Civ 4 Rants Thread

[Steamwerks]

dude...I've watched my Korean friends play Broodwar and be clicking 3 times per second all game, and RON is, let's be honest, an order of magnitude more complicated than Broodwar. There's no way one person can even come close to optimal play...the only exception would be if you were able to focus on the economy for 30-40 min straight with no war, and get everything perfect, and then go to war and be able to focus on that, but if you're getting raided early game and fighting throughout the game, it's just too much.
The pro warcraft players had APM of, what, 400? Starcraft is something like 300-350 to be pro (optimal play). RON would need something like 800 APM for optimal play, I don't think there are any humans who could hit that...Jedi knights maybe, but not humans.

Maybe I'm missing something, but it sounds like you're mostly restating my post. The main difference seems to be that you view the abundance of tasks as a flaw, whereas I think of it as an essential feature; it's part of what makes RoN unique. Since a player can't possibly manage everything at once (optimally), you have to master a triage approach. The fact that it's not very accessible compared to other RTS's does not constitute a "serious flaw" in my book.

 

[noto2]

Prioritizing graphics to the point where gameplay doesn't consistently work is one of my biggest rants though .

There are things I'd like changed in civ IV's design, but the biggest complaints by me are always things that, if you go back to games made 15+ years ago, devs were already getting right. For example, in HOMM 1-3, how many instances do you have of a unit moving while being unable to prevent it from moving? Literally 0...in both the combat and overworld screens.

The reason I dog on civ IV and V is that they have quite literally *regressed* in these things. Warlords 2 (made 1991) has an algorithm for interrupting a unit's pathing if an unseen enemy blocks its path after moving through the fog. Why couldn't civ IV, made over TEN years later, manage that "feat"? I love the old games too and have LP'd quite a few (Warlords 2, HOMM III, with Warlords III and HOMM V coming soon...but also older pokemon games, GK II, ogre battle, etc). It's a shame when these games have better controls, better hotkeys (and in some cases, hotkey customization) and run MUCH better on their recommended specs than newer games (the latter being a direct effect of graphics-gouging).

Civ V is winning TBS sales now not because it's a great game, but rather because the best TBS competitors aren't around any longer for whatever reason. If there is ONE thing that would make the civ series better, it would be to learn how to make a decent-running engine and make sure their controls (and display of what controls do) work consistently...none of this "moving button on the display screen", "show one action but have the command do another", or "attack out of the stack even though all units are selected and it's stack moving" bullcrap.

Edit on APM: In Sc2, most APM is superflous. You only need ~200 apm at extremely short-lived intervals (big battles that involve multiple micro-intensive units). An AVERAGE of 100 would probably work against top tier pros, if you could spike ~250-300. The pros like to keep themselves forced at a higher speed though (usually giving something along the lines of "staying sharp").

RoN is starting to sound interesting...do its controls work unlike civ IV/V?

Phil you've never played RON? You definitely have to try it! You can find a torrent easily, just search "rise of nations gold edition" which will get you the expansion pack as well, and no I don't feel bad about torrenting it because it's about 10 years old now. It's the closest thing to Civ but on a RTS platform, so obviously its controls are very different. In fact it's so similar to Civ that I believe that explains the rumour I heard of some staff overlap between RoN and Civ 3.

 

[noto2]

I've thought about it more and while I think a game can be fun with both a strategic and a tactical layer to keep track of, I think 1 UPH on the strategic map is not the way to do it. I really think it's the biggest fail for Civ 5.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Biggest fail for civ V is that its design is just leaving beta, but its UI is in beta and its engine is in alpha.

 

[Alchemind]

Civ 4 is terrible.

1. Bad graphics. Civ 4 looks like it was made during the Bush years. The units are ugly, the terrain is all messed up looking, and the interface is nausea inducing.
2. Squares. The square tiles are lame. I want to play a strategy game, not Sid Mieir Chess.
3. Stacking Units. I'm supposed to believe 400 tanks are piled up on top of each other all the way to the moon?
4. Religion. It doesn't do anything as all religions have the same generic abilities. Boring.
5. Health. Oh fun, micromanaging city sanitation.
6. Road spam.
7. Vassal states. Blah.

lol noob.

 

[Qgqqqqq]

120) The mac .dll thing stopping most mods

 

[jarhead_leif]

121: Let's talk about gunships.

I don't know where to start with.

 

[Qgqqqqq]

121) The large imbalances with trait/civ power + overpowered mechanics (in vanilla that is)
122) The (relative) lack of difference between cigs (again, only talking about vanilla)
123) The stupidity of the workers nessecitating micro for a long time
124) The lack of balance between game speeds, not just movement, but things like AI demands, war decs, forest growth, chopping, moving onto hills, India, etc.
125) the (relative) lack of customisation for city governor - again demanding micro

Edit: damn! Ninja'd, just pretend it goes 122-126

 

[AdamCrock]

127) SAM's are too powerful -> Carriers too weak Should be the other way around

 

[Quasar1011]

Civ IV is very good (not as good as II or III IMO), I've yet to really get into V. The only "rant" I would have about IV is that railroads should still have unlimited movement. Real life example: What Stalin was able to do with his Siberian army, transfering it in a matter of weeks by rail to defend Moscow!

 

[vincentz]

(this time serious "rants" from me)

129) limited logistics. basically a warrior "born" in 3900 BC can walk around the world if its connected. And huge armies can walk deep into enemy land without any effect (maybe a very little negative effect on economy). Might not be very liked if you are one of those that thinks micromanagement is a negative word. Personally MM is why I play Civ.
Even a Civ1 system would work me thinks.

130) Stacks. TBH I kinda like stacks. I usually green pigs when some AI shows up on my shores with a 50 unit stack, but I think it would be better with the Call to Power system, or a combi of the two. And I would love a combined arms system, where 2 units could "assist" each other. A unit of archers alone wouldnt be able to do much harm, but with a unit of melee they would be "protected", while a unit of melee with some archers in the back, would be able to inflict considerily more damage.

131) Limited, stockable, expendable resources (no, ofcourse not : you ran out of cows) but especially for energi resources.

 

[TheMulattoMaker]

You know what's seriously messed up about Civ4? There's no moonbase. Unacceptable.

 

[jarhead_leif]

132: You met Lincoln wearing tuxedo at 3,000BC. I thought they're only wearing loinclothes those days.

 

[AdamCrock]

133: Scotland Yard ~2000 B.C - modern architecture surrounded by simple huts

 

[noto2]

yeah, Civ 3 changed the leader's clothes and background according to era...why did Firaxis abandon that? It was a very good idea

 

[MilesBeyond]

23) if not 22, then how about instead of limited units, or 1upt, we make ONE UNIT PER CIV. hah, good idea right?

I would literally pay good money to see a Let's Play of an 8-player MP game with a mod that allows only one unit per civ. That would be hilarious.

 

[AdamCrock]

I would literally pay good money to see a Let's Play of an 8-player MP game with a mod that allows only one unit per civ. That would be hilarious.

..... ..... ^ this

 

[freeluos]

134] There is no weather, no seasons. It is all static.

135] Going to my next point -> non cultured tiles should have at least some natural influence. Oceans take tiles, new (vulcanic) lands are created.

136] My regular troops are running through snow/jungle. Normally regular troops will perish under low morale/sickness/etc. but here they regain strength and can continue for decades.

137] The RNG seems to have no influence on the economics.

138] It is crap.

That's enough for now. I'll be off playing. To find more crap of course.

 

[jarhead_leif]

134] There is no weather, no seasons. It is all static.

Actually, there are...random events; hurricanes, el niño(global warming), and others. And turns doesn't take months but centuries, decades, and years.

That's enough for now. I'll be off playing. To find more crap of course.

Goodluck with that.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I would literally pay good money to see a Let's Play of an 8-player MP game with a mod that allows only one unit per civ. That would be hilarious.

One person would get near a peaceful VC, then everyone would dogpile him and start backstabbing each other at the same time. It would be an extremely boring game, right up until someone almost won, and then the diplo aspect would be amazing!

But if you only had 1 unit, you'd have to choose between worker and military, or be completely defenseless while expanding .

If someone had a choke point that could be covered by 1 unit, they'd win instantly. Nobody would want to attack it and risk losing themselves.

You could easily tell if someone deleted military to use a worker or settler and just walk into his undefended city too so everyone would probably have to go without tile improvements all game .