I wouldn't mind so much if using the insta-heal counted as the unit's action(s), thus preventing it from being able to attack or pillage on the same turn.Īt best, the unit should be able to heal and run away.
The source of my frustration is that you can insta-heal and attack on the same turn. Double Argh!! For me, this is Civ V's equivalent of that spearman killing your tank in Civ III, or losing a 99% battle in Civ IV.Īnd it wouldn't be so bad if the insta-heal mechanics just worked differently. Argh! Then it insta-heals and kills your unit. You expect to kill an enemy unit in an attack, but it survives with like 3 HP because of the damned RNG, but you don't have any other units to finish it off.
This one isn't so much a design flaw as it is a pet peeve. Wonders built in capitals are impervious to destruction, especially the annoying ones like the Great Wall. While some ancient capitals like Rome and Athens still exist, many other do not, and the significant infrastructures and wonders within them have been lost to time. On top of that, from a historical theme perspective, capital cities were frequently razed in real life. See a city state that owns primo real estate, but it's one tile out of range of a valuable resource, or one tile away from a coast or river, or otherwise in a sub-optimal location? Argh! Same goes for other player's capitals. But city states take up a huge amount of space, and they often spawn in inconvenient locations. Again, this is critical to the diplomatic victory, so it makes sense. For one thing, city states count as capital cities, so you can't raze them. I can't raze the city and build one that can work both halves of the Great Barrier Reef.īut not being able to raze capitals resulted in some very annoying qualities of the game. has founded would result in a lot more unfinished games. Having to scour the map for every snowball ice city and island city that the A.I. The late game already feels like a grind as is, due to the large number of units that have to be moved one at a time across the map. And requiring the complete annihilation of every rival civ would have introduced significantly more tedium to the game. Being able to raze a capital would make it impossible for the capital to be recovered, and thus make it impossible for that player to win the game. The more simplistic domination victory condition requires that capitals can't be razed. In any case, many areas of the game, from economy, to city management, to government policies, to the tech tree, and even the victory conditions were simplified. The radical gameplay change to a hex-based map with tactical, 1-unit-per-tile combat meant that a lot of other features and mechanics had to be simplified - either because the developers didn't want to overwhelm players with complicated micro-systems to go with their complicated unit-management or because they simply didn't have the time in design and development to implement more complicated gameplay subsystems. I understand why this had to happen for gameplay reasons.
#P civilization v free#
If there's any features, mechanics, or design decisions that you really hate in Civilization V, its DLC, or its two expansions, please feel free to leave a comment! You may not agree with my opinions, and that's OK.
Of course, any list of "good ideas" or "bad ideas" is going to be subjective.
#P civilization v series#
The hope is that future games in the series will be able to learn from Civ V failures and successes and be better games. Following up on my previous post about the Top 10 good ideas in Civilization V, here is a list of the opposite: the flaws and annoyances in the game's design that really grind my gears and make me nostalgic for the older games and wishing for dramatic changes in future sequels.Īnd since I'm always eager to provide constructive criticism where I can, I will propose ideas for addressing some of the problems with these features where relevant.
0 kommentar(er)
