Be honest! Who currently still prefers Civ IV?
- Thread starter kamex
- Start date
Tylerryan79
Emperor
Civ V seems simple only because you can basicly click next turn over and over again, and it will tell you what to do(build que, move a unit, pick research etc). I spent my first hours in a daze, just trying to get a feel for it. Then the complexity slowly starts to show, there are a lot of choices to make for yourself, if you take the game off auto pilot. You do have to play the game for more than a few hours before you can call it a wash and give up!
I think this game will be MORE complex then iv ever could be. The different variations are astounding. It's simplistic on the outer shell, crack that sucker open and it oozes strategy. If some people can't see it, or don't want to see it, your lose.
I think this game will be MORE complex then iv ever could be. The different variations are astounding. It's simplistic on the outer shell, crack that sucker open and it oozes strategy. If some people can't see it, or don't want to see it, your lose.
civ 5, and it's not even close. I simply cannot believe people think this game is "simplified"! To me, it is MUCH more complex! Indeed, it is a bit overwhelming at first. To balance your economy is a much more challenging task than in any other civ.
You have to balance happiness (which is by far the most precious resource!) with food (so the question is, how many farms/pastures on bonus resources should I build?). You may have a lot of food bonuses (i.e. bonus resources like wheat) around, but you may not have the happiness to burn to get them all!
Indeed, you have to balance food with trading posts (gold), because you will quickly run out of happiness. Why food with gold? Simple, because you get big time happiness bonuses with buildings early on in the tech tree. But of course it's not that simple, you need quickly make sure your production is up to snuff because all buildings/units seem to be a bit more production intensive. This may mean a mine or two (for 3 production each), which severely cuts into your excess food...
People were worried about science being only from population. It is not even remotely an issue. In fact, I would prefer to slow down the first two eras just a bit. Well, this is if you make sure to get a library in each city relatively soon. Ahh, there is that production dilemma again! Get more production (that is, devote more HAPPINESS to production producing tiles) and you get more science more quickly.
Oh what a wonderful system of complexity. I mean, in civ 4 you just built stuff willy nilly. Follow the bonuses, cottage up the place. Adjust the "slider" (the ULTIMATE simplification!) to fix any problems. Blah blah blah. Never again for me.
Combat absolutely REQUIRES you to pay attention to terrain. You fall asleep for even a minute and your precious horseman (and all that production! you did focus at least one city on production, right?) is gobbled up with a combo archer ranged attack and a brute/spearman strike. You must plan your movement carefully, ESPECIALLY around rivers! Can't tell you how many units I lost because of both of these points.
My biggest issue so far is a bug that people have already mentioned: I managed to get myself a rifleman in the first couple dozen turns. Really, really unfortunate. I simply abstained from using it, but still...should be fixed soon, at least.
In sum, to be perfectly frank the people who yell and scream "simplified!" are either being disingenuous or they are playing fast and recklessly. Indeed, this may explain why people feel put off so far. Can't stress enough the various balancing that needs to be done...
Oh wait, I forgot something else too. People were very down on the liberty tree before. Including me. After forcing myself to try it, I must say it is very underrated. Specifically, the +1 production from republic represents a potential 10-20% boost in production AT LEAST PER CITY at the beginning! It may not seem like a lot, especially with larger costs, but we're shaving many turns off of longer builds. It adds up. So too does the +1 happiness per city connected to the capital. If you can limit yourself to MORE but SMALLER cities, we're talking a free colosseum or two. Getting that without the maintenance costs at the beginning of the game can be huge. Try to leverage the smaller but more numerous cities into an increased number of happiness buildings when you transition to the mid-game. Suddenly, your reservoir of potential happiness is MUCH higher than someone who goes for large but fewer cities...
Oh many, the strategies for this game...can't wait for all of us to figure it out. Frankly, we need more strategy talk and less whining about graphics or simplification or what have you!
You have to balance happiness (which is by far the most precious resource!) with food (so the question is, how many farms/pastures on bonus resources should I build?). You may have a lot of food bonuses (i.e. bonus resources like wheat) around, but you may not have the happiness to burn to get them all!
Indeed, you have to balance food with trading posts (gold), because you will quickly run out of happiness. Why food with gold? Simple, because you get big time happiness bonuses with buildings early on in the tech tree. But of course it's not that simple, you need quickly make sure your production is up to snuff because all buildings/units seem to be a bit more production intensive. This may mean a mine or two (for 3 production each), which severely cuts into your excess food...
People were worried about science being only from population. It is not even remotely an issue. In fact, I would prefer to slow down the first two eras just a bit. Well, this is if you make sure to get a library in each city relatively soon. Ahh, there is that production dilemma again! Get more production (that is, devote more HAPPINESS to production producing tiles) and you get more science more quickly.
Oh what a wonderful system of complexity. I mean, in civ 4 you just built stuff willy nilly. Follow the bonuses, cottage up the place. Adjust the "slider" (the ULTIMATE simplification!) to fix any problems. Blah blah blah. Never again for me.
Combat absolutely REQUIRES you to pay attention to terrain. You fall asleep for even a minute and your precious horseman (and all that production! you did focus at least one city on production, right?) is gobbled up with a combo archer ranged attack and a brute/spearman strike. You must plan your movement carefully, ESPECIALLY around rivers! Can't tell you how many units I lost because of both of these points.
My biggest issue so far is a bug that people have already mentioned: I managed to get myself a rifleman in the first couple dozen turns. Really, really unfortunate. I simply abstained from using it, but still...should be fixed soon, at least.
In sum, to be perfectly frank the people who yell and scream "simplified!" are either being disingenuous or they are playing fast and recklessly. Indeed, this may explain why people feel put off so far. Can't stress enough the various balancing that needs to be done...
Oh wait, I forgot something else too. People were very down on the liberty tree before. Including me. After forcing myself to try it, I must say it is very underrated. Specifically, the +1 production from republic represents a potential 10-20% boost in production AT LEAST PER CITY at the beginning! It may not seem like a lot, especially with larger costs, but we're shaving many turns off of longer builds. It adds up. So too does the +1 happiness per city connected to the capital. If you can limit yourself to MORE but SMALLER cities, we're talking a free colosseum or two. Getting that without the maintenance costs at the beginning of the game can be huge. Try to leverage the smaller but more numerous cities into an increased number of happiness buildings when you transition to the mid-game. Suddenly, your reservoir of potential happiness is MUCH higher than someone who goes for large but fewer cities...
Oh many, the strategies for this game...can't wait for all of us to figure it out. Frankly, we need more strategy talk and less whining about graphics or simplification or what have you!
I see Civ4 as superior atm in almost every way shape and form, the ONLY thing V has going for it, is more strategic combat, ofcource when moving large armies it creates more headaches then its worth and I long for stacking when i got a +10 unit army.
I'm getting mixed feelings for the game. Btw I hope this thread goes on cause im interested in peoples opinions. First 100 turns, i felt.... meh, felt way too simplistic, and i usually love the early years, which was a bummer. Like everyone else i'm a flawed human being and by instinct i reject change, being consciously aware of this helps a bit but it still doesn't feel right. Took my eyes awhile to adjust to the graphics, I was like woah, some parts are way too blurry but others have pristine detail, felt weird. Not to mention the hexes got me disoriented. It took even longer to understand the interface "Pick a new production" What? Oh! That's right! My hoplite is done.... uhhh sure, im used to the building thing popping up but this is good i guess, and casually brushing off different suggestions from advisors and the pop ups.
Another 100 years passed and another and maybe a few more turns and i realized. Hey its not perfect, but theres something to clinge to in civ 5. I can't put my finger on why I continued playing for that long. However the 1upt, limited resources, ranged attacks all the "NEW AMAZING BATTLE SYSTEM" didn't really deliver, funny how it turned out. I like the micro-management of the culturaly, scientific and all things non-military in Civ 4 and mods conversly i liked the simplicity of military combat in civ 4. In this game its different. I'm disappointed in the lack of micro-management in things i like yet the battle system frustrates me. Not to say its hard strategy wise, fairly easy, but i mean i have to make a conscious effort "Okay gonna move units like this so they don't get caught up on those trees".
Uhhhh what else. Aw yes my goldilocks zone. The settings that make the game just right. Was kinda sad that the options were so few. Glad they kept the marathon and huge maps to what i like. But one thing though, is it possible to have historical placements on earth map? I noticed there was no worldbuilder either.
But im in a middle of one intense civ 4 game so that'll probably take me a week to finish before i can get into the game and understand everything. Last thing, anyone else almost cry to how awesome the intro video was?
Another 100 years passed and another and maybe a few more turns and i realized. Hey its not perfect, but theres something to clinge to in civ 5. I can't put my finger on why I continued playing for that long. However the 1upt, limited resources, ranged attacks all the "NEW AMAZING BATTLE SYSTEM" didn't really deliver, funny how it turned out. I like the micro-management of the culturaly, scientific and all things non-military in Civ 4 and mods conversly i liked the simplicity of military combat in civ 4. In this game its different. I'm disappointed in the lack of micro-management in things i like yet the battle system frustrates me. Not to say its hard strategy wise, fairly easy, but i mean i have to make a conscious effort "Okay gonna move units like this so they don't get caught up on those trees".
Uhhhh what else. Aw yes my goldilocks zone. The settings that make the game just right. Was kinda sad that the options were so few. Glad they kept the marathon and huge maps to what i like. But one thing though, is it possible to have historical placements on earth map? I noticed there was no worldbuilder either.
But im in a middle of one intense civ 4 game so that'll probably take me a week to finish before i can get into the game and understand everything. Last thing, anyone else almost cry to how awesome the intro video was?
Likes_Civing
Warlord
yeah i mean i played about 30+ and lost a scout and a warrior to barbs and built one worker and a settler. I mean man you can't see what is happening.
This designer was a wargame guy. Now I loved Panzer General and all those games my self, had them all from the beginning of PC's with a floppy drive lol but this interface SUCKS.
I think the old civ you could play without reading anything.
Like someone posted, not at all intuitive. Played CIV, CIV 2, CIV 4, for hundreds of hours and now this demo. I bought a video card for this?
How big can a city get? Hate hard to work squares. Not a lot of depth of improvements. could type more
This designer was a wargame guy. Now I loved Panzer General and all those games my self, had them all from the beginning of PC's with a floppy drive lol but this interface SUCKS.
I think the old civ you could play without reading anything.
Like someone posted, not at all intuitive. Played CIV, CIV 2, CIV 4, for hundreds of hours and now this demo. I bought a video card for this?
How big can a city get? Hate hard to work squares. Not a lot of depth of improvements. could type more
migkillertwo
Prince
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2010
- Messages
- 404
I feel really sorry for you. I'm in love with Civ V, I really dont think I can go back to Civ IV after today.I think I may atm. Maybe I'm just not 100% settled with 5 yet.
King Jason
Fleece-bearer
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 2,040
It'll take time. Nuanced elements like SEs and EEs, and all the number-crunch crazy analytical strategies haven't even hit the forums yet.
Most people know civ4 in and out and love it to death.
So far, I'm diggin civ5 a lot and don't intend to go back to 4 anytime soon. But it's only day one, seriously.
Most people know civ4 in and out and love it to death.
So far, I'm diggin civ5 a lot and don't intend to go back to 4 anytime soon. But it's only day one, seriously.
Yeah, not to make it seem like my previous post is all hate, i suppose the things that civ 5 wasn't so succussful stood out like a sore thumb. But i agree with you, its starting to seep in.
Civtilltheend
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2010
- Messages
- 14
I remember when cIV came out on the first day everybody was moaning and groaning, couple months later the majority caught on how great cIV is\was. I played 5 or 6 turns of the ciV demo then stopped "thinking Why am I wasting my time on this demo when I need to be downloading the legit game"!
starrywisdom
Warlord
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2010
- Messages
- 205
I think anyone who is playing the 'Civ4 was teh bests' card needs to go play vanilla civ 4 with no updates - and see how god awful it was in the beginning. I mean - how many people even play anything BUT BTS?
Everything seemed just about right in my taste and by far the best game I'v ever played.
seasnake
Conquistador
Been playing the demo, and:
Civ V is awesome but doesn't replace Civ IV, yet. I think it is better overall, but I'll still play civ IV. I think the UI is different but actually a bit easier to manage. The City States rock, and the Social Policies are my new favorite part. The Tech tree is still the same, but the Wonders, oh my, every wonder is useful now. There is no "Best" wonder, they all do something important. UPT is so more engaging than SoD.
Don't understand people who think it's simpler.
Civ V is awesome but doesn't replace Civ IV, yet. I think it is better overall, but I'll still play civ IV. I think the UI is different but actually a bit easier to manage. The City States rock, and the Social Policies are my new favorite part. The Tech tree is still the same, but the Wonders, oh my, every wonder is useful now. There is no "Best" wonder, they all do something important. UPT is so more engaging than SoD.
Don't understand people who think it's simpler.
hardcore_gamer
King
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2009
- Messages
- 672
So far the only thing I am finding really disappointing is that there doesn't appear to be any kind of a advanced diplomatic screen that shows all of the relations between the Civs on the map which leaves a lot of the international diplomacy to pure guesswork which is just a pile of cra*.
Still, I have only played the demo since the full game won't unlock for me until the 23rd.
I like most of the other things I have seen however, not counting the painfully slow pace of the starting/early game.
Still, I have only played the demo since the full game won't unlock for me until the 23rd.
I like most of the other things I have seen however, not counting the painfully slow pace of the starting/early game.
Dark_Jedi06
"Deus ex Machina."
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2006
- Messages
- 1,399
Not all.
I haven't played Civ IV in months, yet Civ V has had me glued to my computer chair (despite the fact that it's uncomfortable).
I haven't played Civ IV in months, yet Civ V has had me glued to my computer chair (despite the fact that it's uncomfortable).
bamboothief
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2010
- Messages
- 9
Civ5 is better than Civ4(includes all expasion patches). If you are comparing civ5 with civ4 vanilla with no patch, then Civ5 is alot better.
Civ5 has a far superior combat system. Civ4 one is so simple for 3years kids. Civ5 one needs to think more strategically.
The only thing i really don't like about Civ5 is you cannot raze city-state. A lot of these city-state cities are placed at very bad location(like 1 resource in its range, and 4 resource 3 tiles from it).
Civ5 has a far superior combat system. Civ4 one is so simple for 3years kids. Civ5 one needs to think more strategically.
The only thing i really don't like about Civ5 is you cannot raze city-state. A lot of these city-state cities are placed at very bad location(like 1 resource in its range, and 4 resource 3 tiles from it).
BjoernLars
Warlord
As for the interface complaints, I think lots of people need to realize that you have to get use to a new system. There is a lot of resistance to change.
I remember awhile back when a new interface came out for Facebook and the community was up in arms and demanded that the company revert back to the old format. Now, nobody complains, we enjoy the way the program works, we are used to the new format and we can't remember why we were complaining in the first place.
I am still learning the system of CiV, and yes it gets a bit annoying at first...
- What?!?! I can't purchase a unit because of a garrisoned unit!? Where is it?! I can't find it! Yarrrrrg! Military adviser! Where is my garrisoned warrior!!! Yes, you centered on the city where I can't buy a unit... Where is my unit?!?!?!?! OH... here is a unit's symbol in the upper left hand corner of my city. I'll click on it... ah! There's my unit! NOW MOVE! -
...now I know for the next time.
I have to say that the 1UPT tile in a militaristic sense is a godsend! NO MORE STACK OF DOOM! I love the bombardment! I missed that so much from Civ III. Suicide catapults were something I never got over in Civ 4.
As for workers, the 1UPT are a bit cumbersome at times. I will probably have to experiment on some different ideas on how to maneuver them in a better manner.
I remember awhile back when a new interface came out for Facebook and the community was up in arms and demanded that the company revert back to the old format. Now, nobody complains, we enjoy the way the program works, we are used to the new format and we can't remember why we were complaining in the first place.
I am still learning the system of CiV, and yes it gets a bit annoying at first...
- What?!?! I can't purchase a unit because of a garrisoned unit!? Where is it?! I can't find it! Yarrrrrg! Military adviser! Where is my garrisoned warrior!!! Yes, you centered on the city where I can't buy a unit... Where is my unit?!?!?!?! OH... here is a unit's symbol in the upper left hand corner of my city. I'll click on it... ah! There's my unit! NOW MOVE! -
...now I know for the next time.
I have to say that the 1UPT tile in a militaristic sense is a godsend! NO MORE STACK OF DOOM! I love the bombardment! I missed that so much from Civ III. Suicide catapults were something I never got over in Civ 4.
As for workers, the 1UPT are a bit cumbersome at times. I will probably have to experiment on some different ideas on how to maneuver them in a better manner.
Kruelgor
Emperor
I like Civ 5, but I kind of get the sense that it was designed for a console.
