Civ 4 VS Civ 6

Welcome back! :)

If you think that Civ 4 was "the peak", then I'd suggest that you check out some of the mods which continue to be actively developed for the game to this day. You may already know about the BUG mod, which improves the UI tremendously. There are also mods which make minimal changes, but which seek to fix aspects of the game which needed further development or balancing. For example, there are mods which improve the easily-tricked AI from vanilla BtS: among these is Better BAT AI. Other mods like K-mod include the former changes, but additionally make modest balance changes and repair some poorly-implemented mechanics in the base game, like Global Warming. K-mod's spiritual successor is effectively Advanced Civ, which has quite active development with lots of community input. Of course, there are many mods which make much more radical changes to the flavor of Civ4 such as Rhye's and Fall, Realism Invictus, Caveman 2 Cosmos, etc. There still is a lot going on with this game, so you'll have a lot to do! :)

Hey do you know any resources to show how you can download and use these mods on a Steam version of Civ 4?
 
You have to use the "beta" version of Steam Civ4, which is actually the unmodified version. Steam's regular version of Civ4 is actually modified to work with their system. In the process, they prevented it from working with mods. You can download their "beta" from Steam and use it instead of their standared version all the time, with no more Steam caused problems.
 
OG civ player here. Played from #1 when it came out all the way thru 6. Played way too much of 1-4. Civ 4 is still my favorite of the bunch (The intro music, Nimoy narration, just a perfect game). I had a hard time accepting 5, but put in a hundred hours or so according to Steam. It didn't really hold my attention like 4. Played maybe 2 games of Civ 6 and put it down, but recently picked it back up again, and here's my thoughts:

Civ 6
The positives:
-I actually don't mind the change in combat. Its actually pretty fun when you get the hang of it. It definitely is different than the stack of doom, but ... (more on that below)
-Spreading out cities - takes a ton more planning and calculation. A lot more micromanaging and strategizing. It works great for the player, but ... (more on that below)
-Some UI changes were nice, some info and reports from previous entries should never have been changed, and agree with previous posters that its cumbersome being hidden behind clicks and mouseovers.

The negatives:
-Dumbed down diplomacy. Bipolar leaders. Why can't I bribe leaders to fight someone else without having it be a joint war? One of my favorite ever games in Civ 4 was making a custom map 1 city surrounded by a ring of mountains, water tiles, and mountains, turning on cheats, and bribing leaders to fight each other and watching the carnage ensue. Its just not possible here.
-I miss turning enemy civs into vassal states. They pump out gold/faith/tech but don't impact expansion negatives and you don't have to micromanage them. So much better than burning everything down because you don't want to expand too much, and visually it looks better. This should never have been removed from the game. I hate the choice of "burn it down and most likely some other civ will come settle a city for me to burn again" or "keep it and have it weaken my empire."
-And the biggest downside of Civ 6 - the absolute hot garbage AI. They put up no fight, have no real units to ever defend against me despite me purposefully giving them advance notice that I'm coming for them, and the AI absolutely cannot manage the OUPT system. The planning of cities by the AI just makes no sense sometime. Everything else I can put up with, but this is such a big let down.

I think its time to reinstall 4 again....
 
Lol only because I've gone through a PC or two since the last time I played :)
PC's change. Hard drives remain. :)

But I am willing to compromise and not judge you if you still have and use the original CD. :)
 
I just downloaded Civ 6 with the free promotion from Epic games and spent the last week playing it. I've seen a few people ask about how they compare so I figured I'd share my thoughts as a long time Civ 4 player who has recently started on Civ 6.

snip
,

Great post, I'm just getting back into CIV IV, I have CIV V, CIV 6 has passed me by so far, and I can't believe we're coming upto CIV 7. Time flies.
 
This might be little offtopic, but whatever.

CIV VI seems to be highly controversial compared to CIV IV for many players and many have stated very clearly why, like 1-UPT etc.

My question is have you guys tried CIV 5 mod called Vox Populi? It's basically almost total conversion mod which changes many aspects of the game for better and fixes many complaints about CIV VI.

Few examples: AI is actually REALLY good (deity is allmost impossible to beat in stantard speed), No more global happiness, Much more balanced Civs/VCs/strategies and the list goes on and on.

Sure, there are some aspects that can't be changed like 1-UPT but I strongly recommed Vox Populi for every civ fan.
 
This might be little offtopic, but whatever.

CIV VI seems to be highly controversial compared to CIV IV for many players and many have stated very clearly why, like 1-UPT etc.

My question is have you guys tried CIV 5 mod called Vox Populi? It's basically almost total conversion mod which changes many aspects of the game for better and fixes many complaints about CIV VI.

Few examples: AI is actually REALLY good (deity is allmost impossible to beat in stantard speed), No more global happiness, Much more balanced Civs/VCs/strategies and the list goes on and on.

Sure, there are some aspects that can't be changed like 1-UPT but I strongly recommed Vox Populi for every civ fan.
The problem with that mod is that it's a Ship of Theseus situation. That is to say, if the only way to make a game good is by modding it to the point of changing or removing every major game mechanic in it is it really the game that is good? I mean, how much of CIV5 is even left after that mod gets done with it?
 
The problem with that mod is that it's a Ship of Theseus situation. That is to say, if the only way to make a game good is by modding it to the point of changing or removing every major game mechanic in it is it really the game that is good? I mean, how much of CIV5 is even left after that mod gets done with it?

Hello PPQ Purple,

I don't see how or why it's a problem. Does it matter? Most folk would agree that Vox Populi for Civ V is a fantastic experience. It removes the bad from Civ V and replaces it with well-thought out replacements, as far as possible within the engine's limitations. I would say that the very existence of a total-conversion mod is an admission that the base game lacks in numerous areas. What's left of the "original" Civ V is irrelevant; the end experience is what counts.

Kind regards,
Ita Bear
 
Hello PPQ Purple,

I don't see how or why it's a problem. Does it matter? Most folk would agree that Vox Populi for Civ V is a fantastic experience. It removes the bad from Civ V and replaces it with well-thought out replacements, as far as possible within the engine's limitations. I would say that the very existence of a total-conversion mod is an admission that the base game lacks in numerous areas. What's left of the "original" Civ V is irrelevant; the end experience is what counts.

Kind regards,
Ita Bear
Of course it matters. If you need to change literally everything about a game in order to make that game fun to play than it was not a good game.
 
Of course it matters. If you need to change literally everything about a game in order to make that game fun to play than it was not a good game.

No one is saying Civ V is a good or a bad game. :confused: The user above merely suggested trying Vox Populi, which receives rave reviews. The foundations it's built on don't really matter if the end result is excellent and, as you say, fun to play.

Kind regards,
Ita Bear
 
No one is saying Civ V is a good or a bad game. :confused: The user above merely suggested trying Vox Populi, which receives rave reviews. The foundations it's built on don't really matter if the end result is excellent and, as you say, fun to play.

Kind regards,
Ita Bear
You do realize that this is a thread dedicated to comparing CIV4 to CIV5. And that his response was: "Well there is this mod that turns 5 into something more like 4 thus making it good".
 
You do realize that this is a thread dedicated to comparing CIV4 to CIV5. And that his response was: "Well there is this mod that turns 5 into something more like 4 thus making it good".

The thread is comparing Civ 6 to 4, not 5 to 4. My issue with your comment was you essentially writing the mod off because it's a total conversion, maintaining little of the original Civ 5. I think that's a rather narrow-minded view to take. Base game Civ V cannot be compared fairly to a total-conversion mod like Vox Populi.

From my time on this forum I've come to realise you are often a confrontational and argumentative person. I learnt long ago not to deal with such people for too long and have no desire to continue this conversation, so I will wish you a good day.

Kind regards,
Ita Bear

Moderator Action: Please be civil when discussing a topic. It's fine to disagree, but be polite. Refer to the forum rules on trolling here: CFC Rules
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The thread is comparing Civ 6 to 4, not 5 to 4. My issue with your comment was you essentially writing the mod off because it's a total conversion, maintaining little of the original Civ 5. I think that's a rather narrow-minded view to take. Base game Civ V cannot be compared fairly to a total-conversion mod like Vox Populi.

From my time on this forum I've come to realise you are often a confrontational and argumentative person. I learnt long ago not to deal with such people for too long and have no desire to continue this conversation, so I will wish you a good day.

Kind regards,
Ita Bear
I am not writing the mod off. Indeed, I applaud the mod for its ability to extract some value out of the base game. I am however writing the base game off and using the mod as evidence to support that.
 
If developers don't respect player time, why should players respect theirs?

Civ 4 is the only game in the series that shows evidence of developers respecting player time. It isn't perfect, but it's something the devs actually invested time to make sure it was decent. Earlier iterations are very inefficient with inputs, while later versions regressed in this regard, badly, in multiple ways.

I extend this criticism to Civ 5/6, and also to many of its modern competitors. Stuff like Endless Space seems about on par with Civ 5+. Paradox UI is a pathetic travesty that is not only inefficient, but also outright lies to you many times over and has control aspects that are straight up objectively broken (unit attachment in EU 4, battle planner in HOI 4 as examples).

So while 4 has UI flaws, sadly it stands as one of the best UIs in the genre anyway. I don't know where UI programmers went since then, but it hasn't been into strategy games.
 
My objection to Civ 5 and Civ 6 is not with gameplay as much as it is with the fact that Civ IV was the last Civ to be available without any DRM and copy protection. I know that my legally obtained DRM-free version of Civ 4, along with all of the mods I have downloaded, is something I can play 10 or 20 years from now and have the same gaming experience I have today.

My fantasy version of Civ 7 is to return to Civ 4, but with some modernizations: I prefer the hex tiles in Civ 5, and using Lua as the scripting language makes a lot more sense than using Python (since Lua, unlike Python, is designed to be embedded in other programs); I would also use JSON or maybe YAML to describe game rules instead of the XML Civ 4 uses (actually, I would use commentJSON/HJSON or HCL—HashiCorp configuration language—since JSON doesn’t even have comments and YAML has the same complexity issues XML has). It also makes a lot of sense to compile it as a 64-bit game instead of a 32-bit game, to get rid of those pesky memory allocation failures.

I would make it scale: I would give the game a hard limit of 1000x1000 squares for a map (an order of magnitude bigger than anything Civ4 can handle; I consider Civ4’s practical limit about 30,000 tiles) but make sure the game was fully playable even with a million tiles.

I would have them hire Rich Marinaccio to make an official Perfect World map generator for it, because a quality map generator makes for a quality Civ games which feel like playing on a real planet.

I can see why they made Civ 6 a lot easier. Even with Civ 4, I have seen people complain that they can’t always win at deity difficulty using a map generated with a given map script (my solution: Play the same map at noble, then prince, and up in difficulty until the map can not be won any more). Most people do not want an actual challenge with a strategy game.
 
Last edited:
Bravo!

I do like what I'm reading in the latest 2 posts (except that about using hex tiles).
 
Top Bottom