Old timer's, what are your thoughts so far?

[SemperFi2382]

As long as they don't make us wait for Hotseat like the did for Civ V, I am quite excited. I have played Civ for a long time, including spin offs, etc.

My wife and I have played Civ together since Civ IV (not counting FreeCiv), and it is one of those games we can play together on the couch (on the television via a HDMI Cable) after the kids goto bed. This is a big reason I want to make sure there is Hotseat (at launch) before I pre-order because, frankly that's something that I think is a must have feature.

As for the game itself, many of the new features are things that either my wife or myself have commented on wishing existed in the game. I've often wanted smarter barbarians, which this seems to fit the bill. There are other things, but I did like 1UPT, although the hybrid of the Army System from Civ III is a nice touch.

With a hopefully much smarter AI as well, I expect to clock a lot of hours into this one. Of course, that all depends on Hotseat being available, because I will skip it until it's bargain bin otherwise.

 

[Jorunkun]

Been playing since CIV 1, but sat out 5 - still playing 4 though. Cautiously optimistic.

 

[Kelvrin]

I started with the SNES version of Civ I. Then moved on to Civ 2 for the PSX. Then everything changed when I got my first computer. I played Call to Power 1&2, Test of Time, ACPP, Civ III, IV, Civ Rev, V and BE. all and all I liked Civ 2 and 3 the best and civ 5 the least. The graphics don't bother me as I'm used to playing civ 3 to this day. If it bothers you then just mod it.

I hated the hexes and the City States. I also hated that any unit can cross a body of water without a transport. I hate BE's tech web

In Civ 1 i usually choose America or Rome, civ 2 usually Japan. 3 was Rome mostly, 4 and 5 England and Japan. BE is Daoming i think her name is. the Pan Asian one.

I really hope we get a collectors edition and that firaxis or 2k doesn't pull a dick move like square-enix and limit the amount of CE's.

 

[agonistes]

Based on the screenies I've seen, I'm concerned about the number of cities a map might allow. And the 1 unit per hex.

edit: I realize we can combine units. I'm not sure of the limit to this this, however.

edit2: I'm also hoping the ability to resurrect dead civs will be a feature. It was one of the big plusses in Civ V for me. Sort of ties into the inability to tech trade. How can we buff a civ if we can't gift them techs? I find it annoying when half of the civs can build nukes, but two or three are still building spearmen.

 

[Leathaface]

I'm 29 years old so I dunno if i'm an "old timer", however my first impression are positive. I like the fact that happiness is local, so no big penalty for settling a new city.

I also like how City States look. IMO they are a fine addition to the Civ series and if they are improved upon, that is a bonus. The shadows from the trees also look better than in Civ V.

 

[m15a]

Based on the screenies I've seen, I'm concerned about the number of cities a map might allow. And the 1 unit per hex.

edit: I realize we can combine units. I'm not sure of the limit to this this, however.

Units can be combined in two ways. First, there are support units that are special units that can be paired with a regular unit - like a battering ram is a support unit and can be paired with a warrior unit. (Some details of that are still missing.)

The other way is that multiple units of the same type can be combined - only 2 or 3, and that requires certain mid-game techs to unlock. It's sort of like armies in Civ 3 (or Civ 2? Can't remember) but with more restrictions.

The designers are at least aware of the demand for more cities and some attempt has been made to make larger empires viable. We don't have the exact details on that though. City spacing is the same as Civ V though.

 

[rastak]

Well, I finally found my Civilization Chronicles boxed set and looks like I'll be able to get a windows 98 Virtual machine working....installing as I type this. So it looks like I'm good for Civ 2 in my quest to play through 1-4 this summer.

Now I just have to quit getting killed in Civ I....I had forgotten settlers doubled as workers!

 

[Verrucosus]

Chronicles includes the Multiplayer Gold and Test of Time versions of Civ2. In my experience, both work under Windows 7, 64bit without the need for a virtual operating system. They do require this fix

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=193215

to prevent crashing when a text edit box (eg. leader & city names) pops up. I have no idea whether the fix works for Windows 8 or 10.

Of course, if you use a Windows 98 Virtual Machine you will probably be able to go without that fix.

 

[rastak]

Chronicles includes the Multiplayer Gold and Test of Time versions of Civ2. In my experience, both work under Windows 7, 64bit without the need for a virtual operating system. They do require this fix

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=193215

to prevent crashing when a text edit box (eg. leader & city names) pops up. I have no idea whether the fix works for Windows 8 or 10.

Of course, if you use a Windows 98 Virtual Machine you will probably be able to go without that fix.

Thx!

Easier than messing with this vm.

 

[Kissamies]

Started with I on Amiga. Haven't been very excited because the little info I have bothered to check seems to indicate that they are not reconciling things that were wrong in CiV. Not planning to get it on release. Will probably wait for the collection version with both expansions. Might change my mind if I happen to come across some info and like what I hear. just too burned by CiV to be very enthusiastic at this point. Especially when there is plenty of other Civ-like games on the market.

 

[keiselhorn13]

Played since the very first Civ when I got them in floppy disks from a schoolmate 23 years ago. I enjoyed every version of Civ, and can't wait for VI. When I saw the first screenshots I was a bit disappointed with the graphics but after watching the gameplay I could see it's a real deal Civ game coming. I like the changes shown so far.

 

[Genesis_26317]

I've played since Civilization I.

Civ I was incredible for its era.
-did I really just lose a tank, a bomber, and a battleship to a spearman???

Civ II increased the scope beyond anything before.
-The custom palace.
-the advisors
-the new government types
-espionage
-civil wars!
-terraforming!

Civ II: Test of Time
-It was epic in scale, all of a sudden you actually landed on Alpha Centauri, and there is already hostile life there!
-Midgar scenario, sort of a pre-Fall From Heaven II, you can live underground, on land, in the sky with mountain tops as "islands", or under water.
-The 4 layer solar system one, yes you can colonize the upper atmosphere of a gas giant.

Civilization III:
-added national resources, this completely was the biggest upgrade the game had.
-the scenario's were incredible
-I hated whack a mole pollution, it made corruption seem okay...
-artillery was awesome, especially defensive bombardments!
-air bombing was awesome too, stealth bombers even more cool for some one sided wars, research enough tech and you even get precision bombing
-enemy nations change appearance based on era!!!!!
-Armies from great leaders or building from the cities with generals. If you have trouble with overly hardened cities, just move that army over there!
-Rise of Rome, enough said.
-stack of doom, mean my fleet of bombers!!!

Alpha Centauri:
-Custom Units, that's right Beyond Earth, I get to design my own stuff.
-unlimited terraforming, that's right it actually makes a big difference.
-humidity
-elevation
-aoe bonus's to adjacent tiles
-forests
-fungus production
...ummm it can get a little tedious
-AI factions are kinda neat, and the storyline is incredible, don't forget the expansion
-Dead IP, they don't own it, so it isn't going to be redone anytime soon.

Civ IV: Vanilla
-I can't build trees/forests anymore?
-the terrain was extreme especially when you start to really get into the techs, I like how I can't just play Egypt/Native American's and irrigate the whole Sahara Desert anymore. It made colonizing jungle areas really feel like you are doing something.
-unique faction buildings are incredibly lame, seriously Egypt gets a special monument that you can't build in like 20-30 turns.
-bombardment was illogical, the point of artillery is to sit back and bombard, not go charging into a city, I don't care what anyone says. It made stacks of doom worse as well, because now you artillery DIES when they attack.
-air units were kind of weak and odd. I mean yeah you can steamroll with them and tanks, but they didn't feel very well implemented.
-Modding, I seriously have spent more time playing Civ IV than any other video game ever. Modding just makes me play more.

Civ IV: Warlords
-Warlords aren't really that interesting, wow some extra XP on that now dead unit, I'd rather use Genghis as a trainer in a production city.
-Vassals, kinda neat
-Scenario's well they aren't that interesting....

Civ IV: BTS
-Scenario's were super neat!
-finally a fully fleshed out game
-it still crashes all the time
-espionage is still lame
-I don't care this game feels like a continued sequential extension to Civilization I

Civ V: Vanilla
-Wow, this is a lot like playing on my XBox
-Despite me not liking it, I can't really suggest people switch from V to IV if their first game was Civ V in the series.

Civ V: XCom??? (oh nevermind sorry) the apology expansion (whatever it was called
-well I have to admit it is comparable in depth to Civ IV with the expansions now. The only problem was it took you WAY to long to get there, stop streamlining and instead make a full game.
-yeah religion blah blah blah we all know they added a ton of stuff into the game
-Why does this 1UPT thing make it so that when I try to move my units to attack the other guys it is more tedious than back in the old days, yeah sure run off the damn railroad track, make me micromanage MORE


Civ VI: An incremental change, (not upgrade) to Civ V. Which is probably a good thing, too much change and people get pissed.

Overall I've literally seen all of these new features in dozens of other games. It is starting to look like Rome: Total War meets Warlock, with Civ 5 graphics.

 

[mitsho]

I started with Civilization 2 and for a very long time I preferred the around here actively disliked Call to Power. Why? Because it removed a lot of micromanagement (see workers - which are still not eliminated from civ6). Or maybe that's just what I remember. Civ6 also for example keeps the fullscreen leaderheads which to me are mostly a distraction. They look good in game one, but in the late game, they just prolong the turn times insufferably. So my biggest hope for 6 is that it'll make me play more games in the late game. So far, I've mostly abandonned them from Late Middle Ages to Industrial Era when the number of decisions go down and repetitive tasks ("that city needs a library, then defense, oh I need to upgrade all my units") start accumulating. What has been presented looks okay however content-wise. And everything else will be seen this Fall/Winter

 

[Duuk]

Hated Civ5.

Nostalgia tells me I loved CTP2 the most, reality tells me Civ4 was the best.

Cautiously optimistic about Civ6. It looks like they paid attention to the part where Civ5 was sort of like watching paint dry.

We'll see though. I will definitely be waiting until after the forum gets its hands on it for a month or two before I buy.

 

[duckstab]

Started playing Civ4 in 2008 about the time I joined CFC. Don't know if that qualifies me as an old timer or not.

Civ4, with various mods, is still my favorite in the series and I haven't stopped playing it. I did not pick up Civ5 until BNW and I have to admit that the final iteration has some interesting mechanics that represent real improvements over Civ4. And yet, overall, it has still never grabbed my imagination and interest to the same degree. It just seems too easy and I still think 1UPT was a Bad Idea (TM).

I'm cautiously optimistic about Civ6, given that some attempt has been made to ease the traffic jams and micromanagement of 1UPT. I actually like the new graphics because I think they'll be easier to read without switching to the strategy layer. The investment in AI behavior could add an interesting dimension. But I will probably wait and see what the community says about it before buying it.

 

[Savoir10]

Loved Civs 1,2 and 3. Not fussed about Civ4. Civ5 Vanilla was a mess. BNW is my favourite.

Like what I see in Civ6 and really wish I could buy it on release. However I refuse to ripped off by some greedy American company simply because I live outside the borders of the USA. I'll get in on sale or through a 3rd party provider same as I did with Civ 5 and expansions.

 

[X_nemesis_X]

I've been playing since civ2 and I liked every part including civ5. I'm still playing civ5 and I liked 1upt despite that the AI didn't handle it well. But I remember getting bored of the military part of civ4. The information we got about civ6 are really promising and I've got nothing to complain about yet. What I'm looking forward to the most is the unstacking of cities. And as always I hope that they manage to design a proper AI

Gesendet von meinem LG-H815 mit Tapatalk

 

[JtW]

And as always I hope that they manage to design a proper AI

And, as always, they won't.

 

[Lord Tirian]

Been at it since a bundle CD with CivNet and got Civ2 immediately afterwards. Must have been some time around 1997.

My favourites were always the more experimental Civ games, so that means SMAC/X, the Call to Power series (though I liked CtP 1 a lot more) and, of course, the sheer variety of Civ4 with mods. Wasn't a fan of Civ3 (too bland) and Civ5 vanilla (too slow-paced) but came around when BNW hit - it has the best endgame experience (Culture victory and World Congress never were much fun before).

Cautiously excited for CiVI, it looks like it keeps all the good bits from Civ5, improves upon clever-but-not-well-implemented systems (mainly 1UPT) and is willing to push more map-based play with the district and wonder system.

The last point is something I'm really excited to see, because as the series increased in complexity, the number of menus increased. More map play is a great way to keep the complexity but present it in a more accessible and interesting way - and a logical continuation of Civ5 (see on-map trade routes, great tile improvements, 1UPT, natural wonders).

 

[CelticBlood]

Civ I.

I was 10 when I was first exposed to it on my cousin's computer. I was looking for something to do and just stumbled across this file named "civ.exe" (these were the DOS days). I ran it and was blown away by the intro.

I had no clue what I was doing. I learned that game from 100% trial and error. I remember my first play-through was with Ghandi, and I kept building cities literally on adjacent tiles to my first city because I thought that's how I was expanding the city borders. So I had a 9x9 grid of cities dominating the Indian continent.

Once I figured out how to edit the text for the intro movie and for the civilopedia and see those changes in-game, my young pre-teen mind perverted those files with references to things that would make any mother blush. I was amused.

I really miss the global warming features of Civ I and Civ II, and the ability to make a civilization (or see your own) splinter in two in Civ I. I really wish they would bring those features back.

Civ I is still my fav based on nostalgia, but I haven't been disappointed with any iteration. Civ VI looks amazing. I have confidence it will live up to the hype.