MetalCraze said:
I'm playing the demo now (with turn counter disabled) and so far it looks like Civ5 maybe the worst, most dumbed down Civ to date.
- ZOCs are non-existent for all but enemy units, units still can pass through each other
- The retarded "declare war to move into the territory of another country" is still there, while the same doesn't apply to the territory of city states
- The economy was dumbed down, so far careful planning of where to put your population to work is not there
- The relations with city-states are extremely primitive. Basically the game forces you to give a locked amount of gold (you have no choice what to give yourself) to improve relations with them and not much else.
- Tech-tree is now smaller (note that I'm not talking about medieval-modern techs which are not there due to the demo limitations)
- The combat outcome is being predicted for you before it even started. There is no small random chance of victory being added anymore. You just look at the handholding message that predicts everything and decide whether to attack or not.
- Units still have a single "strength" stat for everything incl. damage/defences/hp
- Speeding up production is dumbed down. You now either purchase a unit for a full price (and it appears in your city instantly instead of waiting for another turn - another dumbing down, basically you can churn out defences for the city each turn they are killed if you have gold) or don't purchase anything at all. No you can't just pay what you have to speed up the production.
- The combat itself is not an improvement. Same shit, different name. You will achieve the exactly same "depth" if you'll just put one unit per square around enemy and attack with them one by one because here you do the same.
- The diplomacy is still a primitive excel table. You'd think during all those 11 years after SMAC they would get the hint.
The few things I like so far are natural wonders and the ability to capture enemy settlers instead of just killing them. Policies are meh because they have only pros to them when you upgrade them, no cons (apart from another policy being locked).
But overall so far it looks like "they brought civ to the masses" indeed.
From Your points I like what they changed.
-ZoC are a retarded concept implemented only as a poor mans logisitcs. IRL armies often missed each other, there were raiders and commandos, whole warfare before the times of mass conscription was devoid of frontlines. +
- Another +, no sane ruler would allow military access to someone who is not his ally. Wanna cross = declare war is very realistic considering the devastation that armies brought.
- Econoy in Civ was always dumb as a brick so nothign changed here. Balancing improvements should eb a good thing too, no more cottage spam.
- Easier diplomacy = less exploitation of thew dumb AI. Seems reasonable.
- Smaller tech tree means longer research for each tech? If yes then another +, I was sick and tired of my units becoming obsolete on the way to enemy. Besides most of old techs made no sense.
- Combat outcome was always predicted for You only with element of randomness. Dont know about this one, must see for myself.
- Strenght as one stat for everything is perfectly fine and reasonable, division with 50% of its force wont fight as effectively as one with 100%. Different untis are made different with max strenght, reasonable too. Having attacka nd defence stats was retarded.
- Yea, mercenaries, ever heard of them? You know those gusy that won wars up to XIX century? Finally in.
- Combat is as bad as it was always, no difference for me
- I dont really understand, diplomacy in SMAC was as retarded as in other Civs. Actually limiting options is very sensible since they were anyway nearly useless.
So overall looks very good.