Other civ4 like games

[code99]

As per title, if anyone knows other games similar to civ 4 except galactic civilization 2.

Thanks

 

[SamSniped]

There's Europa Universalis 3, but it is a lot more complicated , with buyable Advisors, Warscore, etc. It's really fun, however.

You could try any of the other Civ games, too, except 5, which was a step backwards in programming for this game series

 

[Lemon Merchant]

Other Civ type games? Blasphemy!!

I agree on Europa Universalis III.

 

[code99]

Other Civ type games? Blasphemy!!

Lol!
Dont get me wrong, civ 4 is the best around and im still playing it like crazy. Was just curious bout others

As for europa univeralis 3, ill go check it out

Thanks and keep it coming !

 

[lymond]

Lemon...you were Miss Ireland! woot! lookin' good!

OP, EUIII is worth checking out. Technically it plays in real time, but with the pause and speed settings it can play as slow as civ or slower with much to think about. Great game.

Have you played the Total War series? It's a TBS/RTS hybrid, but you play as a particular civ and expand or conquer. The battles are full scale RTS though. However, you can auto-play the battles. Not as deep strategy wise, but fun none-the-less. Personal favorite is Medieval II Total War.

Stardock, the company that made Gal civ 2, release a game recently called Elemental: War of Magic. It's a fantasy 4x in the civ mold. Although the initial release was not well received, a stand-alone expansion will be released this year that is supposed to be a complete overhaul of the game to fix what was wrong original. Stardock appears very intent on making this game work. Interestingly, they hired one of the more renowned Civ modders to lead development of this version. Should be interesting. I actually own Elemental, but haven't played it much for reasons other than the issues. I look forward to the expansion.

Lastly, don't forget to check out the mods here for additional ways to play Civ4.

 

[ajsciri4]

Any games by Paradox Interactive are amazing, though complicated. Others have said Europa Universalis III. EU3 is a game made by Paradox.

Someone else mentioned Creative Assembly's Total War series. I play these too. They're all fantastic.

Games I play by them:
Paradox: Europa Universalis III, Victoria II, Crusader Kings II, Hearts of Iron III are great.
Creative Assembly (Total War): Rome Total War, Medieval II Total War, Empire Total War, Napoleon Total War

I suggest you also check out the Age of Empires series and Rise of Nations, but they're not as good as the above or Civ. Rise of Nations is probably the most similar to Civ.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

Lemon...you were Miss Ireland! woot! lookin' good!

Riiight. Mum would have beaten me senseless for even having the idea.[/QUOTE]

 

[lietkynes]

If you haven't played Alpha Centauri, please do.

Other games you may like:
Mount & Blade: Warband
Tropico 3
Europa Universalis 3
Final Fantasy Tactics
UFO -Enemy Unknown
Warlords 3
Space Rangers 2

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Advance Wars is pretty good (no tech tree though).

EDIT: Lemon, I would only spank you lightly for the Miss Ireland thing. No need to use the belt

 

[Seraiel]

Master of Orrion (MoO) is awesome. Imho part 3 is the best, but lots of people say 2 is. Never played 1 iirc.

 

[Kaosprophet]

Master of Orrion (MoO) is awesome. Imho part 3 is the best, but lots of people say 2 is. Never played 1 iirc.

That's... surprising. MoO3 was even less popular than Civ5 is today.

 

[Seraiel]

The thing is, 3 had battles in real-time which hightened the pulse quite a bit . 2 was better overall but had turn-based battles which I don't like that much. Also 3 had the larger maps, and some already know that I'm addicted to Huge .

 

[Mîtiu Ioan]

That's... surprising. MoO3 was even less popular than Civ5 is today.

This isn't a surprise : it was full of bugs and, even worse, unbalanced ...

I/our group abandoned it after just few weeks. So bad - because the theme sounds promising ( and MoO2 was really good as a "Civ in Space" ).

 

[Seraiel]

This isn't a surprise : it was full of bugs and, even worse, unbalanced ...

I/our group abandoned it after just few weeks. So bad - because the theme sounds promising ( and MoO2 was really good as a "Civ in Space" ).

You understood him wrong, he was surprised that I liked it more than MoO 2 Best games are unbalanced and Bugs were ok with the latest patches. I found GalCiv to be too easy imho, beat it on highest difficulty in my 2nd game. MoO 3 had those insane management parts with managing gigantic Empires of 1000 planets and Fleets that were too large to be counted, I remember every Armada had like 18 Ships which consisted out of 4 different groups and maximum for the Battlefield were 180 Ships so 10 Armadas, but if one wanted to conquer 1000 planets and also defend those, that ment about 1000 Ships in each of the border systems. One needed incredibly good Macro and Micro was terrifying. Also read the points I mentioned above for knowing why I really liked the game

 

[Great Big Al]

Well, there's the Daisenryaku series. It's a little like Civ. It's much more focused on military strategy than empire building. No building or managing cities, only capturing cities. No Tech, you are stuck in a specific era. Most are set in WW2, but the one I have, Dai Senryaku 7, is modern era.

It actually has more in common with Civ 5 really. Hexes, only one unit per hex. The difference is that it actually works in DS.

DS7 has 6 or 7 countries to choose from and I don't even know how many units. Hundreds. The U.S. alone has about 30 different planes.

A few, mainly basic units, are shared by all countries (trucks to transport infantry, supply vehicles for example.) Most are shared by a few countries, the apache helicopter is fairly common. Some are unique to one country.

There aren't really any useless units either. You won't build every unit in every single battle, but they all can fit into some strategy.

IN DS7, the only one I currently own and am most familiar with, the AI is decent. Probably smarter than Civ4's AI. If you have it blocked at a choke point it will try a different strategy to break out. Watch your flank. There are a few situations where the AI falls noticeably short though.

All in all a very solid game.

 

[ProximaCentauri]

Master of Orion 2 was very nice, although the AI really sucked bad and combat could become tedious, even if crafting ships was a part I liked. I didn't really like 3, but I have to admit I didn't play it much.
MoO2 made me dream, especially the technologies; I mean, it's a condensed pack of all 20th century sci-fi, and more Terraforming planets, deploying anti-rad planetary shields, enhancing fertile soil with nanotech or genetics, enhancing the whole specie with some home-made mutation, communicating parsecs away with your fleets using some transdimentional technology... Ok, stopping here.

 

[AlpsStranger]

Best games are unbalanced

Every time I hear this sentiment repeated I get just a little closer to my cross-country gamer-directed killing spree.

Balance makes games better. Stop the hate

 

[Seraiel]

Every time I hear this sentiment repeated I get just a little closer to my cross-country gamer-directed killing spree.

Balance makes games better. Stop the hate

I don't understand at all what you're saying (maybe because english isn't my mother-language) , but I was right with what I said, best games in history all were unbalanced.

Take DAoC (Tanks were OP) or Warhammer (Casters were OP) . That led to so funny discussions, you cannot imagine it "uh, we need an 8th man, why don't we take xy?" "no, he's caster (DAoC)" "yes, but he can play well and is a nice guy" "yes, he can and is, but he should make himself a tank, otherwise he's of no use at all" Or the whine-threads, when we (Valheru) whiped out 700 human players with just 6 of us in Warhammer, they were like pages long. Best commedy I've ever seen. All those nerfs and patches that came out after that, first Wardens were of no use at all, suddenly, they were totally op. What did players do? Everybody created himself a warden then, except the ones who were unable to adapt to change and whined and whined for our fun . And we weren't op all the time, still we kept playing against those Realm Rank 11 groups who could fight with being immune to any dmg for 2 minutes, and still we slew them after those 2 minutes had run out, you cannot imagine how much fun that was.

If something is unbalanced, just exploit it as hard as possible, have fun. Don't come with silly arguments like "but I want to be a xy QQ" , be adaptive and you'll win most times and always have a great time.

 

[ProximaCentauri]

Imbalance leads to boredom.

 

[AlpsStranger]

If something is unbalanced, just exploit it as hard as possible, have fun. Don't come with silly arguments like "but I want to be a xy QQ" , be adaptive and you'll win most times and always have a great time.

This may be practical advice, but it isn't something game designers should imitate. It should more properly be stated that some of the best games are good *despite* being imbalanced.

Sorry, but your opinion is complete nonsense from a game design perspective. Deliberately causing imbalance to create 'comedy'? Being 'adaptive' really just means 'only take the decision the devs made for you, the other classes/races/nations/etc were put in as a joke.' I disagree with all of it in the most thorough and unapologetic terms possible.

Now, should balance be taken *too far?* No, but this problem usually doesn't occur so...