Sid Meier's Civilization V

By Will Porter Published 5 August, 2010

Hex and the city state.

I, like many others, have been playing Civilization games for well over a decade. Over this time I've developed several habits and ticks that have become ingrained in my play style. I habitually name my first city 'WillisCool', the second city 'WillisVeryCool' and (should any metropolis be founded near a particularly disputed border) the third: 'F***theRomans'. Or indeed any other civilisation I wish to textually bait. Civilization V, however, horror of horrors, does not let you rename cities.

This caused great pain and anger during my first turns within Firaxis' latest. It was such a break with tradition that my first city had been forcibly called Paris that I physically shook with emotion. Oddly enough, this was a pattern that would continue on a larger scale throughout repeated sorties in Civ V's hexagonal worlds. The game's core concept seems to be to shake you out of accustomed patterns of play, erasing your accustomed Civ-building 'racing line' and insisting that you come at everything from a slightly different angle.

Civilization V isn't simply piling in a barrage of new features and calling it a sequel. In fact, it's actively removing recent additions to the canon. Religion is out on its arse, while many of the features added in Civ IV expansions are similarly erased. This iteration is all about looking deeply at the features that form the bedrock of Civ, yet are so often skimmed over by players or simply left to sustain themselves in rarely frequented menu screens. It's about repackaging the more bewildering things into something palatable, and ensuring that the player is tooled-up and informed enough to deal with them.

As a Civ player I've always been lovingly bewildered and somewhat out of my depth: forever proud of building the Sistine Chapel, yet somehow blind to the starving millions. At some point, Firaxis must have put a Civ player like me in a blank-walled room and asked him politely what he didn't really understand but pretended to anyway in social circles and on internet forums.

He'd have said things like: the way individual tiles work, which style of government he should choose and the use and abuse of luxuries and resources. If he's anything like me, then he'd also reveal a slight unease when it came to naval manoeuvres - and given time, in that small white room in Maryland, he'd break down and through incessant tears admit that he's totally rubbish at combat, and especially crap at keeping track of his myriad of upgraded units.

Civ V soothes these worries. Not by evaporating them, but by explaining them better and giving you clear reasons to engage with them, pulling their roles into sharper focus through active use.

To explain, let's highlight something that in a previous Civ game I'd have had completely automated. Say you notice a particularly fruitful-looking resource spot where you can mine iron. First off, you'll need it within your borders - and to absorb it you can now speed the growth of your Empire by purchasing new tiles through your city screen rather than simply waiting for culture and population growth to do the job. This not only encourages a reinforced appreciation of the fruitfulness and roles of Civ's different (and newly hexagonal) tiles but will also lead you to order a worker to go and busy themselves so you can mine yourself some ore.

Automation is tucked away to some degree within the UI and it's clear that Firaxis wants you to become intimate with the individual advantages and disadvantages of your randomly assigned land-mass through the worker, previously the lowliest of your units. This is further underlined by the game's more stringent approach to resources. The amount of mounted units you can create, for example, directly correlates to the limited number of horses your nation contains - meaning that their acquisition is a necessity, yet if you have a surfeit of the equine beauties then it can suddenly be an even bigger bartering chip (or prompt for an early war) with your neighbours than before.

Similarly, when one of your cities screams for a certain luxury, say ivory, then your eyes will be anxiously scanning the desert or tundra your people laughably call home, before inevitably eyeing up the Romans next door with their green fields and plentiful elephants.

What is increasingly looking like Civ V's triumph, then, is rendering its less glamorous constituent parts interesting, fun and comprehensible. Another example is the constant worry of the research and institution of a blanket society variant (Feudalism! Nationalism! Communism!). This has been given extra texture, depth and control through a social policy screen that lets you sit in multiple camps (where applicable) as well as unlock various new civil branches within each structure of rule.

As for warfare, with a new emphasis on ranged combat, the introduction of hexagonal movement and the fact that no two military units can now stand on the same tile, there's a real feeling of military tactics that enters proceedings. Combat is suddenly like a board game, with the protection of your game pieces just as vital as the damage they deal. Cities now have firepower of their own and can only keep one military unit with their walls, which means that general combat has gently been edged away from constant urban bombardment and out into the open hills and dales of your lands.

As for an Iron Age warrior being buried beneath a pile of units and waking up in the manner of California Man, worriedly blinking in the light of nuclear explosions and aeroplanes buzzing overhead... The idiots among us can't let that happen now, either.

In fact, this move away from tiled-up unit-spam, the overall reduced numbers of military units and (more importantly) the way that the game underlines the way units develop through XP-gathering and consequent upgrades, makes you an awful lot more aware of just what kinds of firepower your Civ is brandishing.

And as for the old complexities of piling your little chaps into boats and setting them off across a few tiles of water for a jolly boy's holiday beating up Roman scum, at a certain point of maritime tech, discovery units develop the ability to travel short distances in self-created boats. The days of countless turns in which you were nothing but a glorified ferry operator seem to have been partly erased.

More on Sid Meier's Civilization V

If there's something within Civ V that I'm yet to be convinced by then it's City States: independent, one-city power blocks that are there to be allied with or trampled underfoot. On one hand, they provide an excellent way of expanding early on without the need to build Settlers (an alternative being to establish them as puppet regimes) but to an extent they also seem to get in the way of the traditional argy-bargy with the civilisations that are your direct competitors.

It's more fun to start research pacts, secrecy pacts and "why don't you give me the contents of your Treasury" pacts with the big boys than piddly old Warsaw. Although, as is the way with Civilization, if you don't want Warsaw and his chums in your game then they be turned off before the game begins.

Ultimately - with a UI that's frankly astounding, its polite hand-holding tutorials and event reminders somehow never becoming intrusive - there's little doubt that Civ V is onto something of a winner. The framework of classic Civ has been deconstructed, and its dustiest and most misunderstood parts have been ushered into the foreground, reappearing with a gleam, like the shiny C3PO when he throws his arms in the air at the end of Star Wars.

Established hacks will miss the religion, espionage and suchlike, and those features, surely, will be waiting in the wings as expansion packs. As for being able to name your city after how cool you are (or how cool you intend to be), I'm hoping this is an issue that can be dealt with before the September release, or at the very least in a post-release patch. WillisCool shall be triumphant once more. It has been written.

Sid Meier's Civilization V is due out for PC in September.

Picture of Will.

About Will Porter

Will ‘Velvet Owl’ Porter is a roaming freelance writer who occasionally appears at EG’s back door asking for scraps. You can find out how cold/hungry he is by following @Batsphinx on Twitter.

Read more articles from Will by visiting the Will Porter archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (70) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Jeepers #1 2 years ago

    Can't. Wait.

  • barkertron #2 2 years ago

    Yeah, it does all sound great but if you can't call your cities whatever you like then IT'S JUST NOT THE SAME. Once you get used to filling your game with random obscenities it's hard to go back.

  • omerga #3 2 years ago

    the days until release will be long - after release, they are too short

  • sneetch #4 2 years ago

    Baffling that they removed the ability to rename cities.

    "Established hacks will miss the religion, espionage and suchlike"

    Hey, just realised I'm an established hack! :)

  • Britesparc Verified Creative, ITV #5 2 years ago

    The problem I've always had with Civ (apart from being shit at it) is that Democracy is always the best government, unless you just want to stockpile armies and start wars, in which case it's Communism. So even more depth to this part of the game is a welcome boon.

    I will miss religion, however, and also the ability to create a Yorkshire empire that bestradles the world :-(

  • SteelPriest #6 2 years ago

    "Firaxis must have put a Civ player like me in a blank-walled room and asked him politely what he didn't really understand but pretended to anyway in social circles and on internet forums"

    n00b.

  • UncleLou #7 2 years ago

    Lovely preview. And the game sounds great, too.

  • Shikasama #8 2 years ago

    The problem with Civ IV was about a third of the way in the game. It doesn't take a great amount of time to either realise that you aren't going to win, in which case there's no point playing, or that you are going to win, in which case there is no point playing.

    I'd love to know how many people are part of a cycle of just constantly starting new games. All of my games ended the same way. By about turn 200 I'm just pressing Enter and waiting for confirmation of the win. The mid-end game was horrifically dull and lacked any sort of engagement.

    Nothing in the article about the new AI system and how it manifests which is a little dissapointing.

  • Britesparc Verified Creative, ITV #9 2 years ago

    Yeah, that probably applies for me. I think Civ III was actually a little better in that respect.

    Because I'm so utterly crap, yersee, either I'm totally overwhelmed almost from the get-go, or it's a cakewalk. I'd like to have a bit of give-and-take with the AI, so that I don't get my arse handed to me, but I'm not the only one with tanks, planes, and ICBMs.

  • Eraysor #10 2 years ago

    They removed religion?! Looks like Civ IV will be staying installed a while longer than I expected.

  • Discalceaterabbit #11 2 years ago

    @Shikasama :

    Have to disagree, whilst you can be at turn 200 and be faced with a seemingly daunting task, pressing enter will certainly confine you to the dustbowl of history, but it is possible to come back from a seeming drubbing to wipe the foreign infidel scum from the world!
    Mwahahahahah

  • thisisatempaccount #12 2 years ago

    @Shikasama:

    I've only played the original Civ, but the last ~40 turns waiting for my colony ship to reach Alpha Centauri was always spent in an engaging attempt to remould my government from an upstanding, globalist democracy into something that would allow me to nuke France with no forewarning.

    Great article btw, Mr. Porter.
    Edited by thisisatempaccount at 05/08/10 @ 17:54

  • Shikasama #13 2 years ago

    Discalceaterabbit

    I don't see how on the higher difficutlies. You have to choose which type of victory you are going to go for from the start or your so far behind it'll be impossible. You cant get to turn 200 and suddenly decide you want to wipe everyone out militarily. Especially on larger maps.

    I suppose there's always a chance you could get a sneaky Diplo victory though. Better players than me probably have ways around the sort of thing I described, but that's just my personal experience.

  • Tyranix #14 2 years ago

    "Religion is out on its arse" *sigh*

    Ah well, other than that it sounds great.

  • darth_paul #15 2 years ago

    hope the game will come on a WINDOWS/MAC hybrid disc
    theres hoping

  • Orange #16 2 years ago

    Hopefully they bring back religion, was a good feature and it's been too much a part of human history to just omit.

  • IronCladChicken #17 2 years ago

    Not allowing players to rename cities makes me think this version has been developed with a console release in mind... Or (along with religion) a reason to buy one of the expansion packs.

  • Vyggo #18 2 years ago

    Nah, it's pretty easy to (re)name something on consoles, at least with the xbox 360. Of course it's more convenient on the pc, but for city names the interface on consoles is sufficient.

    I read some parts of the hands-on twice, but I still don't really understand how the resource thing works now/is changed.
    Edited by Vyggo at 05/08/10 @ 18:58

  • Jockie #19 2 years ago

    Ridiculous naming conventions were a mainstay of my Civ multiplayer sessions for years, it won't be quite the same without them (all too rude and juvenile to replicate here). Apart from that it sounds pretty much fantastic, although singing along to the theme tunes of the religions down skype every time they are played will be missed as well!

  • Hantheman #20 2 years ago

    To be fair, Religion was kinda pointless other than an easy cashcow.

  • kingmong #21 2 years ago

    whatchoo talkin bout WillIs

  • Oli Verified Reviews Editor, Eurogamer.net #22 2 years ago

    Hi - a part of this preview was omitted in error, the third paragraph on page two about warfare. It's been reinstated now. Apologies.

  • Scimarad #23 2 years ago

    I know it seems petty to be put off a game by something so minor but the whole point is that the it's YOUR civilization. If you can't personalize your civ then what's the point? It never once occurred to me that they'd change something so central to the game...

  • Hantheman #24 2 years ago

    It'll be released in a patch I bet.

  • darkmorgado #25 2 years ago

    If only the real world would follow suit and get rid of religion....

    a man can dream.

    EDIT: Sorry, is it really bad that I look forward to a time when we have gotten rid of the single biggest cause of war and human suffering?
    Edited by darkmorgado at 05/08/10 @ 20:10

  • thefinn #26 2 years ago

    "Established hacks will miss the religion, espionage and suchlike"

    Well, religion was a new addition to the series anyway, so to the truly established hacks it'll just be like I, II or III.

    "I know it seems petty to be put off a game by something so minor but the whole point is that the it's YOUR civilization. If you can't personalize your civ then what's the point? It never once occurred to me that they'd change something so central to the game..."

    Am I really the only one here who's always gone completely in the opposite direction? I always rename *myself* to whatever leader I'm playing as, and leave the city names as they are.

    Be that as it may, I think calling it "central to the game" may be stretching it a bit (certainly compared to the square grid and unit stacks). And if it's truly such a beloved feature, it'll be modded in within a week, I expect.

  • memeroot #27 2 years ago

    Renaming - mod - sorted

    Funny how I agree whither almost all stories related here (though I was not crap.... honest)

    Biggest game since .... well civ 4

  • Spekingur #28 2 years ago

    Religions out?! Dangit!
    I've always based my arch-enemy-nation upon which religion they (and I) have.

    I am on par with most commenters, I hope that the renaming city feature isn't out. Always good to rename your capital city a really lousy name (Drunkards'R'Us) and expect it to do badly (not showing up for AA meetings). That way when it is doing well you can feel really good about yourself.

  • Scimarad #29 2 years ago

    "Be that as it may, I think calling it "central to the game" may be stretching it a bit"

    Well, I'm talking about what I personally like in Civ, I didn't really expect anyone to agree with me - I always cared more about making my own Civ more than any of that tedious 'winning' business;) I love making my own stuff in games which is probably why I didn't hate Spore quite as much as most people.

    Anyway, as you say it will probably be modded back in very quickly.

  • suhawk75 #30 2 years ago

    @Vyggo - easy to rename on PS3 as well since it takes wireless USB keyboards (as well as the joypad add-on)

    Losing religion is a bit of a blow. It was such a nice addition to Civ IV that it seems perverse to lose it. I suspect it'll be in the first expansion/ DLC which probably means they could have put it in there but this is a rather unfortunate trend.

    I never rename my cities but I can't see why it's out. An oversight?

    Other than those niggles it all sounds lovely. I'm not bothered that espionage has gone though. I didn't really like it or use it but I suppose others will miss it.

  • hiddenranbir #31 2 years ago

    I can't rename my cities? What? I'm confused, this is also at the same time supposed to be the most moddable game?!

    "Firaxis must have put a Civ player like me in a blank-walled room and asked him politely what he didn't really understand but pretended to anyway in social circles and on internet forums"

    -If only they put civ players like me in.

  • craziii #32 2 years ago

    I wish they would improve the war/conquest aspect of the game. a spear man killing a tank is not fun/funny/realistic, just plain annoying.

  • Caimbeul #33 2 years ago

    Lenard Nimoy?

  • Harmonica #34 2 years ago

    Hopefully it's not too stripped back just for the sake of addons later.

    @Shikasama "I'd love to know how many people are part of a cycle of just constantly starting new games. All of my games ended the same way. By about turn 200 I'm just pressing Enter and waiting for confirmation of the win."

    Yeah, I'd fall into that grouping too. However, my main problem with all the Civs is that there's not a lot of dynamicness once you've played the game a handful of times. No surprises. It's just honing your route to glory/crushing defeat, and aeons of turns spent tediously managing units.

    I feel like although the phrases 'it's still Civ' and 'just another turn..' always apply, there's some untapped potential as far as really making civ games play out massively different each time. I still love Civ for being a skirmish rather than campaign mode orientated game (hate campaigns in strategy games).

  • Harmonica #35 2 years ago

    @ craziii

    At its core its still a dice based game with a core contingent of luck, if you take away that then you really do gut the charm out of it.

  • Hantheman #36 2 years ago

    @Harmonica

    Your point about repeating games is practically just honing your route to victory is correct. But isn't all strategy games in similar vein?

  • cnlfailure #37 2 years ago

    Release it now please.

  • OliverH #38 2 years ago

    Totally aside from naming cities for obscenities, as a German, even when playing the English version, when playing Germans, I tend to correct city names when they use English designations - after all, why would a German Empire be using English city names? Oh and same for playing Rome and latin names. That's Roma for you, RomA. With an A. No e in it, except as in Romae - but that would be genitive, dative, locative or vocative case.

    So please, bring back renaming cities, lest Caesar forgets his latin...

  • lucky_jim #39 2 years ago

    My first settlement in every game which has such things is always called "Jim City".

    Well, it amuses me.

  • Harmonica #40 2 years ago

    @Hantheman "But isn't all strategy games in similar vein?"

    Obviously to a point, yes, but there are games that are more dynamic and offer deeper evolving gameplay than Civ does. I think that we still play it largely because it's Civ and it fills that Civ-shaped hole that anyone over a certain age grew up with.

  • magicpanda #41 2 years ago

    OMFG Massive Star Wars spoiler in the preview!!11!

    ...

    Booking a few days off for this baby. :)

  • TheJuriel #42 2 years ago

    Fewer military units to micromanage? That's a selling point for me. I always grew bored with Civ4 once a war had been going on for a hundred years, most of which consisted of the AI walking back and forth with his five million units. And the rest of the time you had to rebuild the terrain improvements they had demolished...

  • Harmonica #43 2 years ago

    Is there a feature where you can turn off 'view other players turns' but still see at a glance what happened on the world map (ie, where units moved from, what they attacked)?

    If not, that should be a feature.

  • technotica #44 2 years ago

    Is it September yet?

  • faselei #45 2 years ago

    Have to admit never got religion... too lazy for espenionage most of the time too. So happy enough with these 'ommisions'. Chess like combat? Sounds great!

    Faourite civ? 2 or 3... not 4 for sure (although many 100's of hours spent anyway).

    Cannot wait. Really cannot wait. need minimum specs to work out if i need a new PC.

  • superdelphinus #46 2 years ago

    gr8 pun up there

  • GiarcYekrub #47 2 years ago

    Fav Civ = Alpha Centuri

  • Nuronv #48 2 years ago

    @Caimbeul

    Lenard Nimoy isn't doing the voice work on this one but it still sounds very good
    http://www.civilization5.com/#/community...

  • tenofspades #49 2 years ago

    How many sequels does Civ need before people don't get bored? (cue -19 threshold as I make a disagreable comment)

  • UncleLou #50 2 years ago

    If you get bored with a sequel every 5 years, gaming is probably the wrong hobby.

  • Lobosolitario #51 2 years ago

    Some more information about diplomacy and the AI would be nice. All the pretty units and improved game mechanics in the world make little difference if you're stuck in the same old you-against-the-whole-world scenario* where your neighbours will always attack you without fail, forcing you to conquer the whole world before the bronze age hits.

    *referring to 4x/strategy games in general, not to Civ in particular.
    Edited by Lobosolitario at 06/08/10 @ 11:22

  • UncleLou #52 2 years ago

    if you're stuck in the same old you-against-the-whole-world scenario where your neighbours will always attack you without fail, forcing you to conquer the whole world before the bronze age hits.

    That definitely was not the case in Civ IV. I've played dozens of games, aiming for a cultural or diplomatic victory, where I haven't had a single war. It does require that you build enough defensive military so you're not easy prey, granted.

  • Lobosolitario #53 2 years ago

    That definitely was not the case in Civ IV. I've played dozens of games, aiming for a cultural or diplomatic victory, where I haven't had a single war. It does require that you build enough defensive military so you're not easy prey, granted.

    Good to know, UncleLou - thanks. It's been a while since I last played the Civ series. Still, some information on what diplomatic options are available, and how the AI plays the non-military game, would be nice.
    Edited by Lobosolitario at 06/08/10 @ 11:54

  • riz23 #54 2 years ago

    This preview is slightly disturbing. I have already taken on board the new hex map and am ready to embrace. I have put aside my fears on unit stacking being removed/curtailed, and now even more drastic changes are being revealed. Religion, yes it was a new feature but for me it felt like one that was intrinsic to the tale of Human Civilisation and was welcomed. Now it's gone after one iteration. Renaming cities is important. For the reasons already given (personalisation) but also if, and I assume by removing this option, the game wants to remain 'realistic'. I always found it odd that you could have a 'Paris' just a few miles down the road from a 'Washington' so renaming things was useful. And fun. The resource stuff does sound interesting, but buying land tiles? Woah!
    We are all naturally a bit resistant to change, but I do trust Firaxis, but there seems a helluva lot of change going on here at once. Do not fuck up Firaxis!
    Edited by riz23 at 06/08/10 @ 12:06

  • dylman #55 2 years ago

    Hmm. My standard Civ game starts with me renaming the German Empire to the Welsh Empire. Then I make a point of being really really nice to the English. Right until my Welsh Panzer divisions roll over the border. Mwahaha.

    If I can't do that then what's the point?
    Edited by dylman at 06/08/10 @ 12:37

  • AceDongface #56 2 years ago

    Nice preview. Really looking forward to a new Civ, (just reinstalled 3 and 4). No Leonard Nimoy makes me sad though.

  • MarvelousMartin #57 2 years ago

    Will Civ V released for MAC OS X?

  • tenofspades #58 2 years ago

    "If you get bored with a sequel every 5 years, gaming is probably the wrong hobby. "

    thats an awful retort :D But whatever you're clearly passionate about it, may I recommend the 'new' worms to you as well ;p

  • 1471 #59 2 years ago

    @Vyggo "I read some parts of the hands-on twice, but I still don't really understand how the resource thing works now/is changed."

    They posted about it just for you:
    [link url=http://www.civilization5.com/#/community/feature_strategic_resources
    ]http://www.civilization5.com/#/community...[/link]

    Instead of an iron mine giving you infinite iron, it gives you finite iron for a finite number of units. If you want more, you need to go get it.

  • levitate #60 2 years ago

    No hands-on is ever complete without an obscure Star Wars reference. I'm not as excited about this installment as I was for Civilization IV but I'll probably succumb and buy at release anyway. Have been buying and playing these games since the first one.

  • levitate #61 2 years ago

    @tenofspades: I have a long way to go before anyone can call me a Civ fanboi. You seem to have no clue what you're talking about. Coming here trolling like that might be fun for you but to me that sounds quite boring. Shoo troll.

  • Chupakun #62 2 years ago

    This and Shogun II: Total War. Can't wait to build me new PC :p

  • tenofspades #63 2 years ago

    Don't get up in arms-I've just got civ on my iPhone. My opinion though is since civ2 every civ has just been the same -hardly altering anything. I'd love to see Sid Meier work on a new franchise.

  • tenofspades #64 2 years ago

    Actually my last opinion on this topic as I didn't want to derail it- but just thought it was a silly retort saying gaming is the wrong hobby if you're fed up of seeing another sequel to a game. A valid point perhaps that civ hasn't seen a sequel in 5 years(unless you count civ rev) but not to suggest because you're tired of seeing a sequel to a particular game that gaming is the wrong hobby because that is ridiculous.
    Which I expect everyone knows anyway hence the knee-jerk reaction of "trolling" so I'll stop here. :)

  • faselei #65 2 years ago

    @tenofspades

    I think there are maybe two main points. One Civ is an enduring story and concept that I don't think people will ever get bored of, i.e. mapping the rise of human civilisation from the dawn of time to the modern day. Each game is different and each iteration brings new aspects of that journey.

    The other is that as some get bored and get of the train others will take their seat. I can't see Civ stopping anytime soon, and even if 'civ' does a game which runs with the same idea will always be popular.

  • Skurmedel #66 2 years ago

    Ordered the Collector's Edition,... a man must have something to put on his altar!

  • Hanterp #67 2 years ago

    I play Civilization for years and it is never boring. I am looking forward to Civ V; things look great. I think the differences between Civ IV and Civ V are bigger than those between Civ III and Civ IV.

    About the article: It was hard to read for somebody who has not the English language as his primary language. The writer obviously has a very large vocabulary, as he used much more ( for me ) unknown words than usual on the internet.

    Example? This sentence:
    "The amount of mounted units you can create, for example, directly correlates to the limited number of horses your nation contains - meaning that their acquisition is a necessity, yet if you have a surfeit of the equine beauties then it can suddenly be an even bigger bartering chip (or prompt for an early war) with your neighbours than before."

    Hopefully he will think about those poor foreigners next time ;)
    Edited by Hanterp at 08/08/10 @ 10:40

  • Matfink #68 2 years ago

    No espionage? FFS :(

  • Buggs #69 2 years ago

    @Hanterp

    It is harder to read for somebody who has not played Civ before, believe me!

    It's funny though, the article was exceptionally well written, but yes when you pull a section like that out, in isolation it does seem a little convoluted. i can see why you struggled. I had to pause on a couple of sentences to grasp the full meaning and English is my first (and only) language.

  • Harmonica #70 2 years ago

    @Hanterp

    The main difference between CivIII and CivIV was that CivIV was leaps and bounds the better game.