Civ 4 - My Comments

[Nigel Stutt]

I like the civilization games generally. I played Civ 1 and 2 to death. I didnt like Civ 3 becuase it was just too close to Civ 2 and so I couldnt get interested in it again. I am enjoying Civ 4 at the moment though mainly because its quite a change from the previous ones but heres my comments:

Why do I feel that bridge building, roads and railways only now serve one purpose - to move troops around. Is there no other reason now for roads?

Combat is based on the luck of the draw far too much. I just cant get adequately trained troops because they can die at a moments notice. I hate the way you have to put in all of your army and prey. Before it didnt seem to matter too much becuase you could build faster armies and they werent trained. Now if you lose even one army its really hard to take.

Are the enemy AI generals cheating at all? I say this becuase I can attack an enemy Civ equal to mine and yet they can create twice as many troops as me. I'm sure the enemy have an unfair advantange in this game and that isn't fun to me.

Is it just me or has Civ changed from being fun to play to just playing to win the game? In past Civ games the playing was the fun part - creating your Civilisation, lasting out the game, creating your palace and a beautiful major city with wonders and the like etc. Now it seems everything is geared towards winning the game as quickly as possible. Or has it always been that way?

I like the new animations on the map view but the sound is atrocious. I cant seem to get the sound so that I can actually hear people talking using EAX unless Im zoomed in fully so I have to resort to using stereo which makes my EAX card useless. The music is good though but why does it have to change when you zoom into a city - if you zoom in too far the music disappears altogether - again it means you have to mess constantly with the zoom to get the music you want to hear. Its stupidly set up.

Ships look a bit daft - sometimes the animation stops when they are turning which means they end up looking like theyre keeling over! Looks daft.

I like the new additions to the game like religion but cant help feeling that there are far more options in terms of diplomacy, sabotage etc that are being ignored in this game.

Technology - I hate the way you are constantly developing new technologies before you have even used the previous ones properly. Seems theres no time to enjoy the development of your civilisation anymore. Similarly you seem to be building everything in your cities, all the time, for every city - they dont seem to vary much. Why cant we have a bit of choice, nonlinear pathways through the technology and buildings, create more varied cultures and civilisations etc. The enemy AI always seem to be research exactly the same things. And they always seem to be at similar levels unless you have attacked them. They should be of varying speeds of development etc. Theres just no real variation in anything in this game.

I dont like the way culture is handled - culture should be more flexible in that if you take a city the culture around it should start to alter to yours. You should also be able to take enemy cities using culture far more easily. Ruins the whole concept the way its handled at the moment.

Trade - automatic trade routes etc are really boring. Why cant we control these using caravans etc?

Generally I feel that theres a lot that has been taken out of the game as well as added. Im busy making my mind up if I really like the game the way it is or not. I cant see me playing it for a long time though - I diont think the replay element is all that strong in the present incarnation - its just not flexible enough to play it in different ways ie winning by diplomacy, conquest, culture etc. The only way to win the game (and for the AI to win the game) seems to be through space race.

 

[Ranos]

I like the civilization games generally. I played Civ 1 and 2 to death. I didnt like Civ 3 becuase it was just too close to Civ 2 and so I couldnt get interested in it again. I am enjoying Civ 4 at the moment though mainly because its quite a change from the previous ones but heres my comments:

Why do I feel that bridge building, roads and railways only now serve one purpose - to move troops around. Is there no other reason now for roads?

Bridge building and roads are discovered through techs that give other benefits. The actual bridges are and built automatically as long as there are roads on both side of the river. Roads should do other things, IMO, but I like the fact that they no longer increase commerce in ever square. I would like to see them required for cottages to grow. RR increase hammer production on tiles with mines so that one isn't for the sole purpose of moving units around the map.

Combat is based on the luck of the draw far too much. I just cant get adequately trained troops because they can die at a moments notice. I hate the way you have to put in all of your army and prey. Before it didnt seem to matter too much becuase you could build faster armies and they werent trained. Now if you lose even one army its really hard to take.

Combat works as it always has. Number vs. number with a RNG determining the outcome. The only difference is that instead of units having different attack and defense numbers, there is a single number and promotions. The Civ 4 system is by far the best of the Civs.

Are the enemy AI generals cheating at all? I say this becuase I can attack an enemy Civ equal to mine and yet they can create twice as many troops as me. I'm sure the enemy have an unfair advantange in this game and that isn't fun to me.

The higher the level you play at, the faster the AI can build things. This is the only way, and always has been, for the programmers of Civ to make the AI more competative at higher levels. This also depends on the size of cities and the type of terrain and improvements within the city radius. If the AI civ has cities with multiple hills with mines, they will turn out units faster than you can in cities with very few hills.

Is it just me or has Civ changed from being fun to play to just playing to win the game? In past Civ games the playing was the fun part - creating your Civilisation, lasting out the game, creating your palace and a beautiful major city with wonders and the like etc. Now it seems everything is geared towards winning the game as quickly as possible. Or has it always been that way?

I agree that one thing missing from Civ 4 is the throne room/palace of the previous Civs. Hopefully they'll add it in a patch or an expansion. I have been the same way of building my civ, making war, etc. and I still find that to be a more fun aspect than actually winning.

I like the new animations on the map view but the sound is atrocious. I cant seem to get the sound so that I can actually hear people talking using EAX unless Im zoomed in fully so I have to resort to using stereo which makes my EAX card useless. The music is good though but why does it have to change when you zoom into a city - if you zoom in too far the music disappears altogether - again it means you have to mess constantly with the zoom to get the music you want to hear. Its stupidly set up.

What people are you talking about? The music is fine, but it does stop when you zoom in very close. I usually play with the zoom at the same level as at the beginning of the game. Going to the city screen is kind of annoying hearing the same old city sounds in every city all of the time, but it is tolerable.

Ships look a bit daft - sometimes the animation stops when they are turning which means they end up looking like theyre keeling over! Looks daft.

This I agree on. The ship leaning over when it stops looks really bad. Something they should fix in a patch.

I like the new additions to the game like religion but cant help feeling that there are far more options in terms of diplomacy, sabotage etc that are being ignored in this game.

The diplomacy options seem fine to me but the engine can be annoying. I hat having the AI always asking me for "gifts" and then getting pissed when I won't give it to them. It should always be a demand instead of being two separate types of requests.

Technology - I hate the way you are constantly developing new technologies before you have even used the previous ones properly. Seems theres no time to enjoy the development of your civilisation anymore. Similarly you seem to be building everything in your cities, all the time, for every city - they dont seem to vary much. Why cant we have a bit of choice, nonlinear pathways through the technology and buildings, create more varied cultures and civilisations etc. The enemy AI always seem to be research exactly the same things. And they always seem to be at similar levels unless you have attacked them. They should be of varying speeds of development etc. Theres just no real variation in anything in this game.

Again, I agree with you. When I don't build Musketmen or Riflemen because I can get Infantry if I wait just a few more turns, it is pretty ridiculous. I also find that there are a few units that are a complete waste of time. Although many will disagree, I find Machine Gunners to be the most useless unit in the game. With having barracks in a city and using the Vassalage and Theocracy civics, Infantry with City Garrison I & II are far more useful than a Machine Gunner.

I dont like the way culture is handled - culture should be more flexible in that if you take a city the culture around it should start to alter to yours. You should also be able to take enemy cities using culture far more easily. Ruins the whole concept the way its handled at the moment.

It does convert to your culture once you start producing culture in that city. If using culture to take cities was any easier, there would be no point in war.

Trade - automatic trade routes etc are really boring. Why cant we control these using caravans etc?

Saves some tedious micromanagement. Instead of having to constatnly build caravans and move them to the furthest/biggest city you can find and doing that on a regular basis, the trade routes are automatically established to the cities that will give you the most commerce. Very easy and fluent.

Generally I feel that theres a lot that has been taken out of the game as well as added. Im busy making my mind up if I really like the game the way it is or not. I cant see me playing it for a long time though - I diont think the replay element is all that strong in the present incarnation - its just not flexible enough to play it in different ways ie winning by diplomacy, conquest, culture etc. The only way to win the game (and for the AI to win the game) seems to be through space race.

I would encourage you to keep playing it and trying different strategies. That will mix up the gameplay and make the game challenging for a while.

 

[doug2134]

yea i basically love civ 4, am i alone or somthing? Alot of people seem to have gripes with it.

 

[Ranos]

I like it the best of the Civs if I didn't make that clear enough in my previous post.

 

[Exavier]

I think the reason why it seems very few ppl like it is because you don't see 1-2 "I Love Civ4" threads every day... unlike the constant gripe threads.

I personally love it... even more since i am figuring out more how to mod it