The more I read your posts Charon, the more convinced I'm becoming that you in fact never played Civ4 long enough to learn its gameplay. I can't explain your reasoning otherwise
I've been giving some thought to this Civics vs. Social Policies debate. Several people maintain that the old system of Civics is less linear and offers more options as you progress through the game. I wanted to offer up this alternate viewpoint:
In Civ IV, as you progress through the game, you unlock, one at a time, new civics. For instance, usually the first civic seen when you research bronze working is slavery. A window comes up and asks if you want to adopt slavery, yes or no. Pretty much that's how the civics unlock, one at a time, and you are asked each time if you want to adopt the new civic, yes or no. Also, this usually happens in almost the same order in every game, depending a little on your tech research.
It's occurred to me that the new system of Social Policies in Civ V is far less linear. It provides many more options as you progress through your civilizations history. We all know that strategy gamers love options, I know I do. And I know, that in the civics system, you can switch to previously discovered civics whenever you want. But I maintain that that is kind of a 'cheap' way of running your Civ's government. This is of course my personal opinion of the system, but being able to completely change your government, with little consequence, simply because it gives you a convenient advantage at a certain moment, is pretty lame. I was never crazy about this aspect of Civ IV.
In Civ V, as you build your civilization, it becomes what it becomes, based on your social policy decisions. If you experiment and it doesn't work, you can try something else in a subsequent game. But, personally, I would take a more open-ended system like social policies in Civ V that doesn't allow on-a-dime changes, over the one-at-a-time, yes-or-no system of Civ IV that does.
Almost the same order? Depending "a little" on my tech research? Are you serious? In some games I'll never reach for Pacifism and won't pursue it, in others despite having access to Slavery I won't change into it due to slave revolts/anarchy, various civics usage have large repercussions due to interactions with other nations leaders (it's called diplomacy, and it adds depth to the game), going for Free Religion might either save your skin, or cause you to lose your allies while still having various other effects (no upkeep, bonus science and happiness), there are wonders allowing you to use all the civics from a tree at once (and you don't have to build them, you can
plan which city has such wonder and conquer it, because you know, wonders are famous so the info about where they're built should be easily accessible in every Civ game)...
What I'm saying is that the idea that it's all "on-a-dime" change is downright silly! Sometimes you spend ages deciding which path to go, and on the next day you end up in a heated discussion with your civ friend about the choice you've made in your game the other night -
that's depth. That's complexity. All too often various interactions between civic's effects can lead to tremendously different outcomes -
essentially you're creating your own game, on a far larger scale than Civ5 could ever allow.
I'm sorry but when you state that changing your government in Civ4 has little consequence and you call stiff policy system of Civ5 more open-ended - I couldn't disagree more.
In Civ V, as you progress through your civilizations history and accrue enough culture, you are presented with (at the start) three options, for three very different routes your civilization can take. At each level that social policies open, you are given a choice of several options. If you have started several branches of policies, you could have six or more options available.
In civ5 by the time you acquire enough culture for one-two out of three choices (barring culture goody huts), in Civ4 you can have access to three early civics - Slavery, Hereditary Rule and Organized Religion. But guess what - you can have either
all of them, or
none of them - it all depends on you, and it all can be beneficial unlike in civ5 (I'm talking civic upkeep and favourite civics issue here) So right from the start you've got more choices, and this is only beginning (not to mention that if you happen to get Pyramids you've got seven choices).
Theoretically your viewpoint might have sense, but in practice is only shows how little you know about the civics system in Civ4. I'm sorry if that sounds inflammatory but Social Policies are devoid of so many factors that civics in Civ4 have that to state that civics are one-at-a-time, yes-or-no system is simply incorrect.
(Yes I love the game, despite the faulty combat/naval AI....)
.
