1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Tried Civ V, went back to Civ IV, Should I try G&K?

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by austincm, Feb 12, 2013.

  1. austincm

    austincm Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2010
    Messages:
    142
    I tried Civ V and didn't like it that much since it seemed kinda dumbed down, with the new expansion is it worth revisiting the game?
     
  2. Civking5

    Civking5 Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Messages:
    393
    So you have the game but don't like to try it with last patch, right? If you don't know it by now, you better not know at all.
     
  3. Babri

    Babri Emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,450
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Why did u feel ciV was dumbed down? Was it just lack of enough features, immersion or pure hatred for new 1UPT & focus on war? It largely depends upon why u disliked ciV it the first place, then we would be able to tell whether it would be worthwhile to buy G&K. :)
     
  4. BBMorti

    BBMorti Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2012
    Messages:
    143
    Barbri said it. If you are in doubt if this is the game for you, it likely isn't.
     
  5. Menzies

    Menzies Menzies

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,898
    Location:
    Australia
    Please explain "dumbed down". I am a theoretical physicist with an obsession with statistics, yet I love Civ V? Are you saying that the game is for the "casual gamer" or are you saying that you don't like it and have no other description of problems with it, and are simply trying to make a scene due to a lack of any real attention?
     
  6. dojoboy

    dojoboy Tsalagi

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2001
    Messages:
    4,280
    Location:
    Tanasi, USA
    Yes, you should give it another try. It's a good game, and it's getting better (G&K, patches et al). I would say Civ4+ is an excellent game. A little unfair to compare the two right now.
     
  7. ShuShu62

    ShuShu62 Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Messages:
    183
    Its the boats... It takes a lot of 'Strategic' thinking to load one unit into another

    of course... maybe its the hexes. I am sure even a theoretical physicist understands how 8 is more complex than 6... usually. (ex-theoretical physics major from long ago here)

    Wait, it is the lack of religion... err... at least until they added it back.

    I think it is CivWorld's fault... or was it CivRev's fault. Clearly all of these games have been reduced to pressing a single button that says... 'I Win'

    Ultimately though, somebody said it was dumbed down when the game first came out and a bunch of people (non-theoretical physicists for the most part) agreed, so it must be true.
     
  8. Babri

    Babri Emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,450
    Location:
    Pakistan
    CiV units have double movements than cIV so it has more strategic depth when u compare hexes to squares. Also squares have a real weakness, diagonal movement travels more distance with the same movement point consumed... Your myth busted!

    Not making transport ships is a design choice & it doesn't take away any depth. If u think u can move armies across the ocean without navy because of embarking then there is a problem in your logic. You still need to strategically think when embarking because units are then much more vulnerable. Sorry to burst your bubble.

    Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2
     
  9. Stolen Rutters

    Stolen Rutters Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    2,100
    Location:
    Michigan
    G&K fully patched improves the game quite a bit. Buy it and try it.
     
  10. ShuShu62

    ShuShu62 Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Messages:
    183
    DUDE!

    8 is much simpler than 6 to this old assembler programmer/ex-number theorist...
    8 is even easier from a cartographic perspective, but I am not an ex-map maker.


    I think Physics is probably neutral on the subject.

    I also do not think Civ 5 was dumbed down to appeal to morons such as myself.

    Moderator Action: Don't troll around.
     
  11. ohioastronomy

    ohioastronomy King

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Messages:
    714
    It retains the lack of stacking, which in turn drives a lot of bad consequences in terms of simulation and empire-building. It retains the emphasis on war, the weakest link in the Civ series. When I tried Civ 5 I found that there were other games that did what it did better. There don't appear to be a lot of people who changed their minds about Civ 5 based on the expansion. So I wouldn't bother given your description.
     
  12. KGPurrs

    KGPurrs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Messages:
    36
    I can count to the number potato! :crazyeye: 5 is bigger then 4 and make brain hurt! :cry:
    Moderator Action: Don't troll around.
     
  13. Civking5

    Civking5 Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Messages:
    393
    It retains the lack of stacking? Did you expect they remove 1upt in expansion? Civ5 is all about 1upt, which is a lot more fun than the tedious stacking mechanism.
     
  14. Blackluck

    Blackluck Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Messages:
    177
    I didn't like Civ 5 much when it first came out, played it for a month or so. Didn't have any thing to do with it being 'dumbed down' (the most over worn cliche in gaming, but whatever.) It just didn't click.

    After finally burning out on EU3&CK2 (and getting a new PC) I tried it again last month - and I've been playing obsessively ever since :) Not entirely sure what changed, maybe just enough time elapsed from having played BtS.

    (And I don't fight any more or less wars than I did in BtS. I'm a builder and stay on Prince, so that probably has a lot to do with it.)
     
  15. Fried Egg

    Fried Egg Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    341
    I don't understand what all this big love is for CivIV. I was in love with CivII and CivIII back in the day and I never could get into CivIV (not for want of trying). Now I've tried CivV and I've got back into the game again; it feels like a proper Civ game again (in a way that CivIV never felt like). Although I have to admit that I never played vanilla, I went straight to G&K).

    Incidentally, I'm sure I remember people complaining about CivIV when it first came out saying it was dumbed down...
     
  16. dthompson32

    dthompson32 Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Messages:
    197
    Location:
    Florida
    I have a pet theory that "dumbed down" really means "I hate 1UPT". People liked building up little stacks of "Moving armies of Death" and dislike seeing a mountain pass being held by a single unit that you can't get at.

    Personally, I never cared one way or another, so I jumped into CiV with both feet and have never felt the desire to return to previous versions of the game. But I do like G+K a lot more than Vanilla. Well other than espionage, I don't like rigged elections in city states.
     
  17. Eagle Pursuit

    Eagle Pursuit Scir-Gerefa

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    15,735
    I think 'dumbed down' is code for 'can't use sliders'. The 1upt is actually more strategically intensive than SoD.
     
  18. markusbeutel

    markusbeutel NiGHTS

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,976
    Location:
    Vancouver BC Canada
    If you didn't like it on release because you thought it was dumbed down, you still won't like it now - as the core mechanics are all the same. No stacks and 1UPT, bare-bones diplomacy, pay-to-win UN, linear tech tree, sameness of terrain...

    Then again, if you play more of a military-style game, you'll probably like it now, as that side of the game, while still needing work, has been improved. Religion also adds some more depth, but it's more or less an extension of "pick which bonus you want" with faith acting just like culture and social policies.
     
  19. Babri

    Babri Emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,450
    Location:
    Pakistan
    UN victory wasn't that great on cIV either. Several times I won through diplomacy victory because I was a badass conquer (more population=more votes)

    Religion in ciV is much better than the dumb & linear one in cIV. Here the beliefs you choose matter & depends upon your surroundings and so on.

    Diplomacy is unfortunately not a really strong point of cIV, but otherwise unless you hate core mechanics of ciV like 1UPT & hexes, then you probably would find ciV+GK a much better & enjoyable game than newly ciV without any patches. :)

    Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2
     
  20. joncnunn

    joncnunn Senior Java Wizard Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    8,621
    Location:
    Missouri
    Primary city limit mechanism: I preferred Civ IVs the city itself costs increasing amount of corruption, no building per turn maintenance (only opportunity cost), happiness & health issues are local.

    Resources with quantities vs binary: I prefer Civ V limited quantities.

    Civics vs Social Policies: I like the idea of adding (Social Policies) more than changing (Civics)

    Trades with AI: I much prefer Civ IV system of AI will pay you with another luxury or in GPT for one of your luxuries and not pay lump sum for per turn item.

    Diplomacy: I much prefer Civ IVs where there was a clear difference between having different AIs as your immediate neighbors (along with it being clear what to do to appease them [adopt Spain's religion if she started next to you if you wanted peace] rather than the assurance that anybody starting too close will DOW you.) I also hate AI calling up just for insults.

    City states: On balance good, especally with G&K changing the quest from conquer another city state to just bully another one and adding additional ones.

    Diplomatic Victory: It's looking like Civ III is still the one where Diplomatic victory is most Diplomatic. (Civ IV: Force your opponents into becoming your vassals; Civ V: One turn before the vote, buy all city states and then DOW everyone to ensure they stay allies)

    Hexes vs squares: I prefer hexes.

    On balance, I'd prefer to remove 1UPT to remove all the side effects (early units have to be more expensive to build than otherwise; last few unit upgrades are really cheap for the increased power) But have something else effectively limit them.

    Religion: Much better in Civ 5 G&K than Civ 4 due to being belief system. However, for Civ 6, they need to reincorporate having missionaries & Great Prophets respect closed borders.

    Losing the capital while building the space ship: Civ IVs lose all progress towards the spaceship makes more sense than Civ V. I do however like Civ V's idea that a spaceship parts are units and you need to move them to your capital when built elsewhere.

    Sliders vs no sliders: I prefer sliders

    Espionage: I'm thinking that I liked SMAC's spy vs spy best. (Guard your cities against probe teams with your own probe teams, which duke it out) I also think that offensive major spy actions should cost money and not be for free.

    Cash rushing: I think partial cash rushing of buildings should be restored [where it cost less to start a building and then finish it with cash than the full price of never starting it.] This would also have the good side effect of just cash rushing one building per turn instead of cash rushing several in one turn.

    National Wonders: I much prefer Civ IV's requiring fixed X copies of the building to Civ V's 100% of all current cities in your empire. However, I prefer being able to build as many national wonders in a given city as I want to being limited to only two of them per city.
     

Share This Page