Go Back   Steam Users' Forums > Steam Game Discussions > Q - S > Sid Meier's Civilization series

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-24-2012, 11:39 AM   #1
Montyleeny15
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Reputation: 140
Posts: 462
Why do people enable Barbarians?

I personally find enabling Barbarians just unnecessary, and it ruins the fun of the game. I disable them on single player games, because I don't see the purpose of they being there in the first place, including City States.

With regards to multiplayer, adding Barbarians simply contradicts the purpose of multiplayer, as multiplayer Civ5 is intended for PvP. Adding Barbarians (and City States) undermines that.

Out of curiousity, what's the purpose of having Barbarians and City States in the game? Being friends with City States provided no bonus to me, and I simply end up destroying them with joy. :-) Barbarians are a waste of resources and they interfere with my affairs.
Montyleeny15 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2012, 12:05 PM   #2
KaosPropeht
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Reputation: 2
Posts: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montyleeny15 View Post
I personally find enabling Barbarians just unnecessary, and it ruins the fun of the game. I disable them on single player games, because I don't see the purpose of they being there in the first place, including City States.

With regards to multiplayer, adding Barbarians simply contradicts the purpose of multiplayer, as multiplayer Civ5 is intended for PvP. Adding Barbarians (and City States) undermines that.
In disabling either, you're nerfing the unique traits of a number of nations - Germany, Ottomans and Songhai benfit from having barb camps to hunt down/farm, while both Greece and Siam are designed to exploit city-state relationships. (Not sure about DLC civs other than mongols, but their UA also relies on having city states around to mess with.)

You also nerf the opening of the Honor policy tree, since 'farming' barbs for culture is ofen quite an early boost.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montyleeny15 View Post
Out of curiousity, what's the purpose of having Barbarians and City States in the game? Being friends with City States provided no bonus to me, and I simply end up destroying them with joy. :-) Barbarians are a waste of resources and they interfere with my affairs.
Being friendly with maritime city-states boosts your food (which can mean either faster growth or being able to work more production tiles.) Cultural states boost your culture, which means faster access to the social policies. Military ones, I haven't seen much use out of until you're allies at which point they'll start gifting you units every so often (do have to maintain allied status long enough for that to trigger though, so you might not get much if someone else is competing for them.)

At allies status, they'll also give you free access to whatever resources are in their borders - obv. if you just take them over you get that as well, but with an alliance you're spending gold (or quest-time) instead of holding a city that takes up happiness.

Barbs are there to be a nuisance if you don't take them into account - a punishment for not paying attention to the empty areas of the map, or a reward if you know how to exploit them.
KaosPropeht is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2012, 09:48 AM   #3
KnownUnknown
 
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2012
Reputation: 204
Posts: 510
I find barbarians to be nothing but an annoyance for the most part, but they can be a good resource if exploited properly (early unit experience, city state influence). Also keep in mind that barbarians are keeping your opponents occupied too.

As for city states, they can make or break the game depending on what civ you're playing. Hoarding influence over an entire map full of allied city states is a good way to retain border stability and exploit resources you wouldn't normally have access to. Hell, I've even won matches due to heavy city state involvement. Simply wiping them all out is more trouble than it's worth IMO.
KnownUnknown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2012, 09:58 AM   #4
Rastrelly
 
 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Reputation: 12
Posts: 126
... and barbarians make any game so much more fun! They add the element of unpredictable events in début. It's great!
Rastrelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2012, 12:05 PM   #5
firsTraveler
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1
Posts: 109
Barbarians in singel player is no big deal. I hat them in multi because it makes a slow game hopelessly slow.
firsTraveler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2012, 01:50 PM   #6
Rastrelly
 
 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Reputation: 12
Posts: 126
?

Even the greatest hordes even in Civ II did not slow the game down too much. Barbarians are nothing more but a free XP.
Rastrelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2012, 12:43 AM   #7
TomKQT
 
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Reputation: 568
Posts: 4,683
Barbarians are an important element in the game. In the beginning they are usually your first enemy, force you to send soldiers with your settlers and make you be more carefull when scouting.
Later, they are kind of a punishment for keeping too much neutral land, you have to be prepared and keep some soldiers around your cities. In this stage they may seems like a pure annoyance, but it is a game and it's natural that it tries to make your life harder. Anyway, there is also a positive effect, you can level-up your early units on them.
We can even find some real-life equivalents of Civ barbarians, so it's not all just made up.

And city-states provides very interesting and useful bonuses. Besides the obvious food/culture/units depending on the type of the city, they can give you all nearby resources. You may say that you can get the resources by simply capturing the city, but don't forget that each city makes your empire less happy (the city itself plus each citizen), while an allied city-state costs you nothing.
Also, there are some policies that further increase bonuses from city-states, they can give you research and great people.
TomKQT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2012, 03:48 AM   #8
Teronfel
 
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Reputation: 33
Posts: 469
Yeah,same here.I always disable barbarians and city states,especially city states are really annoying.
Teronfel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2012, 05:45 AM   #9
VicRatlhead51
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Reputation: 3
Posts: 31
Barbarians are great for early culture, gold and experience. I frequently put them on raging even when I'm not playing germany or songhai. I almost always take the first level of honor even when I'm not going up the honor tree just because it makes them so easy to kill. The only thing I hate is later in the game its a pain to move land units over water without a few naval units to protect them. To be honest without them in the early game I'd get bored just repeatedly clicking "next turn" over and over.

The city states I'm kind of lukewarm on. By the time I have money to really buy a lot of influence I usually don't need military units or growth from maritime city states. Its really only the cultural ones I find useful. The resources are kind of nice but the game I'm playing right now it seems like all 16 CSs have either silk cotton or whales and I have more than enough of all the strategic resources on my own. There's definitely room for improvement in the expansion with them. I guess we'll see.

Last edited by VicRatlhead51: 03-26-2012 at 05:48 AM.
VicRatlhead51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2012, 09:48 AM   #10
DoubleD
 
DoubleD's Avatar
 
Volunteer Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2005
Reputation: 6000
Posts: 31,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teronfel View Post
Yeah,same here.I always disable barbarians and city states,especially city states are really annoying.
They add more to the game.

__________________
Tripping the Light Fantastic


Clear Eyes, Full Hearts, Can't Lose..
DoubleD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2012, 11:13 AM   #11
UncleHarris
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Reputation: 11
Posts: 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montyleeny15 View Post
Out of curiousity, what's the purpose of having Barbarians and City States in the game? Being friends with City States provided no bonus to me, and I simply end up destroying them with joy. :-) Barbarians are a waste of resources and they interfere with my affairs.
Reasons to enjoy barbarians:
1. Attacking them gives your military extra experience, giving you an advantage in future wars.
2. Taking their huts give you gold.
3. Killing them gives you friendship with some city states.
4. With certain civs, you get nice bonuses from killing barbarians, especially Mongols, who get culture from killing any enemies, and can advance toward culture victory this way.
5. In MP and even against the AI, the barbs keep opponents honest, and prevent unrestricted exploration and settlement without a basic military to defend.

Add'l Notes:
6. The bonuses are so good for Mongolia, I often choose Raging Barbarians when I'm playing as Genghis, and instead of killing off the huts, I park an upgraded unit near them to get as much culture as I can from their spawned units.
7. If barbarians annoy you, recognize they only spawn in unseen territory, and a few military units parked outside your civ borders can let you see more area and prevent new barb huts from spawning near you (I did this a lot in Civ IV, where I often maintained minimal interior military).

Reasons to enjoy City States:
1. An entire policy tree is dedicated to using CS for nice bonuses.
2. Ally them to get iron, coal, other resources needed to construct key military and buildings.
3. Ally them for their luxury resources to expand more.
4. Ally them to get food, military, and culture bonuses per turn (this is sometimes the cheapest way to these extras).
5. Ally them to distract or annoy a war mongering neighbor, as the enemy civ will send some units at the CS instead of you.
6. Ally them to win diplo victory.

Last edited by UncleHarris: 03-26-2012 at 11:15 AM.
UncleHarris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2012, 11:47 AM   #12
junior_birdman
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Reputation: 274
Posts: 327
Maybe because they add more depth and a greater challenge? I always put them on "raging", without fail.
junior_birdman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2012, 03:15 PM   #13
Montyleeny15
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Reputation: 140
Posts: 462
Meh, I'm more of an expansionist, I love expanding until my citizens get angry. That's the first thing I do in every game, and even on the hardest difficulty, I seem to get things my own way. :-P
Montyleeny15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2012, 08:59 AM   #14
ioio
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Reputation: 48
Posts: 89
I like the strategic foothold the early expansion gives, too. At the same time, I try to build a strong economy. Fighting barbarians (a weak foe) allows me to upgrade my units before encountering 'real' enemies, and help me ally with militaristic city-states. Those give me enough units (I don't have time and resources to build them myself) to keep things in control for a while. This is the most difficult part of the game for me. Then, with some teritory and resources (early expansion) and a strong economy, things become realy easy. There are money for science, I can apply quickly the new discoveries, then I have more money for science and so on. When I have artilery, tanks and planes and my neighbors only swordsmen or riflemen, winning becomes just a matter of time. I don't play on highest difficulty levels, though. They don't seem to add anything interesting to gameplay, only frustration.
ioio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2012, 03:41 PM   #15
claffert
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Reputation: 0
Posts: 11
Play the way you enjoy playing. That's why it's an option. However, I suggest trying it both ways, and mixing it up a bit. Maybe varying their aggressiveness too. I usually turn off goodie huts as well, if I turn off barbarians.

If you are wanting to play a game in a specific style (or with certain Civs), they can be a real nuisance, and with other Civs and styles, they are a necessity.

I used to turn Barbarians off, but overall, I think the game plays better with them and serves as a useful check.

Without them, it's too easy to take advantage of the safety of the world, and explore vasts amounts of area, uncovering more goodie huts, and you can send out settlers without worrying about defending them.

That can be good for an inexperienced player or non-aggressive player, but it has many dangers. First, it tempts you to spread out too thin and too quickly. It can lull you into a false sense of security and you might skimp too much on military and make yourself an easy target for a rival Civ. Even if you avoid that pitfall by keeping your military up, then during times of peace you have a bunch of military sitting around doing nothing productive for you (other than acting as a deterrent).

Not having them also makes it too easy for the AI to go around and collect all the goodie huts without resistance. It also means that you haven't had any opponents to fight with, so you have to rely totally on Barracks and such in order to build up the experience on your units.


As far as the City States go, I think that City States are the best thing Civ 5 has brought to the game. I think it makes the diplomacy aspect much more interesting (and I would like to see the idea developed further). It is nice to have Civs that are motivated by something other than winning (or trying to make you lose).

Anyway, I think they all help balance the game, and I think ditching them is kind of a crutch. However, its a game, so play what is fun for you. That's what options are there for.
claffert is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Steam Users' Forums > Steam Game Discussions > Q - S > Sid Meier's Civilization series


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site Content Copyright Valve Corporation 1998-2012, All Rights Reserved.