Civ X or Civ 6 ?

How so? City UI looks simpler than from civ 4, so how could it take longer? You still just click whatever thing you see first, so what is the game missing?

I answered this question earlier.

Civ 4 has hotkeys, queues, and the ability to modify the builds for many cities simultaneously through multiple means. I can add something to the top or bottom of a queue in civ 4 with two inputs. In Civ 5, you can't. Nor can you loop what you've chosen to build. Nor can you save a sequence of builds and paste it into other cities. Nor can you waypoint production.

This isn't a matter of opinion. It objectively takes *much* fewer inputs to navigate UI commands in Civ 4, period. It is also objectively faster, by a non-trivial % of an entire playthrough time.

Oddly, Civ 4 is the only title in the Civ series that respects players' time this way. One of the main reasons I didn't like Civ 2 as a kid is that CIv 2 is tedious, in a way that Warlords 2 for example was not tedious.
 
I answered this question earlier.

Civ 4 has hotkeys, queues, and the ability to modify the builds for many cities simultaneously through multiple means. I can add something to the top or bottom of a queue in civ 4 with two inputs. In Civ 5, you can't. Nor can you loop what you've chosen to build. Nor can you save a sequence of builds and paste it into other cities. Nor can you waypoint production.

This isn't a matter of opinion. It objectively takes *much* fewer inputs to navigate UI commands in Civ 4, period. It is also objectively faster, by a non-trivial % of an entire playthrough time.

Oddly, Civ 4 is the only title in the Civ series that respects players' time this way. One of the main reasons I didn't like Civ 2 as a kid is that CIv 2 is tedious, in a way that Warlords 2 for example was not tedious.
Really? I remember civ 5 also having hotkeys - similar to the ones in civ 4
EUI fixes all of these problems though
 
Really? I remember civ 5 also having hotkeys - similar to the ones in civ 4

Not even close. I've mentioned several things civ 5 can't do, and those are just examples.

I'm not sure to what extend mods "fix" the problem, but involving mods muddies the comparison between titles, and I'm not sure modern civ modding is as flexible regardless. Civ 4 UI got a massive boost from mods, too.
 
I'm sure that if you compare EUI to BUG (and its related components), Civilization IV again wins handily.
 
Civ 5 had giant-ass buttons and UI, and from what I recall the city screen was basically ripped out. It looked like a mobile game compared with Civ 4. And it didn't get better from there in terms of gameplay, balance and AI. Like I have said before, I think the franchise in practice ended with Civ 4. After that they went in an entirely new direction. Not a good look when a so-called follow- up game in a series has drastically fewer features.

Perhaps they fixed some of the issues later, but at that point I had stopped caring about the game. It was dead to me. Though from the voluminous discussion above, it looks like many of the design errors were still in place, and are also present in Civ 6. No big prizes for what will happen to Civ 7 when that is probably released at some point.
 
Civ 5 had giant-ass buttons and UI, and from what I recall the city screen was basically ripped out. It looked like a mobile game compared with Civ 4. And it didn't get better from there in terms of gameplay, balance and AI. Like I have said before, I think the franchise in practice ended with Civ 4. After that they
Dsadfasdfwent in an entirely new direction. Not a good look when a so-called follow- up game in a series has drastically fewer features.

Perhaps they fixed some of the issues later, but at that point I had stopped caring about the game. It was dead to me. Though from the voluminous discussion above, it looks like many of the design errors were still in place, and are also present in Civ 6. No big prizes for what will happen to Civ 7 when that is probably released at some point.

I guess you could say - but answer me this, would we really have advanced beyond civ 4's numbers if we followed their path? From the game's perspective, it couldn't really be improved all that much besides just fixing the vassal system and so on.
Civ 4 was a great game, but it still had it's flaws - in return, removing some of these features from future iterations (talking about death stack, vassal system, revamping the culture system). They also improved the graphics system, which to me looks quite stunning (if you'd ask players, they'd probably say the same). Can't say that about civ 6 or civ 4, though. Gameplay isn't very good, but atleast there was a half-successful modding community. You also have to remember that more features =/= a better game. Civ 6 added more and people started complaining. Happiness was pretty bad in the 5th iteration, but atleast you could play tall - something you couldn't do in ANY of the other civ games. Quite bold to give up on a franchise simply because of features being changed, but that's your choice. I have mixed feeling about civ 7 - they might revamp/fix some of the substandard features, but I can't really have a word on it right now.
 
Happiness was pretty bad in the 5th iteration, but atleast you could play tall - something you couldn't do in ANY of the other civ games.
:confused: What do you mean by "playing tall, that could not be done in any of the other civ games", but Civ 5 ?
 
:confused: What do you mean by "playing tall, that could not be done in any of the other civ games", but Civ 5 ?
Might have not phrased that all too correctly, but if you want a comparison - I can get a civ 5 city up to 40/30 pop easily, while in 4, It'd be harder (I usually get a 21 pop city max with a good start) Internal trade routes really help in this case
 
Might have not phrased that all too correctly, but if you want a comparison - I can get a civ 5 city up to 40/30 pop easily, while in 4, It'd be harder (I usually get a 21 pop city max with a good start) Internal trade routes really help in this case

Aha, but In my eyes this is no argument for the quality of a civ game. Per example in Civ 3 I can set a game with some simple clicks in the editor to do this without any problems, and when using the Antal1987 patch with the enlarged "fat cross" for cities, even much bigger cities in Civ 3 are possible without any problems. This said, big and super big cities in my eyes are boring.
 
Might have not phrased that all too correctly, but if you want a comparison - I can get a civ 5 city up to 40/30 pop easily, while in 4, It'd be harder (I usually get a 21 pop city max with a good start) Internal trade routes really help in this case
That's nice. In Civ 4 we build empires. In Civ 5-6 we build cities.
 
Both. Your empire has lots of cities and old core cities and new cities in particular strong spots will be big too (17-23 big not 40). If you really want to you can certainly get size 30+ cities in Civ4 with corporations.
 
Both. Your empire has lots of cities and old core cities and new cities in particular strong spots will be big too (17-23 big not 40). If you really want to you can certainly get size 30+ cities in Civ4 with corporations.
Both. Your empire has lots of cities and old core cities and new cities in particular strong spots will be big too (17-23 big not 40). If you really want to you can certainly get size 30+ cities in Civ4 with corporations.
And you can also get 40+ pop cities in civ 5 with ideologies aswell, still more than civ 4.
What helps here is the 4 tile workable range
 
Back
Top Bottom