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

[operatesea]

I didn't realize how great civ 4 was until I started to paly civ 5.

 

[Jolly Rogerer]

It reveals more because you displace your unit in two directions, but you don't move further. Moving two tiles east is not the same in movement terms as moving one tile diagonally (though it would be if units only moved in four directions). It's easy to think that diagonal is faster than straight line, but in both cases your unit is still exactly one tile away from where it was. The straight line/diagonal is just a choice on whether to move along the X-axis, the Y-axis, or both.

Good example, you have two units, and there's a city eight tiles north of them. One travels on diagonals, one travels in a straight line. Who's going to get there first?

I'm confused to what you're saying.

In terms of movement points you move the same, but in terms of geometry you move further on the diagonal. Get a ruler and measure it on your screen, you'll see what I mean. That's why moving diagonally will reveal more map, despite the fact that you are moving the same distance in terms of movement points. That's the anomaly introduced by charging the same price in movement points for moving diagonally despite the fact that it is indeed further.

As for zones of control. Consider that on a square grid a unit has 8 adjacent tiles it can move into. When that unit is "pinned" by an enemy unit which is adjacent to it, it can no longer move into some of those tiles because they are also adjacent to the enemy unit (in its zone of control). When your unit is pinned by an enemy unit that is diagonal to it, it loses the ability to move into 2 tiles. When it is pinned by a unit that is NSE or W of it, it loses the ability to move into 4 tiles. This again is because the unit is farther away when it is diagonal than when it is located in one of the cardinal directions.

Because hexagons are equidistant in all directions whenever one unit pins another on a hex grid it always threatens two hexes of the six adjacent to the first unit.

(In all cases above I'm ignoring the tile that the threatening unit is occupying, as the threatened unit can always move into / attack that tile.)

 

[Calouste]

Most already mentioned, but the one I'd like to add is getting rid of bonusses to be the first to research a tech. At least 80% of the playthroughs on these boards on the higher levels in Civ4 revolved around being the first to hit Liberalism.

Also: being able to survive a game at a decent level when you don't have Copper or Horses nearby and actually having some choice which techs to research initially instead of having to rush for Bronze Working every time.

 

[C~G]

Some things but they have also downside them because of bad execution / AI.

+ Hexes (also with new system of culture spread)
+ 1upT (as an idea, not sure does the scale fit to this type of game along with other problems)
+ Some Graphics
+ Limited strategic resources
+ City states

These all promise so much at first but with some otherl issues like Social policies thrown into a mix that as system and permanents just doesn't make sense ruins many of them.

It's really half design build into few good ideas. That's why I don't dig it now and see that since the execution was so bad originally that it could build upon them unless a miracle happens.

 

[niall78]

No!!!!!!!!

 

[Socratatus]

Yes. Civ 5 has issues but so did IV when it first hit. Overall I like V better.

I'm not sure why people who dislike5V bother posting - stop playing it, and stop discussing it.

.

If people did not complain, how then can the Devs know how to fix what`s wrong and improve on the next patches or game?

It`s hypocritical since if YOU really did not like something I`d bet you`d be the first to whine.

 

[vandyr]

The short answer to the OP's query; Everything. Its forward thinking and significantly positive changes are the results of an excellent design theory. Its awesomeness the result of a superior dev team. The reasons are playing by the thousands daily on Steam.

 

[Jharii]

If people did not complain, how then can the Devs know how to fix what`s wrong and improve on the next patches or game?

It`s hypocritical since if YOU really did not like something I`d bet you`d be the first to whine.

He has already proven that you are correct.

He posted that he doesn't like that people post a complaint when they don't like something. It's a self-defeating argument.

 

[Rystic]

In terms of movement points you move the same, but in terms of geometry you move further on the diagonal. Get a ruler and measure it on your screen, you'll see what I mean. That's why moving diagonally will reveal more map, despite the fact that you are moving the same distance in terms of movement points. That's the anomaly introduced by charging the same price in movement points for moving diagonally despite the fact that it is indeed further.

Revealing more =/= moving further. You're displacing yourself on the X- and Y-axis, so you uncover tiles on both. Using a ruler won't help, because tiles are strictly defined. It's like telling one of my friends to move 10 feet in one direction, then telling a second friend to move 10 feet in another direction, and claiming the second friend moved further.

As for zones of control. Consider that on a square grid a unit has 8 adjacent tiles it can move into. When that unit is "pinned" by an enemy unit which is adjacent to it, it can no longer move into some of those tiles because they are also adjacent to the enemy unit (in its zone of control). When your unit is pinned by an enemy unit that is diagonal to it, it loses the ability to move into 2 tiles. When it is pinned by a unit that is NSE or W of it, it loses the ability to move into 4 tiles. This again is because the unit is farther away when it is diagonal than when it is located in one of the cardinal directions.

Do zones of control exist in CiV? I know they were around in Alpha Centauri, but are they in this game?

 

[eric_]

Do zones of control exist in CiV?

Yes, they do.

 

[Toulouse]

Hexes rock! I'm sure there are other things in the game that are real improvements (i.e., besides the graphics and music, etc.), but they're not easy to recall. If you think about it the 1 UPT is totally inappropriate for this game and sure enough doesn't work at all.

In general ranged units are ridiculously overpowered: when longbows are routinely sinking destroyers it's time to power down the PC and find something else to do...

 

[afa2000]

- Culture is more valuable
- leaders speaking in their own tongues
- no more transport ships
- units moving at least 2 squares per time instead of just one
- archers are way better than in previous versions
- being able to buy land with gold
- cities can defend themselves
- limited resources

But that's not enough.

 

[mercury529]

Revealing more =/= moving further. You're displacing yourself on the X- and Y-axis, so you uncover tiles on both. Using a ruler won't help, because tiles are strictly defined. It's like telling one of my friends to move 10 feet in one direction, then telling a second friend to move 10 feet in another direction, and claiming the second friend moved further.

You are correct that tiles are strictly defined. That is not the issue. The issue is that moving on a diagonal effectively increases the speed of a unit by 41% (square root of 2). That is problematic because there is no way to move in a cardinal direction where units can cover ~1.41 units of length as they can on the diagonal.

Working with your example, give your two friends a rate of speed (X feet per second). Tell them to walk for Y seconds, one East the other North-East. When you are done, look at the triangle formed by the starting point and the end points of both friends. You will not have a right triangle. The person traveling East will be X*Y feet further East than he started. The person traveling NE will only be (X*Y)/(square root of 2) feet East of where he started. The only way to make the person traveling NE cover the same amount of eastern distance as the person traveling East in the same amount of time is to increase his rate of speed.

Hence in a tile-based system that allows diagonal moves, diagonal movement has the advantage of increasing unit speed. You can displace in two cardinal directions in the same move. Hexes do not suffer from this weakness. There is no way to move in two cardinal directions in a single move as you can with the old tile-based system.

 

[Jharii]

You are correct that tiles are strictly defined. That is not the issue. The issue is that moving on a diagonal effectively increases the speed of a unit by 41% (square root of 2). That is problematic because there is no way to move in a cardinal direction where units can cover ~1.41 units of length as they can on the diagonal.

Working with your example, give your two friends a rate of speed (X feet per second). Tell them to walk for Y seconds, one East the other North-East. When you are done, look at the triangle formed by the starting point and the end points of both friends. You will not have a right triangle. The person traveling East will be X*Y feet further East than he started. The person traveling NE will only be (X*Y)/(square root of 2) feet East of where he started. The only way to make the person traveling NE cover the same amount of eastern distance as the person traveling East in the same amount of time is to increase his rate of speed.

Hence in a tile-based system that allows diagonal moves, diagonal movement has the advantage of increasing unit speed. You can displace in two cardinal directions in the same move. Hexes do not suffer from this weakness. There is no way to move in two cardinal directions in a single move as you can with the old tile-based system.

In old school FPS games (like Doom), you could actually move faster by always moving in diagonals. This has since been addressed and fixed through code using a process called "normalization" of the vector.

And yes, hexes completely alleviate this as they apply to TBS games.

 

[Ikael]

You don't have to employ ICS if you don't want to. It's still possible to play and *gasp* win in Civ V without using war, and without using ICS.

Unthinkable, I know. It's like there's this whole new game in this here game.

No, it is not. The retardedly agressive AI coupled with the worthless diplomatic engine ensures that you WILL wage war and that you will have to annex / puppet enemy cities in order to secure yourself, thus expanding your empire.

Other economic / empire developing strategies outside ICS are inside the realm of possiblity, yes, but they are VASTLY inferior to ICS. Having 10 options with only one of them being the undoubtely best one is tantamount to having no option at all (see also: which land improvement do I build in Civ V?)

This is a game built for and by warmongers, and it shows. Almost every interesting adminstrative decision in your empire resides on the adoption of social policies once in a while.

- Culture is more valuable

Huh? I always thought that the removal of cultural city assimilation was a HUGE nerf to culture-mongering.

 

[vandyr]

No, it is not. The retardedly agressive AI coupled with the worthless diplomatic engine ensures that you WILL wage war and that you will have to annex / puppet enemy cities in order to secure yourself, thus expanding your empire.

Other economic / empire developing strategies outside ICS are inside the realm of possiblity, yes, but they are VASTLY inferior to ICS. Having 10 options with only one of them being the undoubtely best one is tantamount to having no option at all (see also: which land improvement do I build in Civ V?)

This is a game built for and by warmongers, and it shows. Almost every interesting adminstrative decision in your empire resides on the adoption of social policies once in a while.



Huh? I always thought that the removal of cultural city assimilation was a HUGE nerf to culture-mongering.

Not really. Its no different typing in godmode code on Doom. You don't have to use it just because you know it. I don't TP spam, does that make me a bad player? No, I still win games, quite handily. I don't spam tiny populated cities everywhere either, but I still win games. Gasp! The horror!

 

[Brawndo]

- Units no longer have to die when they attack or defend (I like this a lot)
- Dynamic cultural expansion one tile at a time is better than the sudden explosion of borders you get in Civ 4
- You can "grow" multiple types of Great Persons in one city and see exactly how long it takes to get each one
- Great Generals are more useful


... and that's about it, unfortunately.

 

[afa2000]

Huh? I always thought that the removal of cultural city assimilation was a HUGE nerf to culture-mongering.

At previous versions, my culture slider was always at 0 %, because science is always better than it. That's what I mean. Now, science and culture are not mutually exclusive anymore, both are worthwhile.

Still, I used to find cultural city assimilation very annoying. It was nearly impossible to annex a city far away from your empire, because it starts with 0 culture.

 

[Socratatus]

I`ve been watching and it seems plainly obvious that the beauty of CiV4 COMPLETE WILL REMAIN on my drive for a very long time. The over simplification alone is a big minus. Typical dumbing down for the masses again. Civ 5 sounds furthest away from any CIV game ever made. Can`t be good.

 

[thbrown81]

Poopiness.