Civilization V Catch-All

NSMike wrote:

I did not get into Civ 4. Loved Revolution. But ultimately, looking forward to this one.

But I agree with Tannhauser. Alpha Centauri 2, please!

Zaque wrote:

Damnit, I just decided that I wouldn't bother upgrading my ancient computer for a few more years because there weren't going to be any games I couldn't get on a console. Oh well there goes that resolution.

Man I would love a Apha Centauri 2.

And inhale....exhale...inhale...exhale...

Sweet. Now I don't have to buy another PC game for a few years.

H...hexagons?!

What witchery is this?!

Am I the only one whose mind is blown by this?

Civ is on a square grid. Hell, I had enough trouble moving from Civ 1 to 2 when they went from squares to (isometric) diamonds. Hexagons?

I don't think I can handle this. That's two fewer directions you can move in!

Maybe I stand alone, but I really hope they've tossed out Civ's combat engine and replaced it with something else. I like most of Civ, but in practice combat is boring, tedious, and unfortunately unavoidable.

Maq wrote:

Sounds awesome, but I can't see the screenshots. Will it have hexes?

Floomi wrote:

H...hexagons?!

What witchery is this?!

Am I the only one whose mind is blown by this?

Civ is on a square grid. Hell, I had enough trouble moving from Civ 1 to 2 when they went from squares to (isometric) diamonds. Hexagons?

I don't think I can handle this. That's two fewer directions you can move in!

HEXES!

I'm just so happy right now!

Staats wrote:

Maybe I stand alone, but I really hope they've tossed out Civ's combat engine and replaced it with something else. I like most of Civ, but in practice combat is boring, tedious, and unfortunately unavoidable.

It's completely avoidable: just don't piss anybody off.

But I want to win...

Really excited about Civ V. I am very curious about Civ network. I would be great if a new Civ Rev was in the works as well, but three games seems too much to ask for.

Maybe they'll find an alternative to the Stack o' Doom. I loved Civ 4, but always found it tedious to build, maintain, and direct armies of 20-30 units per stack.

nihilo wrote:
ubrakto wrote:

I am approaching this one with cautious optimism. Want to learn more about what's being changed. I don't want my heart broken if they can't surpass the wonderfulness that remains Civ 4.

I'll echo that cautious optimism, but I don't know that Civ 5 needs to better than Civ 4 to consider it a success.

...

Worse case scenario, I'll still play Civ 4, which has aged phenomenally well.

Yes, that's absolutely true (on both counts).

Great now I need another computer so I can play this with my wife.

You don't see the giant stacks of DOOM in Civ4 that you saw in Civ3. Like, 100 tanks? I just don't see that. Yes, you still see stacks, just not as bad as they used to be.

Ditching 2 types of combat power was a good direction.

I'm still not thrilled with naval combat. I think an aircraft carrier should be able to do something to get a very very long line of sight without having to manually have a plane do a scouting mission every turn. Maybe the ability to put a single plane into a special kind of "fortify" mode. Also, I want to put bombers back on carriers.

Though diplomacy improved from C3 to C4, it still has room for improvement. Sometimes an AI civ will refuse to even consider trading something because "we don't like you enough", no matter how insanely lucrative your offer is. That needs to be fixed. If he doesn't like me, fine, he should just insist I offer him a lot more for trades. Come on, if offer Fission, Composites, and Plastics for a player's world map, there's no way he should turn that down!

Quintin_Stone wrote:

...Come on, if offer Fission, Composites, and Plastics for a player's world map, there's no way he should turn that down!

Sounds like someone doesn't take rejection well

IMAGE(http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/6649/hexes.jpg)

Couldn't be happier over here.

I don't get it. What am I looking at here, Gunner?

Wembley wrote:

I don't get it. What am I looking at here, Gunner?

Ah, well Mr. Wembley, head on over to the trading post thread and pick up that copy of Dragon Age for $25 before it's gone.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

You don't see the giant stacks of DOOM in Civ4 that you saw in Civ3. Like, 100 tanks? I just don't see that. Yes, you still see stacks, just not as bad as they used to be.

Unless you play with the Aggressive AI option. I've seen HUGE opposing stacks in Civ4; maybe not with 100 units but there are enough there that you lose count. Of course they could be a full tech era behind you...

Civilization V! It's Civilization IV, with hexagons!

(I'll buy it anyway)

I also approve of hexes!

Although the announcement of Civ V makes me realize that Civ IV really hasn't gotten enough loving from me.

syndicatedragon wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

You don't see the giant stacks of DOOM in Civ4 that you saw in Civ3. Like, 100 tanks? I just don't see that. Yes, you still see stacks, just not as bad as they used to be.

Unless you play with the Aggressive AI option. I've seen HUGE opposing stacks in Civ4; maybe not with 100 units but there are enough there that you lose count. Of course they could be a full tech era behind you...

Economies make it harder to support that kind of stack in Civ4 though. Support costs are probably the main reason they're less common.

I CANNOT KNOW THIS!

Really.

I better hope like heck we actually get this new project that just got dropped on my head finished on time.

Quintin_Stone wrote:
syndicatedragon wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

You don't see the giant stacks of DOOM in Civ4 that you saw in Civ3. Like, 100 tanks? I just don't see that. Yes, you still see stacks, just not as bad as they used to be.

Unless you play with the Aggressive AI option. I've seen HUGE opposing stacks in Civ4; maybe not with 100 units but there are enough there that you lose count. Of course they could be a full tech era behind you...

Economies make it harder to support that kind of stack in Civ4 though. Support costs are probably the main reason they're less common.

Agreed, unless you're the AI and you cheat.

I just realized something. Hexes means no more fat city cross.

No more fat crosses!

*head explodes*

syndicatedragon wrote:

Agreed, unless you're the AI and you cheat.

So true.

MyBrainHz wrote:

I just realized something. Hexes means no more fat city cross.

No more fat crosses!

*head explodes*

So true.

MyBrainHz wrote:

I just realized something. Hexes means no more fat city cross.

No more fat crosses!

*head explodes*

I guess if they use the same mechanic, it would just be a simple radius of two hexes.

HEXES!

syndicatedragon wrote:

HEXES!

__ / \__ \__/ \ \__/

!

(I can't believe nobody else did that yet)

NSMike wrote:
Wembley wrote:

I don't get it. What am I looking at here, Gunner?

Ah, well Mr. Wembley, head on over to the trading post thread and pick up that copy of Dragon Age for $25 before it's gone.

A Dragon Age thing, eh? Interesting.

Great news! It has been too long since I was able to kill chariots with Main Battle Tanks.

and Hexes!

Enchantment?