Civ 5 DLCs, educate me in 5 minutes Options

[Umidori]

No; actually, when you read the press release, they're going to be more like a fusion between the barbarians and city-states from previous Civ games.

...

You did not see anything else of the game apart from the trailer, didn't you?

No, I did not see anything else of the game apart from the trailer.

The only link in the entire thread is to the Youtube video of the trailer. The press release you speak of is not linked anywhere, and I did not bother to seek it out because I had no clue it existed, since many trailers are released without a separate press release. Hence why I was only talking about my impressions of the trailer.

Furthermore, you're the one who said the aliens "are supposed to be the equivalent of the barbarian tribes from previous Civ games". Clearly that's not what you meant, but I'm not to be blamed for ending up misinformed via your lack of clarity and articulateness.

~Umi

[tasti man LH]

No, it's more of how one article stated just the barbarian part and the other stating that they function kinda-sorta like the city states.

Consistency is apparently a rare commodity these days.

[Umidori]

No, it's more of how one article stated just the barbarian part and the other stating that they function kinda-sorta like the city states.

Consistency is apparently a rare commodity these days.

What are you talking about with articles? I didn't read any damn articles.

I watched the trailer. I read your post, in which you said the aliens "are supposed to be the equivalent of the barbarian tribes from previous Civ games". I did not read, watch, or look at anything else.

So when you told me that the aliens "are supposed to be the equivalent of the barbarian tribes from previous Civ games", I kind of assumed that you, ya know, actually meant that they were "the equivalent of the barbarian tribes from previous Civ games".

~Umi

[Epicedion]

Dude, it's a video game. Calm the fuck down.

[Stahlseele]

Agressive City States WOULD be a novel change to the game as well . .

[mister__joshua]

This looks good, but I think I'm more excited by Galactic Civilizations 3:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owdjizoiqVY

[Tanegar]

I agree, GalCiv3 does look good. I'm going to have to upgrade before I can run it, though; it requires Windows 7 or later.

[Stahlseele]

Win7 runs nicely on older hardware.
If you can find a 32bit version, it runs on stuff with a Pentium 4 . .

[mister__joshua]

It's true, Win7 runs on peanuts. I upgraded our network and tried installing it on everything, even those little eee PC things, and it runs ok.

Also, as XP has officially gone end-of-life now, I suspect ALL new games will say they require Win7 even if they'd actually run fine on XP. Developers aren't going to be supporting it on any new titles though so an upgrade is definitely required unless you want to play retro for life (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[pbangarth]

I love the CIV series and still play it. In the game I blithely deforest the planet to fuel my industries and crank out factories as fast as I can. All this despite the fact that I work for Greenpeace.

The cultural narrative that we can escape our mistakes by going elsewhere is a no-starter. There is no Planet B. We fix it here or we are fucked.

I give a nod to Umidori.

[Stahlseele]

http://store.steampowered.com/sub/36075/
civ5 complete edition for 75% off, if you are interested

furthermore, Civ5 now works on linux.

[nezumi]

1 & 2, that's what I was waiting for, thanks!

[Stahlseele]

np.
i'd have gotten this myself, but i already own most of this anyway.
the only missing things in my collection are the twisted things, and i am not really sure wether or not i actually want to spend money on that . .
that, like true historical starting locations, should have been a part of the main game already in my eyes <.<

[pbangarth]

First ever real opportunity to win a Diplomatic Victory. In about 30 years of playing this damn game. Everybody of any size loves me (Brennus of Celts). Built the United Nations. Got voted Secretary General. Lined up the vote for Diplomatic victory. Alexander, Louis XIV, Bismark, and Shaka are Pleased with me, Mao Tse Tung is downright Friendly.

Damned if not just before the vote, Shaka gets Mao to be his Vassal. The vote is between me and Shaka. The one I counted on most strongly, Mao, of course voted for his Master, not me. Had I gotten Mao, my first ever Diplomatic Victory would have happened. Now I have to figure out how to break the deal between the two and try the vote again.

I told all this to my wife. She said, "Looks like you need to perform a vassalectomy."

[Stahlseele]

oi . . that one was terribad . .

[nezumi]

Ha! Good job, wife.

If I remember correctly, vassalage only works when the vassal is a certain size smaller than the master. Can you start building cities and pumping them into Mao?

[pbangarth]

That calculated risk is exactly what my plan is. Cede enough territory to China to make it secede from Zululand. Then gift Mao till his head spins. Then, maybe, he will vote for me the next time the vote comes around. If it fails to work, I will almost certainly win a Cultural victory... but I've been there, and that will take quite a while yet, so the victory points will be much lower.

I've not had a chance to play for a couple of days, but I'll keep you posted.

[Stahlseele]

have you deactivated spies?
if you send a spy as a diplomat, you can trade world congress votes like any other goods . .
if itwill win you the game, then offer him all but your first city for voting for you, because then it simply won't matter anymore . .

[ProfGast]

I've never seen vassalage happen in Civ 5(BNW+G&K). Thought the only way to get people to vote for you as world leader was to revive their civilization from defeat.

Of course I've yet to pursue a domination victory so far and all my diplomatics have been an exercise in dominating all the city states in the world, so I could be missing something.

[pbangarth]

Sorry, way back in an earlier post I had pointed out I am still playing Civ IV. Should have mentioned it again.

[Stahlseele]

Ah, ok, carry on without me then . . i never actually played that . .
Last game before 5 i played was 2 and i quit that in disgust back then . .

[nezumi]

I'm surprised. I loved 2. Thinking on it, it may still be my favorite ruleset, but I like the resources and the updated AI, so I play 4.

I played 5 and enjoyed it as well, but it feels like it's missing something. I haven't played 4 for like a bazillion years. I suspect if I played them side-by-side I'd remember, but as it stands, I can't quite put my finger on it. I may just miss being young with loads of free time.

[Stahlseele]

don't we all? ._.
i'm honestly very much surprised that it took them 4 parts to figure out that with isometric view you should not use fucking squares as the frame of reference <.<

Furthermore i just found out a pretty crucial piece of information about Civ5:
It does NOT appreciate being started in 5760x1080 resolution using one GPU for nVidia Surround with 3 Screens <.<

[pbangarth]

Well, as it turns out the vassalage was voluntary, so changing the relative population, size, etc. would have no effect. And as I waited the requisite 10 turns for Mao to decide to leave Shaka behind, the love I was feeling from the others started to cool.

So, no Diplomatic victory. I got a Cultural victory, though. Later in the game, fewer points. Meh.

After some reflection, I may take another run at it, right from the start this time. I suspect I'm not spreading my state religion well enough. I'll work on that.

[Stahlseele]

is religion as OP as it is in Civ5?