Best version of Civ EVER.

[Mallipeep]

Civ5 is far superior in design, The implementation is rather poor & rushed tho

but at least it will allow patches take it much further then the inferior civ1-4 series.

 

[civ_king]

Vanilla Civ IV was an atrocity compared to Civ V

 

[Gaizokubanou]

I voted 4.

5 is good and all, but the main focus of the game is a war game... with extremely terrible AI for war.

 

[SuperJay]

Polls aren't usually asinine. It's the analyses from the poll numbers that might be asinine though. Or sometimes they might tell you something really really interesting.

Sure, of course. And you're right, it's not the polling specifically, it's the conclusions that some folks leap to as a result of the polls that seems silly. Obviously, yes, some people enjoy Civ5. Others don't. (I'm one of the "don'ts," with some qualifications.) It's the "SEE, EVERYONE HATES CIV 5, I can *prove* it by linking this poll!!" stuff that I think is just silly.

 

[Crezth]

The people voting for Civ IV vanilla have a very short-term memory.

 

[Civbra]

Civ IV is by far the best, both in gameplay, balance, sound, is certain that he was not perfect and the battles were a bit choppy but it is the best!

And agreeing with that Ischnarch Civ II is the soul of Civilizations.

 

[Medopu]

I completely loved the civ III atmosphere. I hated the Civ 4 atmosphere. I'm content with the Civ5 one.

And since it's the most important thing for me, i'll go with Civ III

 

[Me,myself,and,I]

ciV. If we were comparing to BTS however...

 

[r_rolo1]

The people voting for Civ IV vanilla have a very short-term memory.

Care to base ? Otherwise this is just a flamebait, exactly like saying that people that voted for civ V have a very bad long term memory

 

[Crezth]

Care to base ? Otherwise this is just a flamebait, exactly like saying that people that voted for civ V have a very bad long term memory

OhhhhhHHHHHH clever.

Just go back and try Civ IV vanilla, unpatched. Totally buggy and barely playable and chock-full of problems and mistakes. Not to mention the spearman-beats-tank syndrome in vogue.

Not to mention, many critical UI elements missing - such as how much maintenance does this that or the other thing cost.

And when you get into the gameplay itself, stonehenge becoming obsolete in 50 turns.

No, Civ IV vanilla was not a very good game. Certainly not as good as Civ V vanilla.

 

[JLoZeppeli]

Maybe, or maybe it was buggy but a good game, not buggy and crap as Civ V...

 

[r_rolo1]

Just go back and try Civ IV vanilla, unpatched. Totally buggy and barely playable and chock-full of problems and mistakes. Not to mention the spearman-beats-tank syndrome in vogue.

Not to mention, many critical UI elements missing - such as how much maintenance does this that or the other thing cost.

And when you get into the gameplay itself, stonehenge becoming obsolete in 50 turns.

No, Civ IV vanilla was not a very good game. Certainly not as good as Civ V vanilla.

I never had a in my civ IV experience except cases involving free barb wins And even if I had ( some people did had similar stuff ), civ III and V have far worse examples , like the actual spear beats tank in civ III or lbow sinks destroyer in civ V.

About critical UI elements missing, true, but given that civ V and III ( can't talk of the others except civRev ) also have a LOT of those issues in their vanilla versions, this is not a discriminating point ( in fact , if you got that way, civ III vanilla beat both IV and V in UI completeness in vanilla version )

About stonehenge ... well, it obsoleted in 50 turns because you wanted it to obsolete in 50 turns No one forced you to tech calendar so soon you know ... In that aspect civ V is somewhat worse, since it has less techs to choose in average at any any random moment of the game. You only notice it less because older stuff does not obsolete at the rate of civ IV.

 

[jahman]

1. Civ 4 BtS
2. Civ 1
3. Civ 3 C
4. Civ 2
5. Civ 5

Although Civ 5 implements a few nice ideas, there are just too many flaws to make it really enjoyable. Would love an expansion to Civ 4 with some Civ 5 features though, like hexagonal tiles, ability for any unit to embark (although keeping the transport units for faster transport), restricted amount of units per tile - say 5 - so that when 5 units stack, they constitute an army that occupies the entire tile (this would prevent SoD without making regular movements annoying), the way great generals work in battle and ranged combat.

 

[Dbob]

Do most people forget that some of the early Civ IV play and install discs were mislabeled?

Not that this was a big deal, but it obviously shows that it wasn't the perfect release everyone seems to remember.

Oh, FYI I picked Civ II, I've probably played III the most, but I still find myself going back and playing Civ II while I rarely ever pick up C3C anymore.

 

[ShuShu62]

some really liked it b/c it changed the direction of the series

Exactly. I voted for 1 because it is the most innovative of the series. But III is the only game in the series that lets you run a cultural domination approach. It is also the first to start the trend away from ICS. II was a very good expansion pack, and IV is clearly the most plished (can you say voice overs by Leonard Nimoy? ).

 

[zonk]

IV.

If the question is "most beloved" -- I'd probably go II.

V, I think, is forever going to be a "III" in my mind.... III took the series in a new direction, and while there were some interesting ideas -- I thought some of them really came off poorly. I think it took not just patches and expansions -- but the next iteration (IV) to really make the III ideas work.

V, I think, has some fundamental issues that probably need more than just patches and expansion -- maybe there's a VI in 5 years that makes some of the V things work.

 

[Drakarska]

I'm gonna have to go with II. There's just something about a drunk military advisor saying "this pleases me mightily" as your kicking Romes butt funny as hell. Strange how certain game aspects sit with you, but oh well.

 

[Acidrain]

I voted for Civ5, altho I LOVED civ4... Civ5 because the mechanics are awesome, the only downside it has, are the bugs... which will be patched, I'm sure. Civ4 had lots of patches also and turned out to be probably the best Civ game before Civ5.

 

[gingerbill]

Civ 5 definetly my favourite vanilla game . I also really enjoyed call to power .

 

[Zelig]

I don't really see the point of only including Vanilla versions... other than Civ1, until civ5, I haven't played any civ game prior to the expansions being released.