is this game worth playing yet(civ 4 fan)

[DrwHem]

I pre-ordered this game when it came out and was really excited after playing civ 4 like a freak for 5 years. then i got into the game and after playing (when it was new) was utterly disgusted.
people who werent big civ 1-4 players seem to love it and the veteran civ players hate its simplicity.
they seemed to just dumb down the whole engine. in civ 5 it seemed like all you had to do was spam cities and they would be profitable no matter what. there was no science or economy penalty for over expansion and the whole concept of keeping city-states free didnt seem to pay off at all.
i would start out with a decent size country and army and be making a profit for about 2 hundred turns. then after not expanding or training new units i would see my profits just randomly start to drop until i was forced to delete military units and then just resign once i had no army left.
i havnt played the game since it came out and was just wondering if there were any patches or any mods that would address the majority of the complaints. i have a gift card and was thinking of trying out the expansion pack and was wondering if i would just end up annoyed again.

 

[ork75]

The expansion pack makes the game far more complex, and could be considered the equivalent of BtS or Warlords. I think that with G&K Civ V is a tough rival for Civ IV

 

[joncnunn]

The penalty for over-expansion in Civ V to quickly is happiness. (As long as you play on Prince or above; on Warlord and Chieftain there really isn't any)
The first several patches dealt with making happiness a challenge

As to dealing with gold in Civ V: Easyist way is re-roll until you get a river start.
And don't build roads early until the city is about as big as the number of hexes needed by the road.

 

[Sonereal]

Gods and Kings is as much an equivalent to Beyond the Sword as in the sense that they're both expansions to games with the word "Civilization" in the title.

But yes, after playing G&K, vanilla is completely unplayable.

 

[DrwHem]

ok. i guess ill give it another try then. thanks

 

[Gucumatz]

As always there are many who still hate Civ 4. There are many who still hate Civ 5 - if you hated Civ 5 even though it has improved tremendously with the expansion, patches, and ai tweaks, you may still end up hating it.

 

[Civking5]

I pre-ordered this game when it came out and was really excited after playing civ 4 like a freak for 5 years. then i got into the game and after playing (when it was new) was utterly disgusted.
people who werent big civ 1-4 players seem to love it and the veteran civ players hate its simplicity.
they seemed to just dumb down the whole engine. in civ 5 it seemed like all you had to do was spam cities and they would be profitable no matter what. there was no science or economy penalty for over expansion and the whole concept of keeping city-states free didnt seem to pay off at all.
i would start out with a decent size country and army and be making a profit for about 2 hundred turns. then after not expanding or training new units i would see my profits just randomly start to drop until i was forced to delete military units and then just resign once i had no army left.
i havnt played the game since it came out and was just wondering if there were any patches or any mods that would address the majority of the complaints. i have a gift card and was thinking of trying out the expansion pack and was wondering if i would just end up annoyed again.

There are so many untrue and irrelevant points in your post that shows high level of ignorance and inability to adopt with the changes in the game. Therefore, don't bother with trying civ 5 after all the changed and patched and stick to civ4!

 

[Sonereal]

Which parts aren't true? Care to point them out?

 

[Civking5]

Which parts aren't true? Care to point them out?

Try to play in higher levels/bigger maps and use Ics and see how it works. With out careful expansion and happiness consideration you are guaranteed to fail.

 

[Gucumatz]

I pre-ordered this game when it came out and was really excited after playing civ 4 like a freak for 5 years. then i got into the game and after playing (when it was new) was utterly disgusted.
people who werent big civ 1-4 players seem to love it and the veteran civ players hate its simplicity.
they seemed to just dumb down the whole engine. - Quite arguable :: Sliders were an illogical and "dumbing down" of managing an actual empire - If you mean choices, there are plenty of choices now [even without health] as religion, culture policies, take more focus and more gameplay decisions than before in Civ 4

in civ 5 it seemed like all you had to do was spam cities and they would be profitable no matter what. there was no science or economy penalty for over expansion and the whole concept of keeping city-states free didnt seem to pay off at all. - Yes if you do play on settler you can spam cities. Once again many people argue going tall is a better strategy anyways - As said - The global happiness penalty is severe enough to prevent early unplanned/ill decided overexpansion

i would start out with a decent size country and army and be making a profit for about 2 hundred turns.
then after not expanding or training new units i would see my profits just randomly start to drop until i was forced to delete military units and then just resign once i had no army left. - So you mean you didn't realize that buildings cost maintenance and you are bad at managing an empire? Perhaps its you who dumbed down your expectations from Civ 4 and couldn't manage things on a deeper level


i havnt played the game since it came out and was just wondering if there were any patches or any mods that would address the majority of the complaints. i have a gift card and was thinking of trying out the expansion pack and was wondering if i would just end up annoyed again. - The game has changed tremendously since the start. But if you want to be illogical and not give things a fair shake, you will be like the Civ 3 people who bought civ 4 and hated the AI and never touched Civ since. It is a different game - supposedly much more like Civ 3 than Civ 5, and you have to have an open mind

Well Ill address the main post step by step here ^

 

[Sonereal]

Try to play in higher levels/bigger maps and use Ics and see how it works. With out careful expansion and happiness consideration you are guaranteed to fail.

Through the magic of reading the OP, you would be able to tell that he was talking pre-patches.

i havnt played the game since it came out and was just wondering if there were any patches or any mods that would address the majority of the complaints. i have a gift card and was thinking of trying out the expansion pack and was wondering if i would just end up annoyed again.

 

[Civking5]

Yes, I understand. However, the tone of OP's post is that he is not willing to give it a try anyway.

 

[strijder20]

Yes, I understand. However, the tone of OP's post is that he is not willing to give it a try anyway.

He actually is now, and you've got to admit, Civ 5 was a really mediocre and imbalanced game when it first came out.

Now there are some really awesome aspects (religion, although I don't have G&K myself) and most of the errors are fixed, and the OP's description doesn't apply to Civ5 anymore, but I can completely agree with what he says when looking at the first release.

 

[Appren]

As one that truly hated Civ5 on release (and deleted it in disgust), I can now recommend Civ5 with expansion and how the game is today. I purchased it a couple weeks ago, and enjoy it quite well.

 

[Sonereal]

Yes, I understand. However, the tone of OP's post is that he is not willing to give it a try anyway.

ok. i guess ill give it another try then. thanks

Interesting.

 

[Civking5]

I apologize, I didn't see the other post. I thought Op was like another civ4 supporter who came here asking similar question and then after several people answered, he came back trolling and saying he hates the game anyway.

 

[DrunkenRine]

im one of the guys who loved civ 5 from the very start!

at once i thought that civ 5 was a game in which most of the good aspects of all civ games were melted into one aweseome game. plus, it added panzer-general style wargame combat mechanics to civ, which i loved beacuse i like those games, and i love the tactical depth it adds to civ, instead of the one-stack armies of civ 4.
also i loved the art style of civ 5. it just looked CLEAN. the whole engine and ui are so superior to civ 4, which after all the add ons looked like a mod itself. i cant quite explain why, but civ 4 looked like a mod made based on another game and the civ 4 colo expansion added to this feeling, because it was a mod based on civ 4. (you dont need to understand me in this).

but to conclude my post.
i am a hardcore civ and colonization player from the spawingpool of civ. i played civ 1, civ 2, colonization, civ 3, civ 4 and now civ 5. i played all of them a lot, except civ 3, which i kinda disliked.
but i think that civ 5 really is an improvement and amalgam of all the civ games and a pretty awesome piece of art. i cant understand the criticism.

 

[Tabarnak]

Civ4 is still more ''complex''.

But civ5 is also a lot different from civ4. What makes angry most players that hates civ5 is that civ5 is not another expansion of civ4

With the recent patch you can't complain anymore that the deity level is easy. It's hard, and very sometimes. But there is still a level missing between immortal and deity i must say. Because immortal is not that hard.

 

[iconocast]

The expansion pack makes the game far more complex, and could be considered the equivalent of BtS or Warlords. I think that with G&K Civ V is a tough rival for Civ IV

quoted for truth, he ( or she? ) sums it up well

 

[Commander Bello]

As one that truly hated Civ5 on release (and deleted it in disgust), (....). I purchased it a couple weeks ago, (...)