Not excited...... not one bit

[Dale]

What the title says.  I just can't get excited by this announcement, and the more I read, the less inclined I am to.

Whilst yes it's good to hear there's another game in the Civ franchise (though considering Civ5 sales numbers, did we ever think 2K would not fund another title from Firaxis?) there is much that I am reading that leads me to believe this game is not for me.  I am one of those people who are searching for two ultimate games: a REAL SimCity4 successor, and a REAL Civ4 successor.

So what do I not like the sound of in this new game?  I'll put it in one word: 1upt (okay not a word, but an abbreviated 4 word phrase  ).

1upt killed Civ5 for me.  Truly and utterly killed it.  *poof*  And sadly, 1upt defines the design for literally every other part of the game.

"How so?" you ask.  Well, consider Panzer General, the 1upt game flaunted as the reason for it in Civ5.  In PG, England is 500 hexes.  In Civ5 England is 6-10 on an Earth map.  You cannot engage a tactical combat system such as 1upt on a high-level overview strategic map such as Civ.  It simply does not work.  I cannot tell you how many AI hacks had to be put in place to have an at least "better than [feminine washing]" combat AI.

The worst part is as I said above, 1upt defines the entire rest of the game's design.  It introduces what I've heard called the "strategic limiting system".  To cater for the strategic maps, the game design limits how many units you can build through yields, unit costs, constant wars, etc.  And since yields are a lot smaller, that means cities are a lot smaller.  This means the entire economy model of the game is totally skewed by 1upt.  Diplomacy is heavily affected to.  To help keep units down, the AI is encouraged to war much more often.  So we see lots more smaller wars in Civ5.  So the diplomacy model is also heavily skewed by 1upt.  The concept of unit transportation was totally removed from the game, because 1upt didn't work at all with the system.  Not only that, but because it's a "strategic game" the 1upt system was mashed by the fact of fitting it into a strategic game.  It is not a TRUE 1upt implementation that grognards are used to.

I could go on all day, but I won't.  You get the picture and I'm sure you're all smart enough to figure out other areas where 1upt dominates the game design.  The bottom line is, because of the 1upt system, Civ5 has become a strategic game limited by a tactical combat system, AND a tactical combat system watered down by a strategic game design.  It is trying very hard to be both a tactical AND strategic game, but as it stands is mediocre AT BEST, in either category.

Compared to other grand Empire strategy games such as Paradox games, Civ5 is mediocre at best.
Compared to other tactical combat games such as Slitherine or Matrix games, Civ5 is mediocre at best.

And sadly, they continue to rely on a system which for me, has totally killed the Civilization Experience.   

[Buster's Uncle]

I believe if you look around, you'll find a lot of us mixing skepticism with our excitement...

Notwithstanding the name of the forum, I've never really looked forward to a sequel - being a Star Trek fan has taught me several times over to know better than to get my hopes up much.

[BlaneckW]

We argued for weeks over the fact that 1upt was a "tactical gaming" experience whilst stacking or armies was a "strategic gaming" experience.

That's a good one.  Civilization.  Tactical gaming.  Well, I guess there's bombardment.

[Buster's Uncle]

Dale was pretty much the point man for ciV at WPC - I watched his (enormous) enthusiasm get punctured and deflate.  -Just, I want anyone who doesn't know Dale to know how bad he got burnt, and that he has reason to be cynical this time.

[thorn]

Is that the same Dale from Age of Discovery II? Now I AM starting to worry. 

[Buster's Uncle]

Something to do w/ Colonization is his greatest claim to fame, I think, but AoD sounds right, too.

I mostly know him from his exensive work in talking crap.

[Dale]

Is that the same Dale from Age of Discovery II? Now I AM starting to worry. 

Yes, you are right. 

Ignore Buncle, he's just jealous of my dashing good looks.   

[Buster's Uncle]

I'm jealous of his hot wife.  He's ugly as sin.

And an expert in ugly sin.  The dashing part is to the fridge for more beer.

[Buster's Uncle]

Hey thorn - are you the same Thorn with the goat avatar I've seen around at WPC and 'poly?  -Do you want a goat avatar?

Dale, I've got a number of things vaguely insulting to Oz, if you're game - or if you had some serious request, I'd do you something you liked, even.

[Yitzi]

Wait, Civ BE has the 1 UPT rule without vastly more tiles?

That settles it; there's no way it's going to be a serious competitor for SMAC/X.

[Buster's Uncle]

1upt, yes - and I expect you're right.

[BlaneckW]

I don't even know why they would do it again when it's probably the most criticized feature of Civ5.  Surely Firaxis isn't completely insane, they have some sanity.

[Dale]

Civ5 sold more units than all other Civs combined.  It is still now, years later, once of the most played Steam games.  They made MILLIONS from DLC alone.

As a business venture, why would you change the formula?  Sure, it may piss off a hundred thousand hard cores, but when you gain a new million casuals why do the hard cores matter?

[Dio]

Civ5 sold more units than all other Civs combined.  It is still now, years later, once of the most played Steam games.  They made MILLIONS from DLC alone.

As a business venture, why would you change the formula?  Sure, it may piss off a hundred thousand hard cores, but when you gain a new million casuals why do the hard cores matter?

Here is another great example of corporate money makers speaking and ignoring the wants of long term gamers.

[BlaneckW]

As a business venture, why would you change the formula?  Sure, it may piss off a hundred thousand hard cores, but when you gain a new million casuals why do the hard cores matter?

I can't believe that casuals prefer 1UPT.