How accurate a simulation of real-life geopolitics is this game?
You're joking, right...
It's not really.
t. autist with 600 hours in civ 5
>>72456657
this isn't /b/ boy, go take your fucking retarded bait there
>>72456657
On a scale of 0 10 to, 0/10
>>72456657
>fascist ideology gives you no spaceship perks
pure garbage
>>72456657
EUIV is a much better game OP. I say that 500 hours on civ.
>>72456657
None.
Make a risk thread
>>72456657
Civ 4 was vastly superior IMHO.
You can't even make a decent mod with Civ 5.
>>72456805
Ikr. Havent they ever played wolfenstein?
>>72456657
If you declare war once in that game, every other civ hates you for the rest of the game.
>>72456995
Just like leftists hating America then
>>72456657
>have AI ally for 5000 years
>trade and research benefits for both parties
>ally condems you for no reason
>ally turns on you
>he allies himself with his enemy who he fought for centuries
>he captures all your cities
>you loose
it's pretty much a "US-in-a-nutshel" simulator
>>72456657
Even SMAC is better than Civ5 when simulating real geopolitics.
I noticed that these "advance through the ages" type strategy games, like Civ, AoE, Rise of Nations, etc never feature Australia.
Is it because Aboriginals ever leaving the Stone Age would be too unbelievable?
>Assyria bans crabs
>happiness -10
Yeah. Accurate.
>>72457284
>>72457180
You guys are focusing too much on specific civs. Of course that won't be accurate to real life due to game balance.
I am talking about in the abstract, does the game in any way represent a decent representation of the concerns of nation states?
>>72457180
Dude. The whites living in Australia now have barely left the stone age.
>>72456657
4 was better
>>72456657
India seems to skip pottery and go right to nukes, so.. somewhat accurate?
>>72457180
No soon as internet gets invented loads shitposting begins . The world ends due Australia and india added up shit by 2024 everytime.
>>72457510
something something can't poo in loo
>>72456657
Endless Legend is better
>>72457501
BNW > 4 > 5
>>72457739
>>72456657
Sweden's ability is literally sucking other civs' dicks. So, pretty accurate.
>>72456657
It's not. It's just a game.
>>72457123
>loose
I bet you are, Hans.
>>72456835
No it's not lol. Not even close.
Victoria 2 maybe
>>72456657
It's like Risk, if Risk had a technological/cultural progression system.
>>72457123
Haha you got freedomed
>>72458614
>>72458575
>>72458542
>tfw I play Arabia and fuck everyone up with camel archers
>tfw camel archers still competitive against artillery
>>72456657
about zero
>>72458623
And 9 times out of 10 the progression system itself says it represents certain factors but really all it does is affect your dice rolls.
>>72457123
Sounds like the AI made a perfectly reasonable decision and benefited from it. The classical ages contain similar real life events.
>>72457456
Avid gamer here, but I can't stand anything new. Idk, it's a fetish. I spend vast hours running the formulas, various scenarios, etc on older games (PC, console, so in).
In general CivIII had a few really good principles to teach. Ex:
>never go to war with your greatest rival. Learn to appease them, bc a war only weakens you both.
>encourage medium-weak civs. It's an attempt to grow allies. But realize they may turn on you. You have to make them dependant on you, often through trade.
>if you don't spend in entertainment, you will lose on corruption. It's like a marriage, the ruler and the people.
>Enlightenment, science, and commerce are all great, but your kingdom is held together by the strength of your army.
Lots more, but this is a good start.
TL;dr - yes, realize general principles.
Sitting here playing this right now.
I picked Ghandi and chose Judaism as my religion.
I just wiped Shaka Zulu out with some nukes because the nignog requested 1000 gold for aid.
I never formed any alliances or even so much as allowed other nations to set foot on my land in either game I played until the end in vanilla Civ 5 and I won both of them in a time victory.
Am I doing it wrong?
>>72456657
There's no geopolitics in this game lol. Civ 4 was way way better.
>>72458528
eu4 is better than vic2. But once vic3 comes out, i think its going to be the new best one.
>>72459870
EUIV is literally a map painting sim
>>72459870
>newer == better
Nigger what are you doing? You're really going to claim that Mana simulator IV is better than the most complex geopolitical simulator ever made? Not to mention Victoria 2's timeframe is much more /pol/ related. You get the rise of fascism and communism as well as colonization of africa and slavery debate. Victoria 3 is going to be shit, paradox is now infected with political correctness and their games are abstracted mana-fests
>>72459739
The combat in Civilization IV was the most atrocious thing ever. I like civ v better after it's been patched and the expansions came out.
I never played eu4 but I liked eu3 a lot. That game was a pretty good simulation, especially of how fucked non-Western powers were.
Austria > all
You can fucking buy lands ffs
>>72460166
I don't see the problem.
Civ 3 > Civ 4 > Civ 2 > Civ 5 > Civ
>>72460166
Post-Art of War EUIV is a literal player punishment simulator, though. You can't do shit without facing penalties or having to deal with cheaty AI.
>tfw the only way to win is not to play
>>72459079
I liked III, but it was fucked as far as combat was concerned. IV fixed some of this, but it had STACKS OF DOOOOOM.
V fixed this completely, but Firaxis cannot code AI to handle the grid system to save their own lives, then pass the blame onto everyone else.
>>72456657
yall niggas better adopt Autocracy cause i will go full conquer of all cities until im the one who last to stand!
>>72460960
Admittedly, I haven't played since Wealth of Nations
Oman OP
>>72461162
Too bad I went FREEDOM and bought my ass a ticket off of the planet.
>he builds spaceship parts
>laughing anime girls.jpg
>>72461347
now pls buy our space expansion which you wish was alpha centauri 2 even though it isn't
>>72456657
Most accurate representation of Ghandi I've seen in the media.
>>72461347
not when i conquer your cities and raze them all except let your capital be the shittiest of all cities before even you manage to go build one of your spaceship parts.
Domination victory for the win!
>>72460312
You don't like catapults stacks?
What is wrong with you?
>>72456657
it's a fun game, but it has serious flaws (shit ai, combat slow af, some options straight up inferior to others, etc.)
it has no relation to real life geopolitics although I have learned some history by playing civ 5.
>>72458528
Victoria 2 has a retardedly complex resource management metagame.
>>72460312
Are you serious? The underlying mechanics are still ill-conceived and the AI is still an irredeemable trainwreck that can only provide a challenge if you hamstring yourself, and even then it likes to commit ritual suicide in the ocean.
>>72458623
risk is way better. risk is a an absolute blast if you 3-5 other people who are committed to the game and want to win.
civ 5 is too conducive to runaway players. god tier civ + salt/river start = a civ that can take on everyone else alone by the renaissance.
>>72461637
>economic powerhouse
>can operate an army 5x the size of yours and still bring in cash every turn
Now why don't you go hold another man's hand, or whatever faggy shit you mudslimes do in Sandland.
>>72458528
EU4 is much better as far as history is concerned than any Civ game.
>>72461581
I ain't touching that shit even if it was 90% off during Steam sale.
>>72461921
Control the resources that are made into more advanced products to be the winner.
Like rubber and shit.
>>72457467
:( its hot here.
>>72461986
Yes, i still like it better than civ iv. Wars were so atrocious in civ iv that everything else wasn't fun for me by default.
Civ IV was good with mods though and there were some that greatly improved the game and even the combat.
>>72456657
Played over 3,000 hours of Civ V. Played Civ 4 since the release date, and I'm still playing the ww2 scenario tonight.
Civ 5 has shit AI, and there's hardly any politics, unless you consider moving troops around, producing buildings, and improving tiles "politics".
>>72461921
No, that *is* the game.
If you don't think economically, Vicky 2 isn't the game for you.
>>72465333
>If you don't think economically
Nah mate, retardedly was the operating word in my previous post. The economic """""simulation"""" is really shit.
>not playing medieval 2 total war
>not going on crusades
>not killing muzzles by the thousands
>not conquering Europe and christianizing the world
>play Venice
>found Judaism
>bribe everyone else into fighting for me
>>72456657
Not at all. It's decent and doesn't require as much autism to play compared to other turn-based strategy games like Crusader Kings.
>>72466912
le happy merchant of venice face
>>72467326
>CK
>requiring autism
You might just be functionally retarded
>>72460420
austria is OP as fuck especially when you get airports
>>72466754
What's the best Total War for beginners?
