Is civ5 worth buying it?

[wazzzuup]

people who have played civ4 please reply

Is civ5 worth buying it?

> is it still fun with out religion?

>are there good MODS and scenarios?

>is it better than than civ4 if so say why or why not?

>is hotseat good?

>does it have advanced starts?

>are there more units and leaders than BTS?

 

[Tred]

I tried and tried to get to like it. Some mods helped but it doesn't really feel like a Civ game. It is some other kind of simpler, boring game. I finally gave up and came back to Civ IV with renewed appreciation.

 

[calibur]

I wonder if somebody could take the hexgrid and mod it into civ4.
From what I've seen, the hexgrid seems good.
Also, does the inability to SoD make combat better, at least against other players?

 

[LeHam]

I don't know about other players, but last I knew the AI couldn't handle the 1 UPT. Instead of Stacks of Doom, you get "Carpets of Doom," great moving walls of units that clog up the whole system, cluttering the map.

 

[Funky]

For me Civ 5 was the biggest video game dissapointment i ever experienced, so obviously I'm biased. But if if you liked the complexity and the empire creation feeling of civ 4, then civ 5 is probably not for you.

If you don't mind a desastrous AI that sends workers and unguarded great generals to the front lines, if you don't mind having to move several units every turn that keep getting in the way of eachother, if you don't mind that diplomacy feels shallow and random, if you don't mind that building takes forever and is unrewarding, if you don't mind that many features have been removed, leaving you with less to do, if you don't mind several sloppy implementations such as a useless civilopedia or mere picture popups when you win, or the lack of available information, and most importantly, if you don't mind playing a tactical wargame instead of an empire building game, then civ 5 may appeal to you.

Regarding multiplayer, I didn't try it out, but from what I've heard it basically comes down to who can click the fastest, as turns are simultaneous and there is no movement delay for units that moved at the end of the turn like in civ 4. And since you can't move once you finish your turn, apparently all players sit out the timer, making the game slow and boring.

And hexes... there has been a big hype about these awesome 6-sided shapes. Personally I couldn't care less if civ plays on squares, hexes or circles! Imo it is pretty telling that this superficial "innovation" is regarded as one of civ 5's best plusses.

This turned into quite a rant, I guess. Told ya I am biased.

 

[Sealion]

I recently started playing civ 4 about... a month ago now? I decided to try playing some civ 5 to see what it was all about a few days ago. I played a couple of games to be sure that I was giving it a fair chance and now I don't want to play it anymore. I was initially enticed because there seemed to be many more civilizations represented, but they didn't have any kind of "feel" that they were unique from each other. Everything that Funky said I can mostly just agree with even with my limited exposure to the game. I think the hex grid was implemented to *try* to help with unit congestion, but even with that, I was still getting frustrated that my units just kept tripping over each other at all stages in the game.

I got so hooked on civ 4 because as soon as I ended I game, I wanted to research a bit about what I could have done better and load up another game. Playing through a game of civ 5 just felt bland and I couldn't muster any excitement or interest to play again.

 

[Sundowner]

I too was supremely disappointed in Civ V. I prepurchased it and my friends and I even had a party and all nighter the day it came out to jump right into the MP and see how it was.

My personal belief is that Civ V is just another game on the long trend of MMOPG-ization. That is... Companies dumb games down so that anyone, even a babbling idiot, can succeed and play them. They remove complexity and add time sinks. Instead of rewarding innovation, they reward mouse clicks and time played. In short, they feel the general population is too stupid to play Civ IV so they made Civ V for the dumb masses so they could sell more games.

It flies in the face of what Civ IV stood for, and all for some flashy graphics and hex tiles.

 

[wazzzuup]

so the over all opinion is to not get civ5??

 

[Revent]

Quite obviously. Unless you want a ***** war game rather than an empire building game. In the instance that you want a war game, there are many other better games to play.

 

[Zahar]

I don't like Civ5 for most of the reasons already addressed but keep in mind that you're asking a community of diehard Civ4 fans, so there's going to be a lot of bias.

Personally I think Civ5 plays like a very watered-down version of a Total War game, which is another series I love. The empire-building aspect is weaker and more user-friendly like a Total War game, yet Civ5 lacks Total War's amazing real time field combat strategizing.

 

[Deckhand]

so the over all opinion is to not get civ5??

I don't like Civ5 for most of the reasons already addressed but keep in mind that you're asking a community of diehard Civ4 fans, so there's going to be a lot of bias. ...

What Zahar said.
If you asked on the Civ V forums, the answer would be: Yes! Play Civ V, it's a great game.
But the majority of us Civ IV fanatics tried Civ V and quickly returned to Civ IV.

 

[scyt4l3]

On diplomacy :
The other AI gives you a warmonger penalty when you honor a defensive pact.
...
Yup
And slashing unit count per tile to only one seems like a rash unthoughtful decision. Overall the game feels like a botched version created for the purpose of sucking money.
Their business model, I hate it.

 

[Sisiutil]

I think the hex grid was implemented to *try* to help with unit congestion, but even with that, I was still getting frustrated that my units just kept tripping over each other at all stages in the game.

I never understood the big advantage of going to a hex grid, especially for alleviating unit congestion, as you suggest. IIRC from my brief exposure to it in CivV, it limits your units to moves in 6 directions, whereas the square grid as implemented in CivIV allows moves in eight directions (all 4 sides and the 4 diagonals). Squares have worked fine for classic games like chess and checkers for several hundred years; I don't see the advantage of moving to something supposedly-fancier that is actually more limiting.

 

[calibur]

I never understood the big advantage of going to a hex grid, especially for alleviating unit congestion, as you suggest. IIRC from my brief exposure to it in CivV, it limits your units to moves in 6 directions, whereas the square grid as implemented in CivIV allows moves in eight directions (all 4 sides and the 4 diagonals). Squares have worked fine for classic games like chess and checkers for several hundred years; I don't see the advantage of moving to something supposedly-fancier that is actually more limiting.

Found this.
"Moving diagonally, you end up moving almost 3 squares for the price of 2. Same happens for things like ranged attacks (bombardment and airplanes in Civ IV and before) and city radii. A hex grid neatly fixes a lot of these issues."
"Second big benefit of hexes is aesthetics. Maybe it's because there's now 3 possible angles as opposed to 2, or maybe it's because you can't make a right angle with hexes, but the terrain looks much more organic and natural. Civs, for a long time, had been doing all sorts of clever tricks with tile graphics to make them look less square-y but what the hexes can do is just miles ahead. Plus, I'm sure the artists are glad for all the work they've been saved."

Yeah, you're right, I hadn't even though of the movement penalty. But, nonetheless, this. I had noticed that the hexgrid looked better than even a civV square grid would've.

 

[Culture Bomb]

Is there anyone who loves both Civ IV and V?

 

[Tred]

If you really want to explore the case for Civ V, look at the Civ V forum. Presumably, those people like it.

 

[scyt4l3]

What he said, because honestly, I'm subscribed to this thread mainly to enjoy the potential Civ 5 bashing that will come out of it.

 

[Quintillus]

In general, it's worth it at $7.50, or 75% off (that's what I spent on it). For $30, the current price? I don't think I'd buy it at that price.

It probably isn't how you meant the question, but in my (admittedly limited experience) there are fewer units in Civ5, in terms of quantity in play during the game at any one time, not necessarily in terms of variety available to play with. Personally I find it rather too few units for my taste. Civ4 has more units in play than Civ5, and Civ3 has more than Civ4.

 

[Kesshi]

My personal belief is that Civ V is just another game on the long trend of MMOPG-ization. That is... Companies dumb games down so that anyone, even a babbling idiot, can succeed and play them. They remove complexity and add time sinks. Instead of rewarding innovation, they reward mouse clicks and time played. In short, they feel the general population is too stupid to play Civ IV so they made Civ V for the dumb masses so they could sell more games.

It flies in the face of what Civ IV stood for, and all for some flashy graphics and hex tiles.

I agree with a lot of what Sundowner said here. A lot of games are now rewarding time and effort rather than actual content. Many games have achievements for dying. You gain a 'reward' for losing. ...but I digress.

I never understood the big advantage of going to a hex grid, especially for alleviating unit congestion, as you suggest. IIRC from my brief exposure to it in CivV, it limits your units to moves in 6 directions, whereas the square grid as implemented in CivIV allows moves in eight directions (all 4 sides and the 4 diagonals). Squares have worked fine for classic games like chess and checkers for several hundred years; I don't see the advantage of moving to something supposedly-fancier that is actually more limiting.

The issue with a hex is the concept of vector addition. If I move 1 unit in the x direction and 1 unit in the y direction, I have moved square root of 2 distance away. (That's approximately 1.414 units.) If I move like that again, I've moved approximately 2.828 units away from my starting position.

1 x + 1 x = 2 units
1 x & 1 y + 1 x & 1 y = 2.828 units.

Furthermore, to address the clutter issue: To fully surround a unit with a square based system it requires 8 units. To fully surround a unit with a hex based system requires 6 units. Thus it takes less units to surround, making for less "clutter."

 

[Sisiutil]

The issue with a hex is the concept of vector addition. If I move 1 unit in the x direction and 1 unit in the y direction, I have moved square root of 2 distance away. (That's approximately 1.414 units.) If I move like that again, I've moved approximately 2.828 units away from my starting position.

1 x + 1 x = 2 units
1 x & 1 y + 1 x & 1 y = 2.828 units.

Furthermore, to address the clutter issue: To fully surround a unit with a square based system it requires 8 units. To fully surround a unit with a hex based system requires 6 units. Thus it takes less units to surround, making for less "clutter."

With all due respect, my answer to that is a head shake, shrug of the shoulders, and a contemptuous remark I won't render into text for the sake of any minors reading this. You want to move across the board faster? Make the standard move two squares instead of 1. Problem solved, problem staying solved. And with a lot less algebra (everyone's favourite school subject!).

As for surrounding units... how often do you ever do that in Civ IV? Why is it or should it be necessary? It sounds tedious. Which I gather movement unit is in Civ V. The reason so many Civ IV players abandon games in the modern era is because it just becomes so tedious to manage so many units, even in a stack. I can't imagine the mind-crushing boredom of having to move every single one of them individually.

Then again, maybe I sound like the same grumpy old gamers who complained about Civ IV's 3D graphics... Ah well, I played Civ II for years until they finally came out with a version I liked. I imagine I'll be doing the same with Civ IV for the foreseeable future. At least I won't have to upgrade my graphics card anytime soon...