Civ IV Nostalgia

[Slickshooter]

I've been playing the demo for quite a bit, but I just can't get into the feel of the game. The interface feels weird and I feel absolutely lost. I absolutely adored Civ IV and am a bit cautious about actually buying Civ V. Is my reaction normal? Will I ever get "used to" Civ V?

 

[comatosedragon]

I think this is normal, and I think you will get used to V. I remember having the same trepidations during my transition from 3 to 4 . . . But after a few games I couldn't even go back to III.

 

[Matte979]

Its normal. Change is hard specially when your had something for 4-5 years. It will be the same when civ6 comes out.

 

[amboo]

One thing I miss is wonder videos
IDK why but I loved those

 

[Jimbo30]

I've only played 64 turns of the demo and I already know I won't play Civ 4 again. It was the exact same for Civ 3, and probably 2 before that (can't really remember )

 

[mystikmind2005]

I think this is normal, and I think you will get used to V. I remember having the same trepidations during my transition from 3 to 4 . . . But after a few games I couldn't even go back to III.

Yea, normal.

But my reaction going from civ3 to civ4 was the opposite of yours! I got into civ4 right away and loved every second of it up to the moment i tried to bombard with my artillery. After that moment i was so disillusioned with civ4 i uninstalled the game and threw it in the no good pile where it stayed for about 6 months - that being how long it took me to recover from the disappointment of loosing bombard! After that I came to enjoy the game, understanding the combat dynamics without bombard, i get it, but always miss bombard anyway because of the civ4 unit experience tree which is somewhat moot due to unit attrition and bombard would greatly assist here! but once i have bombers i then got my chance to build experience into units, so all was not lost.

 

[wilebill]

Civ V is great! But at first it was like trying to go on your familiar jog wearing snow shoes! I can see I am going to like it a lot.

But I like Civ IV a lot too. And Civ III. Both are alive and well.

 

[Bill Bisco]

Civ IV had some nice tooltips. I could tell the size of the enemy army by mousing over them.

1. In Civ V, you can mouse over another unit and see it's Strength, but you'll be unable to tell what it's HP is. Annoying.

2. The Strategic Map forces you to look at the units, improvements, and resources. In Civ4 you could pick and choose which effects you wanted to see; not just some. Annoying.

3. In Civ4 when moving a worker, you could know by holding down the right-click mouse button what you could build in the tile. That feature is noticeably absent here.

4. Civ4 had a ton of custom game options. I see hardly any such options here.

5. Civ4 had Combat 1. Now we have Shock and Drill. Now I have to pay attention to what little tile my opponent is under to figure out what promotion I want to get; not fun.

6. In Civ4 I knew the combat Percentages with another unit before starting a war. Now, I have to declare a war and then I can find out if the combat odds were such that starting a war was justified.

A lot of little things that show attention to playability are absent.

 

[mystikmind2005]

6. In Civ4 I knew the combat Percentages with another unit before starting a war. Now, I have to declare a war and then I can find out if the combat odds were such that starting a war was justified.

You mean to say the little combat percentages reported in Civ4 relate to the 'actual' odds of winning?? Hahaha (rolls over on the ground laughing hysterically).... Ahem, well of course it does, and um there is no real reason for my spontaneous laughter, no reason at all, sorry about that!

 

[Earthling]

You mean to say the little combat percentages reported in Civ4 relate to the 'actual' odds of winning??

They are almost exactly the correct mathematical odds of winning, within fractions of a percent. If your point was to perhaps complain about bugs in the initial release of civ4 you made it very poorly (and then you'd be suggesting civ5 be patched up here though. I think we all could agree on that, the combat odds should be more transparent)

Otherwise you are just wrong and clearly didn't understand probability/how combat worked in civ4.

 

[UrkSpleen]

Civ IV had some nice tooltips. I could tell the size of the enemy army by mousing over them.

1. In Civ V, you can mouse over another unit and see it's Strength, but you'll be unable to tell what it's HP is. Annoying.

2. The Strategic Map forces you to look at the units, improvements, and resources. In Civ4 you could pick and choose which effects you wanted to see; not just some. Annoying.

3. In Civ4 when moving a worker, you could know by holding down the right-click mouse button what you could build in the tile. That feature is noticeably absent here.

4. Civ4 had a ton of custom game options. I see hardly any such options here.

5. Civ4 had Combat 1. Now we have Shock and Drill. Now I have to pay attention to what little tile my opponent is under to figure out what promotion I want to get; not fun.

6. In Civ4 I knew the combat Percentages with another unit before starting a war. Now, I have to declare a war and then I can find out if the combat odds were such that starting a war was justified.

A lot of little things that show attention to playability are absent.

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
4. Yes
5. Yes
6. Yes

But I still love both V and IV

 

[Kazimierz Wielk]

I haven't finished my first game, but I feel there are things missing or lacking that will be dealt with in the future. It is taking some getting used to, but my impression is that it is ok. I am not having as much "fun" I had with Civ IV yet. Maybe it is all the changes. Maybe it is the slow pace of the game. I chose marathon, which on Civ IV still kept my interest and moved along. Civ V's marathon seems to drag a lot, so there is not a lot of action (so far).

I DO miss being able to turn on the system time on the main screen so I can see the time and know when I need to stop. ;-)