Civ4 Complete vs Civ5 Complete "experience"

[reddishrecue]

Yes late game civ4 map looks stupid.

Stealing technologies in civilization 4 was also too difficult. The largest technology I've stolen in civilization 4 were usually small beaker technologies such as corporation or music. In civilization 5 one was able to steal larger technologies that took a lot more beakers. However, when spies are captured in civilization 5, their re-spawn times take a lot more than civilization 4.

 

[Leathaface]

Having played 2,000 hours of Civ IV and many hours of Civ V, I wouldn't say Civ IV is better than Civ V with BNW.

However I would find it very difficult to go back to Civ IV.

(The only thing I like more outright in Civ IV is the ease at how you can go wide.)

 

[reddishrecue]

Having played 2,000 hours of Civ IV and many hours of Civ V, I wouldn't say Civ IV is better than Civ V with BNW.

However I would find it very difficult to go back to Civ IV.

(The only thing I like more outright in Civ IV is the ease at how you can go wide.)

Do you prefer civilization 4 multiplayer in steam or civilization 5 multiplayer?

 

[Dr. D]

Civilization leader speech really was great. The effects go away with mute though if you're just there to play..

Animated leader screens are great. Likewise, the effects go away when you turn your monitor off.

Civilization V is fun to play, but the effects go away when you shut down your computer.

...What exactly is your point? I'm pretty sure we're all aware that when you mute something you won't hear anything... that goes without saying.

 

[reddishrecue]

Animated leader screens are great. Likewise, the effects go away when you turn your monitor off.

Civilization V is fun to play, but the effects go away when you shut down your computer.

...What exactly is your point? I'm pretty sure we're all aware that when you mute something you won't hear anything... that goes without saying.

Its too pretty and neat :\ no offense. When newer better civilizations come out it seems things would be prettier in civilization.

 

[orasis]

Civ IV was boring. Never liked, still don't like. End of.

 

[reddishrecue]

Civ iv had a lot more quantities in units and looked neater than earlier versions of civilization.

 

[poom3619]

Civ4 is a really refreshing after I almost forgot how fun Pangaea map is, and how great not to control how unit fight as in Civ5. I love sandbox-y style of Civ4 BTS after playing good amount of Civ5 BNW.

I like Civ as a serie where you build an empire, Civ5 can be about fighting battle in boardgame which I think doesn't really perfectly fit to Civ game, and there are a plenty of boardgame-ish battle game that I prefer more than Civ5.

I also think Civ5 is pretty "restrictive", after reboot Civ4 I remember how fond I love settling, lack of City-States and culturally flipping other city in Medieval/Renaissance. My Civ 5 game rarely last to Modern Era.

 

[nimling]

Civilization 4 is a much, much better game. The only thing I miss is that I wish Civ4 was implemented with hexes, and that Civ4 MP wasn't busted.

 

[reddishrecue]

I liked both of them. They were both great.

 

[Puhi]

I found with civ4 I could almost never win on immortal if I got a lousy start. part of that was i was never that great ancient war, but a big part was with civ4 you really needed to have a certain number of cities (like 6 or 7 on large maps) to be viable.

I find with civ5 even lousy starts are more winnable as you can do perfectly fine with only 2 cities.

 

[Acken]

I found with civ4 I could almost never win on immortal if I got a lousy start. part of that was i was never that great ancient war, but a big part was with civ4 you really needed to have a certain number of cities (like 6 or 7 on large maps) to be viable.

I find with civ5 even lousy starts are more winnable as you can do perfectly fine with only 2 cities.

May I suggest you give my mod (signature) a try ? Since it "fixes" both of your complaints making wide better AND the game more challenging.

 

[Volcanon]

The beef with civ 5 is oh my god is it slow for turns to pass when it shouldn't.

The upside is that it's a good experience aside from it taking eons for games to complete.

 

[Biz_]

civ4 is a better strategy game, but it is more about optimization, planning, and logistics where the best land and biggest empires always won. you didn't have to think hard about what to do, but rather focus on micromanaging how to do the obvious thing in the most efficient way possible

civ5 vanilla had potential because bigger empires did not always beat smaller empires and the important decisions were very high-level instead of at the micro level, but all the civ5 patches and expansions were backwards progress when it comes to overall strategic depth & importance of decision-making

 

[Der_Zorn_gottes]

In General, I prefer V. It lacks a few things (I like to expand, and V is poor at that), but adds a lot:
Better Religion
Better Culture victory
Better Politics (by that I mean the City states)

Also, it looks much, much better.
In later Ages, Civ IV AI would have relentlessly chopped down each and every tree within ist borders, leaving a barren wasteland that hurts just to look an. The horrible roads on every tile made it completely unbearable.

 

[gabrielcev]

First off graphically there is no difference in my opinion. Civ 5 graphics are nothing to go crazy about and are just slightly better then Civ 4. Civ 4 on the highest settings looks just as good as Civ 5. I noticed little differences. Of course Civ 5 looks nicer and more streamlined but Civ 4 looks fantastic as well.

The biggest difference I noticed is the combat which Civ 5 nails. Civ 5 combat is fantastic. No stacking units and it takes more time to kill single units. Cities can defend themselves not just be destroyed by one unit. It makes way more sense. It's very annoying in Civ 4 when you building new cities and you build a worker and your city gets captured by a Barbarian before you have time to make a warrior.

Civ 4 is better in terms of having more control of your civilization. I like to be able to control my consumption of commerce. In Civ 4 you can transfer commerce points into science, culture or espionage. The religion system is way more simple in Civ 4. You have to study the technology that leads to the religion or spread religion with missionaries. No stupid faith points. I can build specialized cities. Ones for commerce and cities that farm production. Extremely useful during wars when I have 3 cities who can build military units in one turn. Commercial cities that specialize in tech and cities that give me more gold.

All in all I enjoy Civ 4 better. More leaders, more control, nicer music. Only downside is the combat system. Which is much better in Civ 5. I feel like you get more control and fun over building your Civilization in Civ 4 but if you just want to conquest and destroy people Civ 5 combat is the way to go.

 

[Heathcliff]

Civ 5 is more interresting, but civ 4 has better AI.

 

[beetle]

civ 4 has better AI

This assertion comes up pretty frequently. The combat AI is exactly the same. It is just another aspect of the 1UPT debate, and SOD masks the ineptitude of the combat AI in IV.

 

[Valmighty]

Civ4 is more complex and deep, especially with civic/policy. Civ5 is more fun.
The only turn off from Civ4 is the unit movement.

Civ4 Stack of doom can be balanced with Realism Invictus. It's a very good mod.

 

[Biz_]

This assertion comes up pretty frequently. The combat AI is exactly the same. It is just another aspect of the 1UPT debate, and SOD masks the ineptitude of the combat AI in IV.

it doesn't matter

the fact is the civ 5 ai needs way more bonuses to compete with players than the civ 4 ai with all the community improvements

if there was a numerical score (eg. elo ratings), the civ 5 ai would be lower than civ 4's if you somehow got them to cheat in identical ways. unfortunately, both ai's would be a 0 on the scale without cheats because the only way they would win a game is if there were human players who didn't fully understand the rules of the game which shouldn't even be part of the sample