I believe I can shed some light on this. Once you choose a civic you keep that civic and the bonuses gained from it in perpetuity (with one exception, which I’ll get to). Say, if I was to start the Liberty tree at the beginning of the game, my leader will be called, for example, “Consul Napoleon of France”. When you begin unlocking other trees, that name will change. You normally keep the name that you have the most unlocked parts of (for example, if I have five unlocked parts of the Liberty tree but one in Piety, I’m still “Consul Napoleon” rather than “Napeoleon the Pious” even if I did the Piety tree later. If you have the exact same amounts of parts unlocked in two trees, you get the one you chose later (If I were to unlock five in Liberty and five in Commerce later on, I’d switch from “Consul Napoleon” to “Doge Napoleon”.
Basically Social Policies still determine what your government is but (as the developers stated) they wanted you to feel more like your civilization was evolving down an organic path rather than switching suddenly between options. Whether this works or not is a subjective value judgment, but I happen to like it. Mainly because the thought of “Doge Washington of America” is just kinda cool.
Sounds about right. Civfanatics is a very harsh place for Austrian supporters.
I’ve been playing around with modding in Civ V, and the SDK came out yesterday. If there’s any policy changes anyone here would like done, let me know and I’ll see what I can throw together. Maybe we can create a full Austrian Economics mod!
I had conquered all the people on my continent, and then I stopped and thought "in real life, I’d be much happier if I didn’t waste all those resources killing people who would have traded with me. We could have divided our labor and cooperate, progressing through technology much quicker. But I guess since CIV5 is a zero sum game, and you have to be like born siamese twin frat brothers to have a technology agreement, I did the right thing. Because once I rule the world, I win the game!
Then I started building nukes and destroyed about half the world’s economy. No wonder:
CIV5 is so fargone from real life. Just in terms of the goals you would have…
Yea the Civ games have always bugged me, even though I love them and think they are awesomely made strategy games, they give the impression that its the state that is responsible for the source of growth and prosperity of a country, which is obviously not true. I also dont like the idea that warfare is considered a way to ‘win’ the game.
Although warfare in the series does hinder your ability to move into other, more productive areas of growth(ie buildings and wonders). Its very difficult to engage in war constantly and win a cultural vicotry for example. However making warfare a potental method of victory undermines this message(although I usually avoid going to war when I play Civ).
I loved two for the ease of winning cultural victories. They seemed to shy away from that recently. Never played 4, but I have the Nintendo DS one (Revolutions) that I play all the time. That one you cannot be a peaceful nation, impossible. It also doesn’t have Earth as a map, which was a huge disappointment.
Anybody play on Emperor, I am currently on King and finding it hard to make the transition?
I just tend to play on Prince/Noble. The AI getting free cheats is a pet peeve of mine. If I’m beaten by the AI, I want it fair and square. So sorry, can’t help you there, Epicurus
I’ve won twice on emperor, abusing the crappy AI that just suicides stuff into your cannons.
If anyone gets an austrian mod started please ask me for help, I am very interested in that though I dunno what can I do. One idea that I have would be to separate wealth and treasury - the gold you have at your disposal is the treasury, while the cities each have their own wealth to be taxed and transformed into usable treasury. Increasing taxes or production deducts from city wealth; I think thats one key “error” that the civilization series does, conflating the two.
I want to comment in regards to it’s new combat system.
Firstly, the system is really great. This Civ V is doing what Halo did with shooters, relying heavily on tactical
strategy over “Horde” strategy, very very fun. ^^
However, I must admit that this new style of combat system no longers feels as epic as the previous Civ games did, to me at least. To me, I loved playing with the “Stack o Deaths”! Sending over 20 units to fight another 20 or over units is the stuff that epics were about (I didn’t mind the waiting, I enjoyed seeing the combats, seeing who would win, who would beat who, heheh). And I am the type of guy who adores epics ^^. With Civ V, it no longer feels like that, I feel like Civ’s combat scope shrank in that matter, but that’s just me, and I can see how seeing long stretches of troops scattered across the map might hit some people’s fancies.
I am going to miss the epic scale of the combats, but I will still welcome this pleasant change of the 1 unit per tyle deal.
There’s a mod out that removes the 1UPT limit. From what I’ve read, it has a few user interface issues, and I’m not sure if the AI knows how to handle it. Link here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=380955
Just letting you know, even though you said you like the new change =)
'That said, I did have ECONOMIST RAEG when I saw that the commerce branch was protectionist policies that actually HELP your economy (defying all sense and reasoning). Same with the Order branch where communism gives +5 production. Word of advice: don’t read the Civilopedia entries on this stuff, you’ll only get more annoyed."
yeah, I felt dirty going full commie / mercantalist. but you do what you gotta do when playing a huge game on immortal.
and I’ve yet to read the civilopedia…I think I’ll keep my eyes away from it.
this strikes me as very odd as alpha centauri was pretty decent when it came to ascribing bonuses to communism, environmentalism, and the free market. it makes you wonder how much he had to do with various aspects of the games.
