Civilization V: Gods & Kings Review

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Civilization V: Gods & Kings Review

Adds features and units you won't want to play without.

Read Full Article

Wow, it's been ages since a game I cared anything for came out.

Definitely interested but there's a part of me that is balking at paying $26 for an expansion to the Civ V GOTY Edition I bought for $12 on Steam 3 weeks ago.

I will be getting this but once I put more mileage on the original game (and the eventual price drop).

I loved Civ IV with Warlords and Beyond The Sword expansions and I truly felt that Civ V, despite having better graphics, interface and whatnot, was a downgrade of Civ IV.

Now I can definitely see that Gods & Kings may make me think that Civ V may be the best Civilization ever made. Maybe.

Great review, nice to here the improvements add so much to the game. I'm especially looking forward to the improved naval combat as I just played a game on an archipelagos map and only one war was declared the entire game. Nice to hear late game naval invasions will be easier as it is almost impossible against a similarly powerful civ.

I love how violent Gahndi is. Also when Americans have communism. So funny

Cool review, now I'm actually really looking forward to play, I must admit that I was a bit skeptic even though I prepurched it, but it's looking pretty good.

Too bad it unlocks the 21st here. :(

The Civ games are great, but all they seem to do between games is make tweaks to the same basic formula. I think the city-production game play element is becoming a bit outdated.

What I would like to see is a new system based upon more complex macro-management. Perhaps an option to build libraries or other basic public works in all cities by taking out a certain amount of gold for a certain amount of turns. I think it would also be nice if you can have the ability to micromanage the resource distribution of the cities so that they can improve certain works, or give their garrisoned army better training/equipment, instead of just allocating certain citizens to certain plots of terrain. Just having a city produce one thing every certain amount of turns is a bit simplistic.

I'd also like to see the game move from combat centered on single units to armies comprised of several different types of units. This way one could specialize one's army for certain things. I'd also like to see customizable units where you can modify their equipment in order to specialize them for certain things; e.g. make them more maneuverable by cutting down their defense. You could modify the formation of each military unit too; e.g. put the archers in the back behind the phalanx and put the spear-men on either side to protect against cavalry, or make the phalanx form a V as opposed to a straight line.

Instead of each city producing one unit of a certain type after a certain amount of turns you could change it so that each city can produce and garrison only one military unit, though the size of this unit depends upon the size of the city; e.g. your capital city could garrison an entire division, whereas a small peripheral city could garrison a battalion or a company. In order to improve/refit the city's unit you have to devote a certain amount of city resources for a certain amount of turns. You could also improve the military capacity of the city by building certain improvements such as a fort, a training camp, or a military academy. This would allow you to improve the units garrisoned in the city. I'd also like to see supply routes to one's army when they are in enemy territory. That would add a lot more strategy to invasions.

Well... on second thought, maybe I just want to see another turn based strategy game with completely different game play mechanics than Civ. Lol.

I just hope they fix the AI's bad habit of being pants on head retarded when it comes to war and peace. I dont care if gandhi's a bloodthirsty maniac, but can we stop the "Oh you are my best friend and here let's trade, swap techs and live in peace" and 2 turns later go to "YOU WILL DIE!!" with no warning, reason or logic.

Ashannon Blackthorn:
I just hope they fix the AI's bad habit of being pants on head retarded when it comes to war and peace. I dont care if gandhi's a bloodthirsty maniac, but can we stop the "Oh you are my best friend and here let's trade, swap techs and live in peace" and 2 turns later go to "YOU WILL DIE!!" with no warning, reason or logic.

To be fair, a fair lot of human players do the same thing to AI/other players, given the chance to (ally with an AI/other players in a superior position, sneak near him and backstab him).

Yey, its only 13 too.

Dooly95:

Ashannon Blackthorn:
I just hope they fix the AI's bad habit of being pants on head retarded when it comes to war and peace. I dont care if gandhi's a bloodthirsty maniac, but can we stop the "Oh you are my best friend and here let's trade, swap techs and live in peace" and 2 turns later go to "YOU WILL DIE!!" with no warning, reason or logic.

To be fair, a fair lot of human players do the same thing to AI/other players, given the chance to (ally with an AI/other players in a superior position, sneak near him and backstab him).

But players are behaving erratically because they actually have a plan. The AI, not so much.

SupahGamuh:
I loved Civ IV with Warlords and Beyond The Sword expansions and I truly felt that Civ V, despite having better graphics, interface and whatnot, was a downgrade of Civ IV.

Now I can definitely see that Gods & Kings may make me think that Civ V may be the best Civilization ever made. Maybe.

Sounds like it just brings it a bit closer to to the standard set by Civ IV. I think I could just play that game forever without ever upgrading.

DustyDrB:

SupahGamuh:
I loved Civ IV with Warlords and Beyond The Sword expansions and I truly felt that Civ V, despite having better graphics, interface and whatnot, was a downgrade of Civ IV.

Now I can definitely see that Gods & Kings may make me think that Civ V may be the best Civilization ever made. Maybe.

Sounds like it just brings it a bit closer to to the standard set by Civ IV. I think I could just play that game forever without ever upgrading.

Yeah. It seems to me that this expansion adds features that should have been in Civ V in the first place. I played a couple of Civ V games and then lost interest. Something that has never happened with Civ IV or any previous Civilization game, and I've played them all. Especially the lackluster implementation of city states, which boils down to regularly throwing money on them or ignoring them completely, was a huge disappointment.

Also, the price tag on this expansion is outrageous. There is no way I am going to pay 30€ for it. I will probably get it when it drops to a more sane 10€ or less and then give Civ V another chance.

You know, i was really skeptical about this expansion, and was originally considering waiting a few weeks/months for the price to drop, but after reading your review, i think i might pre-order it (only 4 hours left to decide, lol)

I love Civ 5, i've gotten 240 hours of gameplay out of it, and its one of those games I can always start playing when I'm feeling bored~

One thing I always felt was missing from Civ5 was the way that in Civ4 many of the civilizations had 2 of 3 leaders to choose from which altered the way the game played. For example you could be England under Churchill or England under Queen Victoria and the two wouldn't start or play our the same way. Also the fact that each civ started out with different technologies already researched which would mix up gameplay a bit. However in Civ5 all the civs only have 1 leader a piece and they all start out with the same tech so much of the incentive to play as the different civs is removed. ...or at least that's how I felt anyway.
The religion thing was never a big issue for me, although it was kinda fun trying to found every religion in the game.

Whoa whoa ... I wasn't paying much attention to this, but now I might just have to take a closer look.

I've started playing and I can already see that the religion system can add a big factor to the game as it progresses. I hope the other enhancements are just as nice.

It took them several years and an expansion pack to make another Civ IV? Yeah, I'll stick to IV, thanks.

Is the opening cinematic still the loading screen? Because that's, like, the ONE thing that really annoys the crap out of me every time I boot up the game.

Also, what's up with releasing it in the US three days earlier than elsewhere? The rest of us love us some civ, too!

I'm definitely interested, but the price is too high considering that the vanilla Civ V was pretty... mediocre. I don't want to pay 80-130 euros for the experience I want.

Veterinari:
Is the opening cinematic still the loading screen? Because that's, like, the ONE thing that really annoys the crap out of me every time I boot up the game.

No, you can skip it now and it brings you to a new loading screen.

Now all we need is a Fall From Heaven mod

But why does Gustav II Adolf look Like Gustav Vasa?

ReiverCorrupter:
The Civ games are great, but all they seem to do between games is make tweaks to the same basic formula. I think the city-production game play element is becoming a bit outdated.

What I would like to see is a new system based upon more complex macro-management. Perhaps an option to build libraries or other basic public works in all cities by taking out a certain amount of gold for a certain amount of turns. I think it would also be nice if you can have the ability to micromanage the resource distribution of the cities so that they can improve certain works, or give their garrisoned army better training/equipment, instead of just allocating certain citizens to certain plots of terrain. Just having a city produce one thing every certain amount of turns is a bit simplistic.

I'd also like to see the game move from combat centered on single units to armies comprised of several different types of units. This way one could specialize one's army for certain things. I'd also like to see customizable units where you can modify their equipment in order to specialize them for certain things; e.g. make them more maneuverable by cutting down their defense. You could modify the formation of each military unit too; e.g. put the archers in the back behind the phalanx and put the spear-men on either side to protect against cavalry, or make the phalanx form a V as opposed to a straight line.

Instead of each city producing one unit of a certain type after a certain amount of turns you could change it so that each city can produce and garrison only one military unit, though the size of this unit depends upon the size of the city; e.g. your capital city could garrison an entire division, whereas a small peripheral city could garrison a battalion or a company. In order to improve/refit the city's unit you have to devote a certain amount of city resources for a certain amount of turns. You could also improve the military capacity of the city by building certain improvements such as a fort, a training camp, or a military academy. This would allow you to improve the units garrisoned in the city. I'd also like to see supply routes to one's army when they are in enemy territory. That would add a lot more strategy to invasions.

Well... on second thought, maybe I just want to see another turn based strategy game with completely different game play mechanics than Civ. Lol.

You should try the Total War games, if you havent already.
Its pretty much what you want. I would recomend Rome Total War (it is a bit old but the graphics has aged pretty well and you can pick it up on steam) and Shogun 2 Total war.

Good review.

2 days, 10 hours. Sigh.

canadamus_prime:
One thing I always felt was missing from Civ5 was the way that in Civ4 many of the civilizations had 2 of 3 leaders to choose from which altered the way the game played. For example you could be England under Churchill or England under Queen Victoria and the two wouldn't start or play our the same way. Also the fact that each civ started out with different technologies already researched which would mix up gameplay a bit. However in Civ5 all the civs only have 1 leader a piece and they all start out with the same tech so much of the incentive to play as the different civs is removed. ...or at least that's how I felt anyway.
The religion thing was never a big issue for me, although it was kinda fun trying to found every religion in the game.

For me the different Civ abilities, unique unit and building have a big on how you play the game. Some of the new unique abilities in God & Kings are game-changing, like Maria Theresa of Austria's ability to purchase city states so that they become part of her empire through "Diplomatic Marriage".

You can play as His Imperial Majesty of Ethiopia? That is so awesome.
I wonder what music plays when you play as that faction. Can it be... reggae?

I personally prefer Civ 5 over Civ 4. I wonder how soon I'll have the chance to play this with some mates.

Mullahgrrl:
But why does Gustav II Adolf look Like Gustav Vasa?

Because we're sweden...not even our greatest kings are worth depicting properly....

:'(

Booted up Civ 5 again, and... The existence of city states fucking kills me. They feel so inane, tacked on and sometimes downright annoying (thanks for taking up a third of my island), it makes me question what the hell Firaxis was thinking on that one. Honestly, I can't think of a really good reason for their existence, other than somebody thinking that 12 players on one map isn't enough.

That's funny, city states are one of my favorite parts of Civ 5, and one of the reasons I don't want to go back and reinstall Civ 4. I like how they influence diplomacy and help you in wars and stuff.

Anyway, thanks for the review, Greg Tito. I've already bought this (a rare, once in the blue moon event of my actually preordering something) but I am glad to hear it seems to meet my expectations. Really looking forward to the religion customization and new Civs especially. Also really glad to hear they beefed up naval capacity, while it sounds like it makes a strong navy almost too dangerous, I think it makes navies more of an appropriate force to be reckoned with rather than basically water-based armed scouts and exploration units.

Mullahgrrl:
But why does Gustav II Adolf look Like Gustav Vasa?

Because you don't know what Gustav II Adolf looks like.

I bought civ V when it first came out, but after a few months I lost interest, which was crazy for me. There has never been a time in the past 15 years that I didn't have a civ game on the go. I did start playing it again after some of the patches improved gameplay, but it still didn't grip me the way previous civ games did, but i still played it every now and then.

I did pre-order the expansion as it was 10% off. It looked like it would add back a number of features that should have been there from the start. I've played a couple hours so far and it's not bad. The AI seems more consistant. Some of the changes seem to be for the better, but I haven't had the time to really see yet. There are mroe happiness items which is good, but I still hate the global happiness. I think if happiness managment went back to how Civ IV was and there were other influences to check expansion then the game would be great.

Seriously? Ethiopia too? It seems we've outmanoeuvred and defeated by every bloody nation out there.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here