Are there any aspects in which you think CiV surpasses CIV?

[Vordeo]

Sorry then. But you could had been more specific on what of civ V now is better than the civ IV counterparts.

Again, most of them have been mentioned (1UPT, hexes, UAs, no tech trading, etc).

I think most of us agree that a lot of the ideas of civ V are good, but a lot of us do not agree that some ( or all ) of those ideas were implemented in a way that surpasses Civ IV similar stuff

I can't agree with the bolded bit. For instance, most people think hexes are an improvement, and crap AI doesn't really have much to do with that implementation. Same with the introduction of UAs and tech trading.

Alot of the changes weren't implemented too well, but I do think with patching they'll be considered improvements over CivIV eventually. Hopefully it doesn't take too long.

 

[r_rolo1]

The bolded part was only added for completeness sake. I can imagine some people might get a gripe with all of the new features implementations ( well, not seeing how you can go wrong on implementing hexes , but ... )

 

[Vordeo]

The bolded part was only added for completeness sake. I can imagine some people might get a gripe with all of the new features implementations ( well, not seeing how you can go wrong on implementing hexes , but ... )

Ah, fair enough.

 

[Earthling]

hexagonal tiles, existence of city states as a concept (not including broken victory conditions, broken diplo system)

I'd say it has a lot of good ideas that just weren't implemented well, like culture growth for city borders, and the social policies. You can really see how much it was rushed.

I agree both of these were good and interesting new ideas, (and I like three ring cities, and if improvements were well, improved that could have been even cooler, at least removing the days of uber-farm/deforesting should have been a goal) but didn't work out right in practice as things stand.

 

[Becephalus]

All kinds of things.

1upt is a better system.
Hexes are a way better system.
The overall economy is better thought out (though still very unbalanced).
Cultural growth makes more sense.
I am glad civics are gone (I ahted the swapping them around constantly.
I am glad some of the crappy feature fluff/bloat elements (espionage) are gone.
I think combat is better.
I think the AI is actually better in a lot of ways. But the game is harder for the AI, and the combat AI is sadly atrocious.

I really felt like Civ4 had a bad case of feature bloat. Just throwing things in to throw them in, which made the game impossible to balance, and crippled the AI. People will always pay for more features regardless of whether or not it is a good idea though

If you just tell them you are improving the AI and the interface they expect it to be a patch, so expansions always entail feature bloat.

 

[Geddy]

I like the fact that it has been dumbed down so the less intellectually gifted amongst us get a chance to play Civ.......
Moderator Action: Trolling is not allowed in this forum.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[fed1943]

IMO some good ideas in the root of Civ 5, but horrible implementation.

1UpT, enhanced by hexes, is a "small" change that makes a different game. I like that,
better to have 2 different games than 2 copies of the same.

So, the combat system in itself is better.

SP (I see them, not as as Civics that was possible to be present too, but as techs that just give achievments) are nice.

But the game, as a whole, is much worse, again IMO.

And I just can speak about the game that exists (the one I bought afterall) and not
about the game that perhaps will exist or not in the future.

 

[DavidPBacon]

Good ideas in Civ V:

Hexes
City defense
Siege weapons needing mount and dismount
No more suicidal Siege weapons
Building maintenance costs( But need option to destroy building and to nerf the costs a bit)
roads maintenance costs(although it needs to link to resource to make sense and to be nerfed a bit)

The rest is a step back, or sideways if you prefer. It makes a game diferent from Civ and I want to play Civ. If I wanted other type of game, like a RTS, which this games resembles a lot, I would play RTS, there are plenty in the market.

 

[Crezth]

Moderator Action: *snip* don't troll here.

 

[Peng Qi]

Everything but diplomacy AI.

 

[fantsu]

How can some people seriously say that Civ5 looks better than IV? It looks horrendous! What are those green spots all over the map? Forests? Can't say.


Always reminds me of this one post mr. V did few weeks ago.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=9640239&postcount=16

...and I don't even care about the looks.

 

[Jharii]

Fantsu, this thread is about what people find better, not flaming other people's opinions. There are plenty of other threads that you can share your disdain on.

For me:
Hexes
1upt
Culture
Civics
Graphics
Tech/Wonder graphic and voiceover
City defense
Spaceship stages incorporated on game map
Global happiness (although city happiness is still needed)

There's various other minor things, but that's all for now.

 

[pagh80]

1: Hexes are great
2: City states. I would have liked a more advanced implementation of them, so you had more choices other than just giving them gold, but all in all i like them.
3: Global happiness. I have to say im beginning to like this more and more, instead of dealing with it in every city.
4: Social policies. It gives you some uniqueness in every game depending on your goals, and SP picks.
5: Partly the combat system but the AI stinks at it, and non combat units like workers should be allowed to stack.
6: The music is nice and the fact that the other AIs speaks in their native language. Neither is important for the gameplay itself, but its some of those nice details that i like.
7: The game is strangely addicitive eventhough there is alot about the game i dont lijke and alot i feel is missing.

My negative list would be way longer btw.

 

[klokwerk]

Civ 5 > Civ 4 in nearly every way, so yeah, including :

- Tactical war (1upt)
- AI which plays to win, no more sandbox AI for losers
- extended diplomacy including city states

and so on..

 

[Rystic]

I don't understand this fanatic love everyone has for hexes. Instead of just saying "hexes are the better system", can someone explain why they're the better system?

 

[lschnarch]

I don't understand this fanatic love everyone has for hexes. Instead of just saying "hexes are the better system", can someone explain why they're the better system?

They offer equidistance in all possible directions.
The old squared system made it better to move in diagonal direction than just N/E/S/W.

 

[Peng Qi]

How can some people seriously say that Civ5 looks better than IV? It looks horrendous! What are those green spots all over the map? Forests? Can't say.


Always reminds me of this one post mr. V did few weeks ago.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=9640239&postcount=16

...and I don't even care about the looks.

Play in DX10 with all the graphics turned up. Civ4 looked like a cartoon.

 

[klokwerk]

Civ 5 does indeed look a lot better than Civ 4 at max settings, as it should.

How can some people seriously say that Civ4 looks better than V? It looks horrendous!

 

[Rystic]

The old squared system made it better to move in diagonal direction than just N/E/S/W.

Why is that bad?

 

[cephalo]

I've decided that the only thing that really holds Civ5 back for me are the social policies. Everything else is potentially better, but changing government in a Civ game is a necessary punctuation dividing the game into different phases. Social policies make it all one big blur.