I mean you take the things I like away?

[Sync]

"If you're going to make an omelet, you need to break a few eggs."


A lot of the stuff people liked from 4 will probably reappear in expansions.. e.g. some form of religion.

But there's a lot of stuff I don't like from 4 that I hope never appears again.
- Stacks o' Doom
- Road Spaghetti
- Running Spy trains into cities to Culture Bomb
- Corporations
- Anarchy on tweaking any part of your policies
- Corruption

.. for a start.

They be no corruption in Civ 4.

 

[jozef57]

personaly i am very disapointed about civ 5. as siad already in this treat apart from moving around units not much to do
nothing between diplomacy and war. for builders not much to do
de idear of getting the battles away from the city's failed totally, even the AI focusses on capturing city's.
what did this guy think?/ that he was creating a new panzer general game?
he should played civ for a year or so to know what this game was about in previous versions.
as civ 5 now is , it is totally boring for all except conqueror players.
i played all version since civ 2, and this is by far the worst civ ever.
it is now alreay in need of an complete overhaul
the fears this would be a "dumbed down"civ becamer a dreadfull truth
and this is something new players find to! i introduced about 5 people to civ. they understood my passion as far as civ 4 goes. but they all find civ 5 boring!!!!!!!!
and even civ 5 is better than no civ at all i must admit that after playing this game now for a the time since released, i must agree.
i think i am going back to civ4 for to experiance a true civ experiance again.
let hope firaxis and 2K come to their senses and build an add on that makes civ 5 worth playing .

 

[Dentalfury]

I started out playing Civ2 and have been hooked ever since. I never bought Civ4 though, couldn't work up any interest. I think with any game there are going to be lots of moddifications/patches/expansions as the series progresses so I don't mind that much if they change some of the mechanics from game to game.

I did kinda scratch my head on the new hex setup though, seemed completely unnecessary. And the lack of unit stacking, I agree that single stacking entire militaries on 1 square was completely unrealisitc but limiting me to 1 unit per square is also pretty unrealistic. How bout we make it a 3 unit limit per square and call it even?

What i'm really interested in is when Alpha Centauri 2 is gona come out. I miss unit customization, morale ratings, and inter-city resource management. By that, I mean being able to transfer production/food between cities that have a surplus. It makes absolutely no sense that cities that are located in and dedicated to industrial complexes have to provide all of their own food.

There is one thing though that I absolutely hate in Civ3 and 5, strict strategic resource restrictions. The idea that there are only 3 sources of Iron/etc. on an entire continent and I simply can't build any units/structures based on that if I didn't claim one. I would prefer that they give a production bonus if you were able to claim the relevant 'mother lode' resource, say 30-50% bonus, or perhaps 10% per resource capped at a certain amount. I think this would be balanced and still encourage people to fight over resources but not make it so mind-numbingly simple and unrealistic. Galatic Civilizations II does something similar to this and I think its a step in the right direction. Add more complexity so players can get sucked in, not just go through the motions.

Also, how about we add a combat/production modifier for future tech? Like 1-5% per tech capped at a certain amount to encourage people who aren't interested in scores to keep researching. Espionage? Map Trading? Cake?

 

[eris]

I don't, why change things that people like? I understand making it better, but changing just for the sake of it I don't get.

That is how we make a lot of progress in the world. If people didn't make brand new things just for the sake of it, there would not have been a Civ 1.

 

[Nicol.Bolas]

I started out playing Civ2 and have been hooked ever since. I never bought Civ4 though, couldn't work up any interest. I think with any game there are going to be lots of moddifications/patches/expansions as the series progresses so I don't mind that much if they change some of the mechanics from game to game.

I did kinda scratch my head on the new hex setup though, seemed completely unnecessary. And the lack of unit stacking, I agree that single stacking entire militaries on 1 square was completely unrealisitc but limiting me to 1 unit per square is also pretty unrealistic. How bout we make it a 3 unit limit per square and call it even?

What i'm really interested in is when Alpha Centauri 2 is gona come out. I miss unit customization, morale ratings, and inter-city resource management. By that, I mean being able to transfer production/food between cities that have a surplus. It makes absolutely no sense that cities that are located in and dedicated to industrial complexes have to provide all of their own food.

There is one thing though that I absolutely hate in Civ3 and 5, strict strategic resource restrictions. The idea that there are only 3 sources of Iron/etc. on an entire continent and I simply can't build any units/structures based on that if I didn't claim one. I would prefer that they give a production bonus if you were able to claim the relevant 'mother lode' resource, say 30-50% bonus, or perhaps 10% per resource capped at a certain amount. I think this would be balanced and still encourage people to fight over resources but not make it so mind-numbingly simple and unrealistic. Galatic Civilizations II does something similar to this and I think its a step in the right direction. Add more complexity so players can get sucked in, not just go through the motions.

Also, how about we add a combat/production modifier for future tech? Like 1-5% per tech capped at a certain amount to encourage people who aren't interested in scores to keep researching. Espionage? Map Trading? Cake?

there is a logt of unit modifications in civ4.
you really can make completely different units by priomotions

 

[Zhahz]

/yawn

This place could use a new forum for threads like this. Call it, "People who don't like civ 5 yet write about it when they could just be playing civ 4 still since that's apparently what they really want."

What I want (oddly, it's actually related to Civ 5, not Civ 4) is better (vastly better) AI in Civ 5 - since I like the gameplay ideas but they don't come across as strong as they should due to weak AI.

 

[lschnarch]

the fact that defensive wars are now actually viable is nice, as well as research no longer being linked to gold production, which means I can have both a research and industry-heavy Civ if I desire.

Defensive wars were very viable in Civ4, too. It even wasn't too difficult to do so, although for sure a minimum of thoughts had to be put into it.
And I don't recall having had much problems to have both, industry and research in Civ4, either.

That is how we make a lot of progress in the world. If people didn't make brand new things just for the sake of it, there would not have been a Civ 1.

If I'm not mistaken, the poster yor are referring to was talking about change for the sake of change.
"Brandnew" things aren't changes, they are brandnew.
And most things get changed not to have something changed, but to have it improved.
The latter is what most people are missing in Civ5.

 

[Guardian_PL]

Defensive wars were very viable in Civ4, too. It even wasn't too difficult to do so, although for sure a minimum of thoughts had to be put into it.
And I don't recall having had much problems to have both, industry and research in Civ4, either.

Yup, I even remeber some interesting strategies that relied on using Imperialistic trait with Great Wall GG bonus to piss closest neighbours off. Being safe from War Weariness (now that's a difficult concept for CivRev 2.0 fanbase xP) eradicate swarms of enemies on your turf, score dozen or so GG's and loads of exp for your units which allowed for superarmy and a cakewalk conquest of the world later on. Heh, good times, Cyrus was awesome for that one

 

[Selous]

/yawn

This place could use a new forum for threads like this. Call it, "People who don't like civ 5 yet write about it when they could just be playing civ 4 still since that's apparently what they really want."

What I want (oddly, it's actually related to Civ 5, not Civ 4) is better (vastly better) AI in Civ 5 - since I like the gameplay ideas but they don't come across as strong as they should due to weak AI.

i would say that no one that still post in the ciV section of this forum actually wants civ4.5 but rather an improvment on what was an excellent game, rather than this poor excuse for a game that we got

if "they" want to introduce radical concepts in a game franchise, why dont they release it game under a different banner, aka civ rev, or better example alpha centuri

ciV takes a giant departure in focus from what every previous civ game has been about, but at the same time was spouted to be the next big thing in the civ series and exploded onto the scene like a giant wet fart, impressive in its own right, but ultimatly embarressing to have around

 

[Orionche]

While previous versions of the game were great in its own time (and I've tried them all at some point), and they all had certain features that could/should return to 5, there is no chance in hell I'm going back to them because of stacks of doom and square tiles. Civ 5 may be buggy and unstable, but overall gameplay/visual-wise, its far better. And like Civ 4, it will probably get a whole lot better as they roll out an expansion or two within the next year.

Stop yer whining, its getting old. :3

 

[lschnarch]

Stop yer whining, its getting old. :3

First, welcome to the forum.

Second, may I kindly ask who exactly you are to tell others what they have to do and what not?
Just curious, you know? A first posting with such a direct order.... gives me the impression that you are somebody really important.

 

[Saarud]

I bought Civilization 1 in 1991 or 1992 and have after that bought all Civilization games including Alpha Centauri and CTP series on the day of the release. I must say that Civ 5 is by far the most fun of all the releses and especially compared against CIV 4 wich I always though was quite boring. It was the mods that made Civ 4 fun for me. Civ 5 on the other hand is more fun than any of other unmodded Civ games and I can't barely wait until Rhyes or ROM kind of mods get released.

GO CIV 5!!!

 

[forty2j]

They be no corruption in Civ 4.

Oops. I thought there was something that resembled that though (maintenance costs increase with distance from capital?)

 

[Rooftrellen]

I'm sure people played civ3 and civ4 and like civ5. My theory is people who like civ5 play previous civs as conquerers. For us builders, civ5 is severely lacking. I never actually realized I was a builder type of player until civ5 came out and then I realized how lacking the building options are in this game. I spend hours wasting time moving units, when I'd rather just manage what I'm building in my cities and lands, and my science/economy. Who cares about moving around military units? bleh.

I would rather build than fight, and I like V more than IV (but for the bugs...)

The reason is simple, with stacks of doom, number of units was very important. You had to spend a lot of time building up that stack to keep the enemies on their heels, or all that building would be for nothing.

Now, tech matters a bit more (remember...oh, crap, I have infantry, but Monty has five times as many catapults) and I can hold off invasions with a relatively small force. That means I can work on my empire, not the army, if I want.

 

[NoAnswer]

[I mean] I'm totally grateful for the fact that I can now go in and out of a Civ game like I would some online flash game. I'm no longer hooked to the point of insanity.

Ahoy to the rest of my life!