1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Civ 4 - Huge Disappointment

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by Jawz II, Jan 18, 2007.

  1. Snake Pliskeen

    Snake Pliskeen Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Messages:
    170
    Location:
    Italy
    In my opinion the only thing to change completely in this game is the combat system. I dont think to be the only one that lost a unit when statistics gave me 99.7 % to win. I always appreciated the combat system used in the game Panzer general, where each units has his peculiarities as in Civ4, but each units has a value of 10. When it faced a battle it can have some casualities but never gone lost if not under particular conditions, for example surprised with an ambush. In this way you can have heavy casualities but you dont lose the whole unit only because a random number decides this turn you have to lose even when you have 75% or more to win. Even the chance to get a leader with some special qualities for a winning unit it would be nice in that game, I would like to see it on Civ4.
     
  2. Arlborn

    Arlborn Legendary Noob

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    1,939
    In CIV4 vanilla(maybe they fixed in 1.61? Dont remember) there was a bug wehere they didnt compute First Strikes in the right way in the odds, thus making them seem weaker than trully they were. Also a bug that showed 100.1% or 0.00%(Impossible, they all have a chance of win), but this one Im almost sure they fixed in 1.61..

    And as far as I know, Warlords doesent have this kind of bug, and so its all about seletive memory.. If you use more suicide units at 50% or less of win chance, you would be surprised..

    And hum, the Battle system of the others CIVs were really good and perfect, right ?
     
  3. Astaldo711

    Astaldo711 Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    106
    Location:
    Wildlands of NJ
    This is the first strategy game I've ever played. I like wargames and strategy games, but have never been very good at them. Civ4 seemed indimidating at first, but once I got the hang of it, I loved it. I owe many tired days at work due to long nights taking "just one more turn". I can't compare it to the other Civilization games, as I've never played them. Civ4 is a terrific game, IMHO.
     
  4. CivMonger

    CivMonger Ruler of Insignificants

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2002
    Messages:
    319
    Location:
    Canada
    Welcome to the addiction Astaldo711
     
  5. PieceOfMind

    PieceOfMind Drill IV Defender Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    9,319
    Location:
    Australia

    Or even if you don't have warlords! ;) Blake's BetterAI project is for both Civ4 and Warlords, but its thread is in the Warlords forum.
     
  6. Arlborn

    Arlborn Legendary Noob

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    1,939
    AH ye! I never play Vanilla anymore, so I forgot this detail, thanks for remembering ;)
     
  7. Giaur

    Giaur War Dancer

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2005
    Messages:
    1,050
    Location:
    Inbetween Shangri-La and Valhalla
    Drill is not indeed useless promotion. Just complited monarch domination game.

    Drill 1) 0,5 FS
    Drill 2) 1,5 FS
    Drill 3) 2,5 FS
    Drill 4) 4,5 FS

    Never promoted before to Drill 3, so I could not calculate properly it's benefits. While you can see there is huge step from Drill3 to Drill4 and it makes a lot of difference. So you were right.

    However it was Washington (charismatic) and game played in Warlords where you can get Great Military Instructors, so achieving Drill4 was very easy.
     
  8. froglegs

    froglegs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    59
    I played CIV 3 for three years and played CIV 4 only 3 weeks. It is not as good or as interesting of a game. It does not stand the test of time. Other games were like this too. For instance, Heroes 3 was much better than Heroes 4 and Heroes 5 stunk. Warlords 2 was great but 3 was not as good and 4 was worse than awful.
     
  9. T.A JONES

    T.A JONES Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    Messages:
    3,471
    Stop it! your scarying me!!:cry:.... Cuz I know your right. Heros 3 was my first taste of turn based,(besides civ1)breathtaking, so I was amazed when I went to play the long awaited sequal. It was more pleaseing to the eye but blew chunks in every way compared to 3 in what counts, gameplay.

    THen I heard heros 5 went all 3d all on us . It was suppose to blow us all away. It bombed. I want Civ4 to just be a long nightmare n' wake up to a Civ5 that puts every thing back to right.

    Its not over man. We have to believe they will listen to the right people this time. they don't have to be reminded what these other guys did to their franchise. Warlords and Civ Chronicles just lost in sales to Desprate Housewives the Game.
     
  10. spiralx

    spiralx Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 22, 2001
    Messages:
    65
    Location:
    London, England
    Aren't you contradicting yourself? If you've only played CIV for 3 weeks, then you can't really state that it "does not stand the test of time" surely?

    Personally I hated CIII, CIV has bought back that feeling of excitement to the series.
     
  11. motherboard1

    motherboard1 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2006
    Messages:
    59
    Personally I cant see how his statement is self contradicting. But anyway

    For a more simplified approach to a new combat system, this is what I would like to see, tell me what you think.

    You know when you select 4 cannons and tell them to bombard a city, and they do so simultaneously? Well I would like to see combat between units happen simultaneously.

    For example, I select 4 units of warriors from my stack, and order them to attack the enemies warriors. If the enemy stack has 4 or more units, then the enemy stack should be forced to defend against all 4 of my warriors at once, each warrior pairing off against another, for a big brawl.

    it would look better, it requires much less micro management, it lets you resolve battles faster, and sounds easy to impliment. I personally dont like the 1 unit at a time thing at all.
     
  12. mrt144

    mrt144 Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    11,121
    Location:
    Seattle
    I never played Civ III. I went straight from SMAC to Civ IV and really enjoy the aspects of SMAC that made it into Civ IV. CIV II really was just too much of a straightforward exercize every game after a while. The thing that I like about Civ IV is that it introduces some more opportunity cost ideas and tough decisions.
     
  13. Dirk1302

    Dirk1302 Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    3,578
    Location:
    Netherlands
    I think Civ IV is far and away the best till now.The developers got most of the
    features right and there are not much exploits. The only aspect of the game i really don't like is the vassal system but this can be turned off.

    I liked Civ I and II much more than Civ III with it's endless research times in the early and middle game and after that the exploitive tech trading being in the tech trade screen for 90% of the time. One aspect of Civ III made me keep playing it, it is a really difficult game on Demigod and Deity (inpossible on sid). Civ II was to easy.
     
  14. Chieftess

    Chieftess Moderator Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2002
    Messages:
    24,160
    Location:
    Baltimore
    I actually like the vassal system - kind of like the Mutual Protection Pacts, but not so complex that you can touch off a free-for-all like you could in Civ3.
     
  15. gnome

    gnome Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2002
    Messages:
    239
    Location:
    New Port Richey, FL
    This is the first time they've simplified the combat system and I liked the result--the unified strength score. I always thought it was kind of lame that a tough-looking spear unit couldn't organize into a phalanx and ATTACK in strength, as they could historically. Even a unit used "defensively" mainly does so by attacking the opponent as they move in... so it made more sense

    The specialized modifiers work well too--you can go for combat +1, or get a bigger bonus if you're able to plan ahead enough to decide how to specialize the unit.
     
  16. Scandinavians

    Scandinavians Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2003
    Messages:
    38
    I originally wasn't going to get Civ 4 (decided to stick with Civ 3 and get Conquests), but when I got my new GeForce 7800 GS OC, I wanted another thing to make good use of my video card for. Plus I've heard good things about the modability.

    For me, Civilization III is harder, yet feels more strategy-ish (and has way more easter eggs and humorous things). Civilization IV feels easier to me, but some things which I can't quite put my finger on make it a good game (though one thing is that they fixed the spearman vs tank problem).

    I do miss several elements of Civ3, though. Some of these:
    -Leaders seemed to have more varied dialog in Civ 3 (each leader had their own unique sayings too)
    -The advisor system seemed better then (and I miss the advisors actually being people, too)
    -The multiplayer in Civ 3, although buggy in PTW, seemed to have more variety (game filters and things)
    -The modern music in Civ 3 (I'm one of few people who liked it)
    -...and various other little bells and whistles.
     
  17. Winston Hughes

    Winston Hughes Wrathful Warlock Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,734
    Location:
    A state of unquenchable rage
    To me, cIV did exactly the right thing with regards to its predecessors: it changed some of the game dynamics in such a way as to make it a very different playing experience, whilst retaining the general flavour of the series.

    I've loved every one of the civ games, but I do tend to get bored with doing the same old thing, over and over (a problem which is easily addressed with mods).

    So, I want every new version to throw out a load of old features, throw in a load of new ones, and create a different balance between its various parts, rather than treating it as some kind of 'enhanced graphics plus a few extra features' add-on. Otherwise, I'd just play the unmodded game a handful of times, get bored, and move straight onto the mods. As it is, I've yet to touch any of the mods for cIV, having enjoyed more than six months of almost continual 'just... one... more... turn...'.
     
  18. Clovis

    Clovis Charlemagne's Grandfather

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    299
    Location:
    Michigan, U.S.
    Figuring things out is what I enjoy about the game. The more control I have and the more options, the better. I like, slow, turn-based strategy. Inductive logic rules!
     
  19. Lance of Llanwy

    Lance of Llanwy King

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    710
    Indeed. Use your brain. It's not hard. And if it's easy, give Blake's Better AI mod a shot...
     
  20. Shaihulud

    Shaihulud Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2004
    Messages:
    3,685
    Location:
    Kingdom of Gore
    I bought it long after it was out, from the comment of most people i was abit disappointed, but still i got the game. I would prefer it to be better of course, CIV 2 was a major improvement over CIV 1, CIV 3 was also an improvement over its predecessor, but imo CIV 4 is not that great an improvement, but diehard fans like me will buy it anyway. I find myself going back to SMACX more often than not, its my favourite game among this genre.
     

Share This Page