Are there any aspects in which you think CiV surpasses CIV?
- Thread starter SGRaaize
- Start date
Bushface
Deity
No. (ten characters)
r_rolo1
King of myself
Hexagonal tiles , music ( well, in quality of the soundtracks ... I have my peeves about the way music is implemented ), AI having grand strategies ( now they only need to start following them 
) ...
Not much really, atleast on things that are indiscussibly better. There is a lot of stuff in civ V that is possibly a better idea than the civ IV counterparts , but that in the current implementation it isn't :/
) ...Not much really, atleast on things that are indiscussibly better. There is a lot of stuff in civ V that is possibly a better idea than the civ IV counterparts , but that in the current implementation it isn't :/
boredatwork
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2010
- Messages
- 104
Being able to "buy" terrain tiles. The implementation sucks but the concept of having your borders be not 100% on city location x culture is a good one.
Except the combat system: Hexes, territory around cities growing one tile at a time, city states, more clear tech tree (no "hidden" connections or units/buildings that need more than one tech), quantitative strategic resources, building upkeep costs, road upkeep costs (no more "spaghetti"), unique civ abilities...
I also like some other aspects (like the global happiness, policies and removal of sliders), but they are very controversial so I didn't include them in the main list.
I also like some other aspects (like the global happiness, policies and removal of sliders), but they are very controversial so I didn't include them in the main list.
1. Hexes are great; a big improvement over squares
2. But I don't think 1upt is better than the SoD at all. This is a strategy game not a tactical battle. Wars take far too long and are far too fiddly. And they lack scale. There is something impressive about taking 20 cannons and 60 rifles over the border in BtS that Civ 5 lacks. It feels like a skirmish with only 8 units rather than a proper war.
3. Ships being able to bombard land target is good, and artillery being able to reply.
2. But I don't think 1upt is better than the SoD at all. This is a strategy game not a tactical battle. Wars take far too long and are far too fiddly. And they lack scale. There is something impressive about taking 20 cannons and 60 rifles over the border in BtS that Civ 5 lacks. It feels like a skirmish with only 8 units rather than a proper war.
3. Ships being able to bombard land target is good, and artillery being able to reply.
ohioastronomy
King
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2005
- Messages
- 714
Hexes. The combat system, however, is a major step ..to the Apple IIe level wargames of the 1980s. Except those were more difficult and fun.
evrett37
Prince
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 346
hexes, 1upt, road system, plot purchase system..what we need is call to power 2 with a graphic upgrade..the one positive light of this failure of a game is that it opens the doors for competition. Firaxis had a choak hold on this type of game for a while..maybe now others will step up.
KahunaGod
Warlord
CiV surpasses CIV in pointlessness. CiV surpasses CIV in simplicity. CiV surpasses CIV in lowering IQ necessary to win. CiV surpasses CIV in boring the player. CiV surpasses CIV in reducing the number of mouse clicks per turn to....one, "next turn".
This is rather easy, I could go on and on, but, why?
FLAT OUT: CIV is LESS COMPLEX than the Original Civilization (which I would rather play). My CiV challenge to myself is "is it possible to handicap myself enough to lose?" so far, nada.
This is rather easy, I could go on and on, but, why?
FLAT OUT: CIV is LESS COMPLEX than the Original Civilization (which I would rather play). My CiV challenge to myself is "is it possible to handicap myself enough to lose?" so far, nada.
Mad Hab
Warlord
I really like one feature of Civ5: each tile is now linked to one and only one city. So, when you conquer a city, you grab all the tiles linked to it and that's all. The culture calculation in Civ4 was way too complex, and commonly you would attack a city without having any idea of how the borders would behave after your conquest.
That said, overall, I think Civ4 was a game superior to Civ5 (and I am comparing vanilla versions, not Civ4 BTS with Civ5 vanilla).
Cheers,
Mad Hab
That said, overall, I think Civ4 was a game superior to Civ5 (and I am comparing vanilla versions, not Civ4 BTS with Civ5 vanilla).
Cheers,
Mad Hab
KahunaGod:
Abegweit came up with a simple handicap set.
1. Never build anything but Settlers.
2. Disband everything you build.
Good luck!
On-Topic:
I like how the cities now have longer reach, so they can work tiles that are as much as 3 tiles away. With 36 tiles to work, and more territory being represented by each tile, it makes city placement more flexible and organic.
Roads cost maintenance. I think this is an indisputably good change.
Science tied to population. I like the march of progress and I would greatly prefer it if I was actually close to 1600's tech in the 1600's. Granted, very large civs can still race up the tech tree astoundingly fast, and the scientists are always a problem, but grounding the base science rate into something relatively predictable is a good design.
1UPT. Don't like stacks.
Abegweit came up with a simple handicap set.
1. Never build anything but Settlers.
2. Disband everything you build.
Good luck!
On-Topic:
I like how the cities now have longer reach, so they can work tiles that are as much as 3 tiles away. With 36 tiles to work, and more territory being represented by each tile, it makes city placement more flexible and organic.
Roads cost maintenance. I think this is an indisputably good change.
Science tied to population. I like the march of progress and I would greatly prefer it if I was actually close to 1600's tech in the 1600's. Granted, very large civs can still race up the tech tree astoundingly fast, and the scientists are always a problem, but grounding the base science rate into something relatively predictable is a good design.
1UPT. Don't like stacks.
The music is nice.
Hexes are very good.
The idea of extending the borders is nice, but poorly implemented.
I would even like the idea of ranged fire (not for bowmen, how crazy is that?) if there were retaliation fire.
Natural wonders are a nice idea, but.... the graphics, the graphics... these are "wonders"? Meh...
That's it.
Five years between both titles and nothing more to mention in favour of Civ0.V (some even call it Shafer0.5)
Hexes are very good.
The idea of extending the borders is nice, but poorly implemented.
I would even like the idea of ranged fire (not for bowmen, how crazy is that?) if there were retaliation fire.
Natural wonders are a nice idea, but.... the graphics, the graphics... these are "wonders"? Meh...
That's it.
Five years between both titles and nothing more to mention in favour of Civ0.V (some even call it Shafer0.5)
Abegweit
Anarchist trader
Hexes are meh. Can take 'em or leave 'em. Obviously they're essential for 1UPT but given that that's a failure...
Ranged attack is an improvement. That's about it.
I do like the new fog of war.
Ranged attack is an improvement. That's about it.
I do like the new fog of war.
JLoZeppeli
Prince
- Joined
- May 11, 2009
- Messages
- 598
I think that the "hidden" connection of tech was that made the system more belanced and strategic, now you can go forward with more less thinking on tech strategies...
For me, hexes, city states, cultural spreding per tile (but i like the civ IV conquest of other civ's tiles by culture, because i was a buider), overall graphic, social politics and the new golden age activation.
For the rest, as my father said to me: "what the heck did they do to this game?" (yeah a 67 years old civ player
)...Krakenheim
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 4
Hexes, Policies, City-states and Art Deco interface (That one in particular !!!).
I think cities owning a provincial area around them is better than CIV4 where you captured a city and all you got was one city tile which was going to revolt for 100 years. Unfortunately the capture of the province is now total, immediate, and should require a little bit more effort.
I also think there are some big changes in city quality as you move through the eras, which is good, but unfortunately these are lost as everyone hates building maintenance and tries to win with minimal city development.
Policies don't need much to be good but at the moment they lack something dynamic. I'd like to see you buy policies as you do now but also have continuous decisions on changing government, with government choices restricted by your policies.
I also think there are some big changes in city quality as you move through the eras, which is good, but unfortunately these are lost as everyone hates building maintenance and tries to win with minimal city development.
Policies don't need much to be good but at the moment they lack something dynamic. I'd like to see you buy policies as you do now but also have continuous decisions on changing government, with government choices restricted by your policies.
Similar threads
