View Full Version : Civ V
SgtJoo
10 Aug 2010, 02:52pm
Turn based, but whatever. Decent place to put this.
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/9/2010/08/500x_civ_v_hands-on_preview_i.jpg
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/9/2010/08/500x_civ_v_hands-on_preview_iii.jpg
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/9/2010/08/500x_civ_v_hands-on_preview_iv.jpg
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/9/2010/08/500x_civ_v_hands-on_preview_ii.jpg
Stole the images, article in the link.
http://kotaku.com/5602257/400-turns-of-civilization-v
I can't wait...
Dracula
10 Aug 2010, 03:53pm
Cant wait to rape you, over and over again.
SgtJoo
10 Aug 2010, 04:53pm
Cant wait to rape you, over and over again.
Get your fucking immortals the hell out of here.
Online works even if you don't pay....you just use Skidrow, open steamclient.dll in notepad, replace any "Skidrow" you find with your steam login ....then just keep steam open whilst you play. Changing download region in Steam to UK-London helps apparently.
Italian Jew
28 Sep 2010, 09:15am
As long as a spearman won't rape my tank for 10 consecutive hit points, then I might get this.
Movement
2 Oct 2010, 07:26pm
I loved Civ IV and now I'm addicted to Civ 5.
Online works even if you don't pay....you just use Skidrow, open steamclient.dll in notepad, replace any "Skidrow" you find with your steam login ....then just keep steam open whilst you play. Changing download region in Steam to UK-London helps apparently.
Wait.. What..
PotshotPolka
3 Oct 2010, 06:58pm
Is the combat essentially the exact same as I-IV or is actually less retarded than before?
downloading this to try it before i buy it
i heard a lot of great things about this game
Movement
3 Oct 2010, 07:14pm
Is the combat essentially the exact same as I-IV or is actually less retarded than before?
One unit per tile, does that answer your question?
SgtJoo
3 Oct 2010, 07:21pm
Is good game.
SgtJoo
3 Oct 2010, 07:46pm
Prefer Total War tbh....
Different types of strategy games...
Different types of strategy games...
One is better than the other...
I don't see how them not being 10000000000% identical to each other means that I can't make that statement. Perhaps Total War being a different type of strategy game is what makes it better?
SgtJoo
3 Oct 2010, 08:26pm
One is better than the other...
I don't see how them not being 10000000000% identical to each other means that I can't make that statement. Perhaps Total War being a different type of strategy game is what makes it better?
No, it's apples and oranges. I can't definitively say Modern Warfare 2 is better than a 3rd person shooter can I?
Also, just your opinion. :huh:
Ultramarine
4 Oct 2010, 03:48am
Is the combat essentially the exact same as I-IV or is actually less retarded than before?
No more stacks of doom.
No, it's apples and oranges. I can't definitively say Modern Warfare 2 is better than a 3rd person shooter can I?
I don't agree at all. I would say you can compare anything. Can you literally not compare Rome Total War and Civ 5? Of course you can....they're almost the same....in fact I think it's pretty pointless comparing things that are alike......there's nothing different about them so nothing to compare.
Apples can be compared to oranges.
Also, just your opinion. :huh:
Well yeah......I did say "Prefer Total War tbh" which always suggested I wasn't trying to pass it off as a fact.
But hey.....it's not "JUST" your opinion......opinions are fine......if you don't respect mine...fine..but it's still my opinion and it's as good as anyone elses.
Combat feels a lot better, you can't build huge stacks of doom anymore, and ranged units are actually ranged! (unlike the suicide catapults of civ4)
SgtJoo
4 Oct 2010, 11:10am
I don't agree at all. I would say you can compare anything. Can you literally not compare Rome Total War and Civ 5? Of course you can....they're almost the same....in fact I think it's pretty pointless comparing things that are alike......there's nothing different about them so nothing to compare.
Apples can be compared to oranges.
Well yeah......I did say "Prefer Total War tbh" which always suggested I wasn't trying to pass it off as a fact.
But hey.....it's not "JUST" your opinion......opinions are fine......if you don't respect mine...fine..but it's still my opinion and it's as good as anyone elses.
You can compare them but it's pointless. Comparing cross genre doesn't really make much sense. I can literally compare computers and dishwashers, they're both appliances, but it makes no sense to do so. Comparing two things finds similarities between two things, you're talking about contrasting Civ V and the Total War series. Contrasting the two doesn't give you any useful information.
An overwhelming majority of review sites/fans of the game are heaping praise on Civ V. Sure it has its flaws, but overall it's a great game. Don't knock it until you try it.
Italian Jew
4 Oct 2010, 11:11am
So can a spearman still destroy my tank?
PotshotPolka
4 Oct 2010, 11:14am
I'd still rather play HOI3 lol.
SgtJoo
4 Oct 2010, 11:17am
So can a spearman still destroy my tank?
I'm pretty sure the answer is no considering a single rifleman can dominate any non gunpowder unit ad infinitum.
You can compare them but it's pointless. Comparing cross genre doesn't really make much sense. I can literally compare computers and dishwashers, they're both appliances, but it makes no sense to do so. Comparing two things finds similarities between two things, you're talking about contrasting Civ V and the Total War series. Contrasting the two doesn't give you any useful information.
Contrasting gives you all the information you need. For a start......Civ 5 has basic AI % generated battles where as Total War has extremely strategical real time battles that you can control yourself. Now....that is a contrast and it tells me that Total War has by FAR the superior battles. That's just an example.....I could go on.
Comparing is like "Yuh derp they're both the same type of game to the very bone" and if that's how similar games have to be for you to classify them as "comparable games" then you've just made comparing games completely redundant. I don't see how you can compare Total War and Civ 5 to dishwashers and computers seeing as how they're both turn based strategy games....
An overwhelming majority of review sites/fans of the game are heaping praise on Civ V. Sure it has its flaws, but overall it's a great game. Don't knock it until you try it.
I did try it though.....obviously I'm not going to criticise a game without even playing it. I'm not going to just conform to whatever review sites say.....there's quite a lot of games that are popular among a group of people.....but I don't like the game at all.
It has it's flaws, and overall it's an average game. When I'm playing it it feels all wrong.....my main disappointment is that the battles are very lame......and secondly 100 years go by for every turn or something like that.....you research something and 10 turns later it's outdated. Does it really take an army 500-1000 years to get from south to north Africa? It's ridiculous...and it's another reason why I prefer Total War....it's over a small time span and so you get the best of one era rather than a "Jack of all trades" game.
I prefer rebels in Total War to barbarians in Civ 5....research wise both are good, but economics wise I feel Total War is ahead. Diplomacy wise both are fairly weak.....
Sure they're different games..but it's very easy for me to pick out and say what makes one better than the other...I'm still going to play Civ 5 a bit but it's just another game to kill time.
Dracula
4 Oct 2010, 03:52pm
I did try it though.....obviously I'm not going to criticise a game without even playing it. I'm not going to just conform to whatever review sites say.....there's quite a lot of games that are popular among a group of people.....but I don't like the game at all.
It has it's flaws, and overall it's an average game. When I'm playing it it feels all wrong.....my main disappointment is that the battles are very lame......and secondly 100 years go by for every turn or something like that.....you research something and 10 turns later it's outdated. Does it really take an army 500-1000 years to get from south to north Africa? It's ridiculous...and it's another reason why I prefer Total War....it's over a small time span and so you get the best of one era rather than a "Jack of all trades" game.
I prefer rebels in Total War to barbarians in Civ 5....research wise both are good, but economics wise I feel Total War is ahead. Diplomacy wise both are fairly weak.....
Sure they're different games..but it's very easy for me to pick out and say what makes one better than the other...I'm still going to play Civ 5 a bit but it's just another game to kill time.
Rofl, sounds like someone really dosent know much about playing CIV the way you describe many things.
Movement
5 Oct 2010, 11:37am
So can a spearman still destroy my tank?
No, but a musket man can destroy your planes.
Tweezy
5 Oct 2010, 12:40pm
Pretty disappointed with the combat system... I was hoping for something like Total War... Oh well :( Still a good game though, but I prefer total war.
Ultramarine
5 Oct 2010, 01:04pm
Pretty disappointed with the combat system... I was hoping for something like Total War... Oh well :( Still a good game though, but I prefer total war.
Why the devil would Civ 5's combat system be like total war?
Have you ever played a Civ game before?
Civ 5s combat system is pretty much like Panzer General from the 90s... awesome WWII Turn base strat game.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.