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

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?

 

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.

 

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.

 

Barbri said it. If you are in doubt if this is the game for you, it likely isn't.

 

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?

 

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.

 

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.

 

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

 

G&K fully patched improves the game quite a bit. Buy it and try it.

 

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.

 

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.

 

I can count to the number potato! 5 is bigger then 4 and make brain hurt!
Moderator Action: Don't troll around.

 

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.

 

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.)

 

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...

 

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.

 

I think 'dumbed down' is code for 'can't use sliders'. The 1upt is actually more strategically intensive than SoD.

 

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.

 

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