I'm Having Trouble Finding How Civ IV is Supposed to be Fun????

I've heard most people who I talk to tell me that Civ IV is the bomb. I'm like really?? So I bought Civ IV thinking it would be better than Civ III. I was a little disappointed. I'm still trying to figure out what makes Civ IV as fun as people are describing?! For one thing I can't change the settings to start with this # of Civ's or this many barbarians. World size is another thing. I am use to playing huge map games in Civ III. In Civ 4 the huge map option yields a very very small map. What is going on?? The civics option with so many things in it makes gameplay very complicated. Maybe I haven't played long enough yet to find the virtues of Civ IV. Either that or maybe its just that everyone have different tastes and to me less is more sometimes? I dunno. I certainly wish though that Civ IV will become fun for me so that it wasn't a waste of 50$. Maybe its the multiplayer. I haven't tried that.

axehaxe said:

I've heard most people who I talk to tell me that Civ IV is the bomb. I'm like really?? So I bought Civ IV thinking it would be better than Civ III. I was a little disappointed. I'm still trying to figure out what makes Civ IV as fun as people are describing?! For one thing I can't change the settings to start with this # of Civ's or this many barbarians. World size is another thing. I am use to playing huge map games in Civ III. In Civ 4 the huge map option yields a very very small map. What is going on?? The civics option with so many things in it makes gameplay very complicated. Maybe I haven't played long enough yet to find the virtues of Civ IV. Either that or maybe its just that everyone have different tastes and to me less is more sometimes? I dunno. I certainly wish though that Civ IV will become fun for me so that it wasn't a waste of 50$. Maybe its the multiplayer. I haven't tried that.

Click to expand...

A couple of things--- you can change the setting in the initial start up screen. You can do a custom game and add or take away civs. You can assign a leader (and therefore a civ) to your civ or any of the AI's. You can change the name that you are called.

When you get started, the small total world map is sized for only what you know. Only the Stonehenge wonder will give you the full world box and your relationship in it. I have found the huge maps to be plenty large.

axehaxe said:

For one thing I can't change the settings to start with this # of Civ's or this many barbarians.

Click to expand...

Go to custom game.

axehaxe said:

World size is another thing. I am use to playing huge map games in Civ III. In Civ 4 the huge map option yields a very very small map. What is going on??

Click to expand...

I think there is already a mod for this, making larger maps possible.

axehaxe said:

The civics option with so many things in it makes gameplay very complicated.

Click to expand...

They aren't that complicated after a while. Just takes some practice and experimenting. I find them more interesting than governments offered in Civ 3.

axehaxe said:

Maybe I haven't played long enough yet to find the virtues of Civ IV. Either that or maybe its just that everyone have different tastes and to me less is more sometimes? I dunno. I certainly wish though that Civ IV will become fun for me so that it wasn't a waste of 50$. Maybe its the multiplayer. I haven't tried that.

Click to expand...

I hope you try the multiplayer. That could make it more fun.

Not sure if you know this, the map grows as you explore it. Heh, you could say the game grows on you as well as you play it more. No doubt this version has alot more features...It takes some time to get used to.

Thanx guys! I'll have to try these things. Its good to know that the map grows. Its even better to know that settings can be changed (Whew!).

How long did you actually play the game before you posted this? You didnt know the map grows or that you can change setting in the "custom game" meny I was kinda dissapointed at the map size too seeing the prerelease screenshots but then i read somewhere that the map becomes visible as you explore or get more techs. Discovering compass or building stonehenge will centre the map for you

Yes, in the beginning the map will zoom in to show just the area you've explored to prevent you from seeing your relative position on the map, but as you explore more of the map, it expands. I think the huge maps are quite large, about the same size as the ones in civIII.

It almost makes me sad to hear people don't like Civ4.
It is better than CIv3 in all aspects, save for the technical performance at the moment (sluggish videos etc)
Just that production and science overflows to the next unit/building or tech is just GREAT, and also that you cant switch to new units/building with the same production.
In Civ3 I had to constantly micromanage my cities to make sure most of the hammers/food/trade was used all the time and see if I should switch something. Very tideous.

Now on the other hand I can focus on the important aspects of the game - the overall strategy and tactics. Too bad we had to wait for 5 games for this to happen (Alpha Centauri used some of the recent features though)

axehaxe said:

Maybe I haven't played long enough yet to find the virtues of Civ IV.t.

Click to expand...

yep. you certainly did not play long at all.

I agree, whenever someone mentions that Civ3 is better than Civ4 it always makes me scratch my head untill my scalp is bloody and raw. Then I just figure that they have some terrible brain disease.

Check this out.

This has been my favorite response to these types of posts. It is tongue-in-cheek, but quite informative at the same time for reconsidering the 'die-hard' tactics of CIII.

I personally couldn't stand the micro required to succeed at the higher levels of CIII where most of that is removed in CIV. For that, I am grateful. CIV is a far better game that gets better & better as the subtleties become clearer.

axehaxe said:

I've heard most people who I talk to tell me that Civ IV is the bomb. I'm like really?? So I bought Civ IV thinking it would be better than Civ III. I was a little disappointed. I'm still trying to figure out what makes Civ IV as fun as people are describing?! For one thing I can't change the settings to start with this # of Civ's or this many barbarians. World size is another thing. I am use to playing huge map games in Civ III. In Civ 4 the huge map option yields a very very small map. What is going on?? The civics option with so many things in it makes gameplay very complicated. Maybe I haven't played long enough yet to find the virtues of Civ IV. Either that or maybe its just that everyone have different tastes and to me less is more sometimes? I dunno. I certainly wish though that Civ IV will become fun for me so that it wasn't a waste of 50$. Maybe its the multiplayer. I haven't tried that.

Click to expand...

Well, I guess you didn't read the manual. "Custom game" allows you to make changes to many set-up items. For example, I hate Barbarians and Tech Trading. Out they both go. I also hate the "time" and "space race" victories (too easy) so out they go.

Now, the "huge" map in Civ IV is considerably larger (has more cells) than in Civ III. This "mis-perception," if it is, makes get a bit concerned I'm responding to someone who's played the game for 5 minutes without even bothering to read the manual or that I'm responding to someone in the "Waaa! It's not Civ III" crowd. If you are in that crowd, Civ II wasn't Civ I and virtually all of us adapted and enjoyed it. Civ III wasn't Civ I or Civ II or even the Alpha Centauri one... And Civ IV is, again, a different well-done game. One that I've found more difficult than it's predecessors because it doesn't share many of the logic-flaws its predecessors had.

In fact, over-all it seems to me that the leader AI is much improved. Dimplomacy is much improved. The tech tree climb is much improved. I really love civics. The power-gaming warmongers now have it harder. And, all-in-all, it requires a lot more skill to be successful in Civ IV than any of its predecessors.

They aren't that complicated after a while. Just takes some practice and experimenting. I find them more interesting than governments offered in Civ 3.

Click to expand...

Oh yes. I was bored with Civ3 governments. Switch to republic ASAP. Choose Democracy or Communism depending on end game strategy. The end.

Now I get to switch things around however I want. Am I going to be a warrior? Then I'll set up vassalage an theocracy? Peaceful? Pacifism. Is having a monoculture religion important to me? Theocracy. Do I use lots of specialists? Representation and caste system. And only having one turn of anarchy per civics change lets you adjust your government as your game situation goes, rather than having five turns of anarchy every time you switch into war mode.

Yeah I don't get it either! I mean, its just a box with some pictures and "civilization IV" written on the front!


Wait... I'm supposed to OPEN it? ohhhhhhhhhh....

Frostyboy said:

In Civ3 I has to constantly micromanage my cities to make sure most of the hammers/food/trade was used all the time and see if I should switch something. Very tideous.

Now on the other hand I can focus on the important aspects of the game - the overall strategy and tactics. Too bad we had to wait for 5 games for this to happen (Alpha Centauri used some of the recent features though)

Click to expand...

Err, how long have you been playing it? In civ3 yeah you had to micromanage on the higher difficulty levels, but in civ4 despite the marketing saying otherwise I find if I don't constantly watch what the city is doing it will decide to have 4 priests for no reason or cut its production practically down to zero and if I tell it to maximize production rarely does it actually get the most I can get out by setting the tiles myself. I'll be building a wonder and it will say 17 turns left, and then I ignore the city for a while and check back on it and it says 21 turns while the city has gotten larger... Add in having to manage all the specialists and I spend more time micromanaging cities than in civ 3.

Leuf said:

Err, how long have you been playing it? In civ3 yeah you had to micromanage on the higher difficulty levels, but in civ4 despite the marketing saying otherwise I find if I don't constantly watch what the city is doing it will decide to have 4 priests for no reason or cut its production practically down to zero and if I tell it to maximize production rarely does it actually get the most I can get out by setting the tiles myself. I'll be building a wonder and it will say 17 turns left, and then I ignore the city for a while and check back on it and it says 21 turns while the city has gotten larger... Add in having to manage all the specialists and I spend more time micromanaging cities than in civ 3.

Click to expand...

Now, is that more time PER city? I certainly might agree with that, since if you used one of the optimal strategies for Civ3, you could basically sleep through the game. However, you'll often have far fewer cities in Civ4, since you cannot afford Infinite City Sprawl. Therefore, I hold that the total time micromanaging cities will be less, for the most part.

Tom

It's like Sex, if it's not fun you are probably doing it wrong.

-drjones

ps. Priests can be very extremely productive witht the right wonders/techs. However even with 'favor production' on the AI usualy will not go into negative growth or very low cash just to get 1 more point of production. I have been very happy with it in general and find no need to micro except for extreme circumstances (need that 1 more hammer/turn to get a wonder out sooner) and have been able to win up to emperor at which point the AI cheating gets a little aggrivating.

TCGTRF said:

Now, is that more time PER city? I certainly might agree with that, since if you used one of the optimal strategies for Civ3, you could basically sleep through the game. However, you'll often have far fewer cities in Civ4, since you cannot afford Infinite City Sprawl. Therefore, I hold that the total time micromanaging cities will be less, for the most part.

Tom

Click to expand...

Errr...While I may not have to go into the city and count shields/food every turn, I still spend more time MM'ng than in Civ3 per city. Long story short, it's because there are so many more options. You may not be counting beans like in Civ3, but if you're successful at the higher levels of Civ4, there's a ton of MM'ng that goes on. It's just a different type.

There always will be. It's the nature of the game. Because if the human player controls every aspect of his empire (MM'ng), he will make better decisions than the AI will, given he knows the game well. MM'ng, in every form (from religion and diplomacy, to worker improvements and happy/healthy faces) is why the computer gets bonuses at higher levels.

And every new option they put in...all those new bells and whistles...all add in a new layer of MM to the game. You might see it as more options, but in truth, it's just different ways to MM your empire.

While Civ4 might allow you to get away with less MM (like no anarchy for unhappiness, etc...), to win at higher levels, there is definitely more MM.

iSkratch said:

Yeah I don't get it either! I mean, its just a box with some pictures and "civilization IV" written on the front!


Wait... I'm supposed to OPEN it? ohhhhhhhhhh....

Click to expand...

Well said!