to intercept them.
* Diplomatic Victory: Win the United Nations vote. All civilizations and city-states now have only 1 vote. There is a progress screen that actually tracks the number of votes you have, so triggering an election can now be a reliable means of winning the game.
* Time Victory: Have the highest score at 2050 AD.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
Bad move, as that means Montezuma will invade while you're busy with that.KaYotiX said:
Always wipe out the Aztecs first, as early as possible. You will regret it later on unless you can sic them on someone else for most of the game.
Yeah, I hope Aztec irrationality is a little better in this game, just yesterday, I started a game of Civ 4 and was on an island with Montezuma. It was like "great, I only have contact with one civilization that I know for sure it will try to destroy me".
...and the fucker succeded.
...and the fucker succeded.
Hari Seldon
Member
I read or heard somewhere that they make the civs so that they can "vary" in personality. So like Ghandi is a more peaceful civ but there is still some randomness in every game if he is more or less peaceful than usual.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
It's in the OP, perhaps that's where you read it?Hari Seldon said:
Yeah Montezuma is a jerk. I was playing an Earth map game with Japan, and after I conquered most of Asia and was moving into Europe, fucking Montezuma declares war on me. What the hell, I barely even talked to you and you're halfway around the world in America. He sent over a few ships that I swatted down, so instead of going into Europe I decided to just whomp him. Little did I know he more or less conquered all of North and South America so his empire was just as big as mine. I nuked him a few times but his empire was just too big and he didn't care at all that I turned a significant portion of his population into radioactive mutants. Eventually the game crashed every time I loaded that file because our armies were too massive. Good times.
Also Catherine is a certified bitch. She is always just looking to start something. I'm actually a little angry she's back in the game. And where is Genghis Khan? He was a really fun leader to play as if you wanted to focus on military conquest.
Also Catherine is a certified bitch. She is always just looking to start something. I'm actually a little angry she's back in the game. And where is Genghis Khan? He was a really fun leader to play as if you wanted to focus on military conquest.
I'm pretty Xenophobic. I find it difficult to get along with others. Especially if they are on my land*. I hold a grudge for a a long time; hundreds and sometimes thousands of years. I am militaristic and expansionistic. If Borg was an option then I am Borg...
I love Civ as it plays to the petty tyrant in me. I'm only 5'4 inches tall and Napoleon is my Role Model.
*The whole land mass/continent that I start on i consider mine.
I love Civ as it plays to the petty tyrant in me. I'm only 5'4 inches tall and Napoleon is my Role Model.
*The whole land mass/continent that I start on i consider mine.
I suppose general strategy will be to have most cities as puppet states and when happiness allow, anex them.
I think we will see very little razing going on, unless, of course, you want to destroy a city you know it will be re-captured.
But preventing to raze the capital seems to be there for this exactly reason, you no longer need to decimate his empire to win the game, you just have to conquer this one city. So work for it.
I think we will see very little razing going on, unless, of course, you want to destroy a city you know it will be re-captured.
But preventing to raze the capital seems to be there for this exactly reason, you no longer need to decimate his empire to win the game, you just have to conquer this one city. So work for it.
Hari Seldon
Member
XiaNaphryz said:It's in the OP, perhaps that's where you read it?
:lol Yeah probably I have been following this game from a lot of sources.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
Delayed territorial release for a DD game is straight up fucking bullshit.
I predict complaining from people who buy retail and cannot play too.
I hope at least the demo thats out on the 21st is region free.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
The strong anti-Steam sentiment several people have over there is baffling to me. People are seriously not wanting to play this game solely because you have to launch it from Steam? :lolCday said:
Danne-Danger
Member
He can be a bitch to invade on a highland map, but then again, so can Brennus. But yeah. it does seem like other AI:s like to gang up on him with trade embargos and such. It's probably a tie between him, Mansa Munsa and Wan Kong for most hated (non-warmongering) civ amongst AI:s.JoeMartin said:
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
Looks like a lot of the achievements listed were unconfirmed when originally posted, I've taken them off for.
platypotamus
Member
XiaNaphryz said:
You can see them on Steam itself (no idea who's profile this is, this link came from the steam forums somewhere):
http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197962691824/stats/appid/8930/achievements