Alright boyz, here we go!!! Civ 5 first impressions & tips thread!

[henry296]

Some quick observations on my next game; a prince archipelago map.

1. Started a on a samll island and built 4 cities plus one on a nearby island. So far on wa and it is 1866.
2. Taj Mahal is a great wonder. It gave me a 22 turn golden age. While I building I also built Machu Pichu at the same time and turned those 2 artists into 2 more golden ages, so I had over 40 consecutive turns of a golden age
3. I'm really levaragin city-states. I'm up to 10 allies. I started with the maritimes states to supply my food while my cities built hills and had a production focus.
4. I get the feeling that it is a little easier than Civ4, I'm moving up a level for my next game. I'll probably go for a tech or diplomacy win.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by henry296

Some quick observations on my next game; a prince archipelago map.

1. Started a on a samll island and built 4 cities plus one on a nearby island. So far on wa and it is 1866.
2. Taj Mahal is a great wonder. It gave me a 22 turn golden age. While I building I also built Machu Pichu at the same time and turned those 2 artists into 2 more golden ages, so I had over 40 consecutive turns of a golden age
3. I'm really levaragin city-states. I'm up to 10 allies. I started with the maritimes states to supply my food while my cities built hills and had a production focus.
4. I get the feeling that it is a little easier than Civ4, I'm moving up a level for my next game. I'll probably go for a tech or diplomacy win.

Try another game on a non-water based map and see how you feel. I do agree that Civ V does seem a hair easier (I'm about to finish a game on King level myself that seemed easier than Civ IV's King). The water heavy boards seem to give further advantage to the players though in my opinion. I still don't think the AI understands water strategy too well.

[henry296]

One more thing... I haven't built a single road althought I may build railroads for the production boost.

[henry296]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Try another game on a non-water based map and see how you feel. I do agree that Civ V does seem a hair easier (I'm about to finish a game on King level myself that seemed easier than Civ IV's King). The water heavy boards seem to give further advantage to the players though in my opinion. I still don't think the AI understands water strategy too well.

I got that feeling too. Even into the 1800s I was finding city ruins which allowed me to take a gifted Cavalry and turn into Modern Armor with 2 good city ruins.

[henry296]

Another question. Why can't a stack an embarked military unit with my settler that I'm taking aross the water to another island.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by henry296

One more thing... I haven't built a single road althought I may build railroads for the production boost.

I easily took over 3 of the 4 civs on my continent with (5) Comp Cav that were then upgraded to Knights. I picked up a bunch of workers somehow and set them building a road daisy chaining from my capital way up north. It took a while and they pretty much got all connected within a few turns. My g/t and happiness were hurting and once the trade routes got established, I instantly went from -3 g/t and 1 happiness to 47 g/t and +7 happiness, plus a golden age in there. It's probably a trade-off between what I got and the maintenance for the roads, but at least I can move units from the north quicker.

Regarding Militaristic city-states, the last three units I got were Knights, exactly the latest and greatest unit that I am fighting with! Had gotten a Catapult and a Scout earlier but immediately gifted those to some other city-state.

The only other civ left on my continent are the French. While other civs were easy pushovers, the French has Longswordsmen and Spearmen, and quite a few of them (plus about 6 cities). I don't think I'll have much problems, esp. using the greatly overpowered Insta-Heal, but the 1upt does make combat a lot of fun. Have to pay much more attention to unit placement.

Like everyone playing the game, haven't seen the AI do anything on the water, except for a few Barb Galleys.

I'm a couple techs from Rifling, still in early AD (on Normal speed). Maybe I ought to go over to Astronomy.

[PraetorianX]

Started a new game last night with the Terra map.

The continent is a sort of reversed L sort of shape, kind of. I'm up north along with India and the Iroquois. Down south across the desert is Japan and Siam. On the western part of the continent are Rome, Ottomans and Egypt.

I was trying to keep India and the Iroquois from spreading into 'my' area where I intended to settle so I found myself getting into it with them diplomatically, neither particularly liked me although Gandhi was too timid to do anything, or even say anything. The Iroquois kept mouthing off at me, annoying little pricks.

Anyway, the Japanese and Siamese suddenly DoW'd me and a couple turns later the Iroquois jumped on as well. Siam and Japan only sent one Japanese unit for quite some time so I was easily able to focus my attention on the Iroquois, destroyed their units and as soon as I started to threaten Grand River they gave me a bunch of gold.

So I heal up a few units and then send one of my archers to take a hill with a good view of the stretch of land that my other two remaining enemies will be coming up through from the south. I get on the hill and GOD DAMN! I nearly crapped myself as there were a TON of units there, a good dozen or so in sight.

And Siam did well of surrounding my units, attacking, destroying, and moving healthy units up to the front line while injured units healed. Dunno if that was the AI or just a coincidence.

Anyway they sort of caught me off guard with that massive attack and my units not fully positioned.

Now the only way into my land from the south is a stretch of about, I dunno maybe seven tiles with Philly on one side and Boston on the other.

They split up their attack with the Japanese making moves on Boston to the east and Siam against Philadelphia on the west coast.

I had to split my defense to try and cover both, and took out a good many units before the Japanese switched west and helped Siam take Philly.

One or two turns later I was able to destroy the last units in the area, but had to recover a bit to try and take Philadelphia. Siam sent a few more units, a few more fights, but eventually I retook the city and then forced a peace from Siam.

The Japanese were a little more stubborn but I got peace from them eventually to.

All in all, it was very fun.

I'm not sure if the AI was just going all clever on me or if it was just a coincidence.

When the Japanese laid off Boston and moved on Philly, I was just preparing my counter-attack and was overloading north of Boston with cavalry, hoping to swoop down from the NE and sweep up all the units while keeping my archers in the NW raining down death upon the Siamese.

So that may be why the Japanese moved. Dunno.

It was fun though.

[Buccaneer]

Here's a couple screenshots. The first shows why I love hexes and 1upt. The French had just taken the Aztec capital (before I got my units in place). I got four Knights in place ready to declare war on France, plus a Great General. They have three Spearmen (including the one embarked) plus a Longswordsmen and an Archer. I moved the Great General one hex so the three Knights would get the bonus (plus the 15% for Honor). The Knight on the right went into the forest to take on the Spears and with the bonuses, eliminated them (surprisingly). The next Knight got the Archers with no problems. The other Knight took on the Spears sitting on a hill and managed to inflict 7/10 damage while taking 5/10. But the secret weapon was the Scout coming in and finishing those Spears off. I left the Longswordmen alone, the attacked the next turn and then the Hoplites finished them off.



The second screenshot is just the next turn, showing off. That means I will have to jump up to level 6 for my next game.

[Buccaneer]

After that, took a couple of turns to get the capital and then quite a few more French units came out of the mists. Slowly pressed forward, using Insta-Heal when appropriate, facing three French cities in the cloud and then Napoleon sued for peace, offering me his kingdom for my horse.

[henry296]

I used harbors to create my trade routes instead of roads.

Right now I'm getting 42 gold per turn, 17 happiness, 175 culture and 283 science from just 5 cities.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by henry296

I used harbors to create my trade routes instead of roads.

Right now I'm getting 42 gold per turn, 17 happiness, 175 culture and 283 science from just 5 cities.

I'm researching Compass now, I think I should have made that an early priority.

[Ben E Lou]

Is anyone else playing Marathon speed? I keep reading stories that seem like people are finishing games in just a few gaming sessions (or just one). I'm still on my first game, and it's far from decided. I haven't even made contact with everyone yet. (Huge map, small continents.)

A few impressions:

• Diplomacy is striking me as bizarre. An opponent hates me, fights a bitter war with me, then wants to snuggle up and be friends, then attacks again, then wants to snuggle up and be friends. Rinse. Repeat.
• Diplomacy also isn't transparent enough. I have no real idea how I'm doing, or if something I did affected the relationship. I miss the easy little numbers from Civ4.
• No-stacking rule is great. I like the strategic options it creates with some narrow strips of land.
• Maybe it's just how my game is going, but right now I'm having to play purely reactively. Elizabeth attacks from the north, so I send nearly all my troops northward. Iroquois come from the SW, so they go there. Then Catherine comes from the SE, and I turn my attention there. I haven't had a breather to build up my armies or focus on econ for several days of gaming now.
• Man, so many of those policies look absolutely delicious. Great to have to make hard decisions in that arena--especially at Marathon where it's 60 or so turns between 'em right now.
• Gold is, uh, a little more useful than in previous versions. My current game is what it is, so I can't really focus on it heavily, but I certainly will in my next one.
• I used religion heavily in Civ4, but I'm not really missing it in Civ5.
• Espionage annoyed me in Civ4. Glad it's gone.
• Given that I *haven't* met everyone, I have this fear that our always-at-war continent may be woefully behind the rest of the world. I have this picture of one or two powers' Knights taking over the continent, only to be notice an aircraft carrier parked off the coast, and a cadre of tanks and marines following it.

[Buccaneer]

•I used religion heavily in Civ4, but I'm not really missing it in Civ5.
•Espionage annoyed me in Civ4. Glad it's gone.

Yep.

I've read stories about playing on Marathon. One of the earlier thoughts was to take your Civ4 speed and go down one. Don't recall why.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

Yep.

I've read stories about playing on Marathon. One of the earlier thoughts was to take your Civ4 speed and go down one. Don't recall why.

Probably impatience. It definitely feels slower. I don't know turn numbers from Civ4, but fwiw, I'm on turn 589, and it's 1388AD.

[henry296]

I think a normal game is longer. A standard game in Civ5 is now 500 turns vs. 400 in Civ4

[Buccaneer]

I looked at the GameSpeed xml file in BtS and Civ5 and they are the same:
Marathon=1500
Epic=750
Normal=500

There are lots of opinions on why Civ5 seems slower.

[henry296]

Saw might what be another bug. I'm getting the 50 production bonus for railroads with no railroads. Does a harbor do the same thing.

Finished my current game with 1949 diplomatic victory.

[PraetorianX]

I only play on marathon. As it is, things still go too fast for me. Unless your unique unit is late game you don't get much use out of them before suddenly it's obsolete.

[Ben E Lou]

Oh...and one more thing:

I disagree that militaristic city/states are useless. At least in my game, they've been *very* useful. More often than not, they've been building a unit with the latest technology. In fact, Almaty built and gifted a knight to me before I could build one myself.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by PraetorianX

I only play on marathon. As it is, things still go too fast for me. Unless your unique unit is late game you don't get much use out of them before suddenly it's obsolete.

I think this is one reason why the Aztec are a lousy nation to play, because their unit is useless before you even meet anyone, let alone actually gave enough military units to do something.

I like France's units - both have long periods of use. And both upgrade all the way to Mechanized Infantry when they get long in the tooth

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Oh...and one more thing:

I disagree that militaristic city/states are useless. At least in my game, they've been *very* useful. More often than not, they've been building a unit with the latest technology. In fact, Almaty built and gifted a knight to me before I could build one myself.

...and just now, my second musketman ever was a gift. I'd call that useful.

[Ben E Lou]

Didn't realize that you get gold for disbanding units. Very nice use of the extra workers I have after improving everything I can. I'll keep a few around for later discoveries...

[ColtCrazy]

I only play on marathon as well. I don't see the issue with units becoming obsolete too soon. Things seem to hang around a bit.

My game is far from over, but I'm a fairly cautious player early on, focusing on production and growth. My military is typically strong enough to play defense, although in my current game I went on the offensive when Egypt placed a city near my borders (which effectively kept me from growing because I was along the coast). I took two cities and got a nice peace settlement.

Loving the game. I was a huge Civ 4 fan, but I think this one is a tick better.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Oh...and one more thing:

I disagree that militaristic city/states are useless. At least in my game, they've been *very* useful. More often than not, they've been building a unit with the latest technology. In fact, Almaty built and gifted a knight to me before I could build one myself.

Do you keep your military forces pretty strong? I still find myself gifting or disbanding almost every unit a military state gives me. Either it puts me too much over the maintenance level or it is a useless unit for me. However admittedly, I almost always keep a pretty close to full force around as I find the AI to be pretty aggressive to me on higher levels if I expand too close to them.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Do you keep your military forces pretty strong? I still find myself gifting or disbanding almost every unit a military state gives me. Either it puts me too much over the maintenance level or it is a useless unit for me. However admittedly, I almost always keep a pretty close to full force around as I find the AI to be pretty aggressive to me on higher levels if I expand too close to them.

Well, keep in mind that this is my first game, it's on marathon, and I'm surrounded on three sides by hostile AIs. The answer to your first question is "I keep my military forces as strong as I possibly can, keeping in mind that I am constantly having to replace ones lost in battle." It is taking 30-40 turns for me to build good units in most cities, so getting on every 17 turns from one city-state, and every 20 turns from another is HUGE.

[Alan T]

That might be another difference. I've been playing faster paced games, just because I've been trying a bunch of different strategies to see what I like the best. So I'm finding no problem getting troops fast (I actually usually just buy troops as I need them though instead of building them). On a slower game, that might be a bigger issue I assume.

[gi]

Originally Posted by gi

Figured out that the game doesn't crash much at all in single player. Soon as my wife and I start a LAN hosted game, crashes all the time.

reduced graphic settings to Medium, no crashes in two hours of gaming with LAN play.

[Ben E Lou]

Speaking of the three sides, I *might* be able to take out Liz up north, and reduce that to two. That's my immediate objective.

[Passacaglia]

Doesn't it seem wonky that the gift is every 17 turns whether it's normal or marathon?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

I'm loving this game. The military aspect is much more manageable IMO. I also have a much easier time understanding why unhappiness and drops in income occur. I also think it's easier than Civ4, but I thought that was overly-difficult, so I prefer this level of difficulty.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Speaking of the three sides, I *might* be able to take out Liz up north, and reduce that to two. That's my immediate objective.

Speaking of AI issues, there's very little land left that I know of. *MAYBE* there's enough for one more city on our continent. I'm halfway into England, and I've encountered *four* English settlers hanging out. Looks like the AI doesn't know very well when to stop building those suckers.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Speaking of AI issues, there's very little land left that I know of. *MAYBE* there's enough for one more city on our continent. I'm halfway into England, and I've encountered *four* English settlers hanging out. Looks like the AI doesn't know very well when to stop building those suckers.

I've never encountered 4 settlers sitting around, but I've noticed the AI likes to keep one handy at all times at least. They seem to wait and wait and wait for some opening somewhere (razed town, or whatever) that they can slip a city in.

[Buccaneer]

Of the 11 city-states I am allied with, I think 3-4 of them are Militaristic. Do get some good units (Knights and Musk), some clunkers (Scout and Catapults). I gift the ones I do not need, as well as disband most of the workers I get during my battles.

Last night, I embarked 4 Knights and a Great General to the other continent and started in on the Americans until I got tired of fighting. Been doing battles all weekend and while fun, it's actually boring because the outcome is inevitable. I started the game doing wonders and social policies, then switched to military; I think now I'm going to work on the peaceful techs and see I can get culture way up. Or maybe a science victory.

One of the things to make Civ5 successful for me is that I don't want the game to be another military rush, esp. combined with the lack of AI defenses and stupidity. That was what Civ4 ended up being. Not only do I wish that the patches with significantly alter the balance militarily but to strengthen the value of buildings and wonders to where you have to make a hard choice of whether to build a small army or to build up culture, happiness, gold, GP, etc.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Do you keep your military forces pretty strong? I still find myself gifting or disbanding almost every unit a military state gives me. Either it puts me too much over the maintenance level or it is a useless unit for me. However admittedly, I almost always keep a pretty close to full force around as I find the AI to be pretty aggressive to me on higher levels if I expand too close to them.

I finished a game where I was allies of an adjacent military c state for most of the game, and it made all of my military for me, I didn;t make any myself, instead focusing on growth and the occasional naval unit. I was happy with it.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I've never encountered 4 settlers sitting around, but I've noticed the AI likes to keep one handy at all times at least. They seem to wait and wait and wait for some opening somewhere (razed town, or whatever) that they can slip a city in.

I've seen that a bunch too, the one hidden settler ready to go.

[JPhillips]

I just got the game on Friday. So far, two times entering the Renaissance, two crashes.

[RainMaker]

Is the crashing happening because of computers or because the game sucks?

[spleen1015]

I haven't had a single crash and Steam says I have played 53 hours.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I haven't had a single crash and Steam says I have played 53 hours.

Same here. Steam says I have played 91 hours and no crashes.

Probably related to specific hardware/software settings that Civ V has a problem with if someone is having crashes.

[gi]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Same here. Steam says I have played 91 hours and no crashes.

Probably related to specific hardware/software settings that Civ V has a problem with if someone is having crashes.

Crashes still happen in multiplayer for me, but after turning down graphics to medium, they happen a lot less.

Most up to date graphics drivers seem to solve a lot of issues.

[PraetorianX]

Eh, my computer is below the min. specs and I haven't had a single crash, and the game runs fine.

[Lonnie]

I had freezes when playing huge maps, but I updated my video drivers which were way overdue and haven't had any issues since.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Doesn't it seem wonky that the gift is every 17 turns whether it's normal or marathon?

Interesting. If this is correct, that's not wonky; it's plain dumb. And that would explain the discrepancy about the usefulness of this, too. Even in my most productive cities, there's very little of use that I can build in 17 turns on Marathon level. I've now gotten my "first" of several different unit types through gifts, despite the fact that the moment I research a tech that gives a new unit, I set at least one city to work building said new unit. I'm just getting them faster from city-states than I can hope to produce them. I don't know what 17 turns represents in the faster-moving levels, but it just makes sense that without any scaling there, it'll be most valuable on marathon.

[JPhillips]

I haven't timed it, but it certainly seems longer than 17 turns on epic.

[henry296]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Try another game on a non-water based map and see how you feel. I do agree that Civ V does seem a hair easier (I'm about to finish a game on King level myself that seemed easier than Civ IV's King). The water heavy boards seem to give further advantage to the players though in my opinion. I still don't think the AI understands water strategy too well.

Started another game on Prince. This time it was continents. I did a good job of taking the lead among the 4 Civs on my continent. Once i discovered the other continent America had dominated wiping out 2 of hte other civs, plus some city-states and the 3rd civ is on life support. We'll see if I can manage a culture or tech victory, but I'm definitely behind.

[Alan T]

I've found so far in my games on King level that I actually benefit from not wiping out my opponents. I actually need them for various things it seems and overextending myself cripples my civilization if I do it too quickly.

I have lately found striking through their hearts, ripping out their capital and one or two other of their best cities and then settling for a huge peace settlement works best.

I then have the best resources (or multiples), the best land, and 2 or 3 opponents that aren't going to be able to muster anything of a challenge. Their lands are split apart and often can't form trade routes, they have lousy land or positioning. I then sell those resources back to them every 30 turns for extra cash as well.

[AlexB]

Tried the demo for CiV after playing only the patched vanilla Civ4 - the demo made me buy straight away, but the Warlords & BTS packs for 4.

First impressions were that I didn't like the 1upt for non-fighting units, didin't like the 1upt for narrow passes, diplomacy was just weird (guess I'd get used to that though), hated the GUI, menus, etc, hated only one unit in each city

Really liked range attacks, but preferred religion over civics, and the speed of Civ4

I may well revisit CiV in a year or so when all patched up with mods as I am sure it will be better then.

[Ksyrup]

OK, I'm pissed. I'm on vacation and can't access CivV because I can't connect to Steam (I don't know why - might be some sort of firewall issue or something), Anyway, I thought I didn't need Steam or to be online to play the game after the first time I fired it up? WTF! This pisses me off to no end.

[RainMaker]

Well I've started playing on my older computer and while it's slow later on, it's been working.

Is anyone else finding this game pretty easy? I thought there was all this talk about making the AI much smarter. But all I'm seeing is that they make stupid decisions throughout and seem to bite themselves in the ass when they don't need to. The game just seems really easy on levels that gave me a challenge in Civ IV.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The game just seems really easy on levels that gave me a challenge in Civ IV.

And that sums it up for the initial release of Civ5. A lot of discussions as to why that it and despite all of whining about missing Civ4 features, it's not that. The game was designed to attact a more casual gamer audience (and they succeeded) but it will be interesting to see where Firaxis goes with the major patches. I think the game boils down to the AI not being able to build and use units effectively and cannot determine accurate cost/benefits when chosing to build. The game has a lot of fun elements and it is fun to play but it's hard not to win or be winning.