... and still Civ4 is superior. I'm sad.

ahcos said:

Can't say i'm surprised - you don't go to a Justin Bieber concert and expect people to agree on your laments about what a musician he is.

Click to expand...

But that's the point: Why on earth would anyone that doesn't like Justin Bieber's music go to one of his concert? Unless he just wanted to troll his fans.

Likewise, why would somebody come into the Civ 5 forum (with mostly pro Civ 5 posters) just to say how awful Civ 5 is compared to Civ 4 and how he "feels sorry" for anybody who thinks otherwise? Unless he wanted to troll Civ 5 fans.

JimBobV said:

So what you're saying is that both games do something better then each other, but yet civ 4 is superior. Everything you say is an opinion, for instance you think 1upt is a bad idea and somehow stacks are better. 1upt actually adds a great deal of strategy. Now you have to plan your moves carefully, and make sure the right units are in the right place, whereas any old noob could create a stack and go on a rampage. You didn't need strategic placement, because you could mash all your units into a pile and just waltz right up to a city. This is just one example of the many flawed things in your arguement, but I'll leave it at that.

Click to expand...

Which is pretty much why CIV 4 was harder. The AI could quite easily go on a rampage crushing people because it didn't take any intelligence to do that.

I think CIV 5 gets the hate it does mostly because it could be so much better if it had a great AI. So we see the potential and then are disappointed that the game didn't reach it.

I'm not gonna agree with you that Civ V is terrible. It made a lot of changes. Maybe way too many to be a smooth transition for old fans, but playing G&K and BNW once they got the espionage, religion, and cultural aspects working I feel Civ V is quite good and it is definitely more complex.

The AI mystified me a bit when I started too. In some respects they do seem idiots bc they are worse at managing the more complex system. I believe that this is mainly why Deity seems easier. There are so many details the human can manage so much better that over time the game just feels easier.

I also started Civ V at King having not playing any civ at all in 4 years. It was atrociously easy to beat the AI with no experience with the game other than the quick tutorial basics. Same experience with Emperor and even beat immortal and Deity on my first try and with close to no outside help as far as strategy, so I kinda agree with you that for a player it is easier to beat Deity. Literally, my 5th game or so was Deity, and Deity was only my 2nd game after upgrading to BNW. Still clobbered the AI in science and won despite getting sidetracked in wars and stuff and playing Mayans for the first time ever. You don't need to optimize to win Deity and it doesn't very often feel like a "skin of your teeth" victory like Civ 3 or 4 so I agree with you there. You just have to know how to keep the AI from winning. Then again, I might just be smarter than I was as a kid. I didn't know half the details and strategy I've learned since that first Deity win and have since become a far better player by being a forum member.

I'd say, get used to it being a little easier overall, and learn to role-play and enjoy some of the new mechanics. I've also had a lot of fun with rolling creative and challenge maps such as Ice Age, Terra, Arboreal, or restricting my play to get me out of my habits or comfort zone. It's fun, and I'm sure you'll learn to enjoy it if you get the chance. I'm guessing from your rant about the irrationality of the AI that you were trying to play it peaceful with a large defense force and tech lead and got DOWed, maybe by multiple AI? This happens if you treat the game like civ III or IV and only interact with the AI when you need something. Civ V diplomacy is more clique-based. You want to trade regularly, even if you don't need stuff all that often to let the AI know you're friendly. Then, when you have friends. You can't just ignore them. You have to emphasize trading with them, sharing religion, notice who they denounce and DOW and denounce their enemies to keep them happy. Otherwise the AI just sees you as a loner and will eventually grow to dislike you...especially if you're winning--they'll try to stop you. Ignoring the AI or not doing anything with your friends is a good way to lose them. If you have 2 friends and they both have been attacked by another civ if you keep happily trading and pledge friendship with their enemy they will hate you for it. Trying to be friends with everyone is the easiest way to end up friends with no one as both sides of wars and enemies will grow to hate you for being friends with the other.

Also, Just having a declaration of friendship is nothing, you need a common history where you have fought together, have same ideology, or denounced their enemies for the AI to feel you really have a history together. They'll be less likely to backstab or attack you and will actually defend you in case of outside aggression as there's always a few AI who try to go on a rampage and kill people. Usually you. if you actually wiped someone out that's a rookie mistake. Civ V warmonger mechanics is kinda ridiculous you can't take very many cities before all the AI that know you start to hate you for it. And then there is no making friends and years of war to come. in Civ V it's better to have friends and fight with them so you don't lose everyone's respect at least if you take cities. At minimum, don't finish players off but leave them 1 crappy city. You get a massive hit for that. Same for conquering CS as they count as a "civ".

Please quote me for saying that "Civ5 is terrible". Otherwise, please refrain from putting words into my mouth that you see fit. I said more than once that Civ5 is a very good game on it's own, but i'm critizing that it's not a true successor of the franchise. Feel free to disagree.

They had some great ideas, like 1UPT, but the way they actually implemented that into their game pretty much failed, mostly because the AI is just as stupid as in Civ4. Yes, Civ4 was harder because it was much easier for the AI to handle it's system, but that isn't a good excuse for the laughable difficulty presented in Civ5, now is it?

There are great ideas in this game, and i kept my hopes up that they actually might be able to fix most of the problems with GnK+BNW, but yeah... they failed. That's how i feel. Great potential in the game, but most of them failed because the AI just isn't able to play the game. As a peaceful builder game, Civ5 works just fine. But Civilization always was about building AND crushing alike. Not that you can't do warfare succesfully (actually it's way too easy), it's just so freakin' boring with the 1UPT system, the endless micro and an AI that offers no challenge.

Please don't get me wrong: i still enjoy playing Civ5 from time to time (although i don't play it as eagerly as Civ4, because as a player, i enjoy challenge and gathering knowledge/experience), but i don't play it as a Civilization game because i don't go to war. Like ever. It's just soooo tedious and boring, unrewarding, way too easy, and everyone hates you, no matter if the Civ you fought actually declared war on you. I mean, what's the point of warfare anyway in this case? Very little to gain, and a lot to lose.

w/e i'm not here to argue, i'm hoping that Firaxis will turn around and will actually improve the next game in the series in a way that it's just as accessible as Civ5 while being as in-depth regarding strategy and versatility as Civ4. That'd be a dream. They could've done it with Civ5 already, but unfortunately there were some bad decisions on their end.

ahcos said:

Please quote me for saying that "Civ5 is terrible". Otherwise, please refrain from putting words into my mouth that you see fit.

Click to expand...

>huge disappointment,
>pretty obvious that it would never be a good game
>they just ed up too many things.
>disaster
> isn't fun
>it's tedious
>endless amounts of boring and blunt micro
>horrible
>SO BAD

More or less

I would be still playing civ 4 if it didnt' have that stack of doom combat system.... I miss the random events. Hmmmm... i wonder if there's a mod that changes the combat of civ4 to 1upt?

Resipsa said:

>huge disappointment,
>pretty obvious that it would never be a good game
>they just ed up too many things.
>disaster
> isn't fun
>it's tedious
>endless amounts of boring and blunt micro
>horrible
>SO BAD

More or less

Click to expand...

Do i have to repeat myself? Really? After two posts? ... Can you read?

Please quote me for saying that "Civ5 is terrible". Otherwise, please refrain from putting words into my mouth that you see fit. I said more than once that Civ5 is a very good game on it's own, but i'm critizing that it's not a true successor of the franchise.

Click to expand...

I'm out, once trolls like Callonia start to roll into the thread it's getting even more pointless than before. Not that i was hoping to have a decent conversation, although Civfanatics always was one of the greatest communities/forums of them all. Everything changes, i guess.

ahcos said:

Do i have to repeat myself? Really? After two posts? ... Can you read?

I'm out, once trolls like Callonia

Click to expand...

Starts troll thread, complains about trolls. Throws insults.

Really, what's your end game here? No one wants to hear you 'vent'. So fire up Civ 4 and spare us, please. We don't need your selfish ranting.

Thanks for the chuckle ahcos. That was good stuff.

ahcos said:

Do i have to repeat myself? Really? After two posts? ... Can you read?







I'm out, once trolls like Callonia start to roll into the thread it's getting even more pointless than before. Not that i was hoping to have a decent conversation, although Civfanatics always was one of the greatest communities/forums of them all. Everything changes, i guess.

Click to expand...

Not at all, your thoughts are clearly conveyed.

I'm sad that you're sad. I prefer Civ 5 > Civ 4, but that's my preference. I can see why you feel the way you do.

Allow me to give my opinion on this. I hate unlimited Stacks of Doom. Civ 4 had mods to alleviate this. Civ 5 does not need mods for this.

Boo stacks of doom. Boo.

Moderator Action: This thread is closed. In future, if you think someone is trolling, please report the post and move on. Answering it and calling someone a troll is trolling and only feeds the troll. Stay on topic and skip the personal stuff.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889