What in Civ V is worse than in Civ IV ?

[hookpiotr]

Hello, I am wondering if there are some aspects or features in Civilization V that are simply worse in conception or application than they were in Civilization IV. As for me, the lack of religion aspect in the latest Civilization installment is a big minus. What about your thoughts?

 

[duxup]

For me the issues with V so far are around the periphery / polish. Data you get for combat is pretty clear, but then looking up the details of other aspects in the cyclopedia gives you little to no info. The tech tree is much the same, heck even the quotes are. A new or at least altered techtree would have been very nice. Same goes for some new units (not all but just some to spice things up). The clock is gone, other minor issues that are obvious bugs are annoying. They're somewhat minor complaints on their own, but I keep finding them and they add up.

 

[Boris Godunov]

The Civ V AI, particularly with regards to diplomacy, needs to be reworked. There are a couple of threads detailing the propensity of the AI to either give away their empire in peace deals after receiving nary scratch or refusing to pay even meager gold when they are getting rolled over. Looks to me like some numbers in the programming are a bit off.

Also, I agree that the production times are too slow in the early game. Why should a unit of soldiers take the same time to build as a world wonder?

I miss some of the Civ IV information screens--where's the top city list??

 

[Jaguar]

Civ IV's city maintenance system was a thing of beauty. I'm sad to see it go.

 

[Soro]

The inflexible social tree, for one. Much preferred the dynamic version in SMAC, grandfathered into Civ IV. I don't expect this to show up until an expansion (if then), but I do hope they fix the truly terrible combat AI and negotiations AI. I really don't like playing with suicidal AIs. They depress me.

 

[Meteora]

Stupid AI that refuse to expand another city at around 200 BC while I have 5 cities up and running. And well, a disappointing diplomacy setting. While its nice to see the number crunching go away from diplomatic relations, there's really little point in having another ally with how the AI is handled and the lack of diplomatic options. I also miss the complicated diplomatic web from IV where I had to be careful with who I associate myself with. While that was a bit inflexible, it could have been reworked on so it was simplified to an extent in V.

 

[zonk]

Right now - and it's just based off of 3 days - I would say everything EXCEPT warfare...

However, I will say this -- I like the 1UPT/Hex system and the more strategic/chess vs. stacks of doom warfare so much that I don't think I'm in the "Civ4 was better" group... and I say this as a decidedly builder-based player NOT a warmonger.

1UPT/hex is carrying civ5 right now for me -- I dearly, dearly hope that modders and expansions will restore the missing concepts I feel are dogging 5 -- but 1UPT/hex is a real step forward.

Things I most think are missing...

Rivers seem nerfed/meaningless... +1 commerce, but that seems to be about it.... you don't need them for farms, they don't work as roads for trade routes, and with pollution gone - there's really no reason to build ON a river anymore. This seems just wrong... Look at a map of the world and you'll notice since the dawn of time - direct access to fresh water and riverways was a critical aspect of the rise of civilization. Rivers need desperately to be restored as an important part of population growth, commerce, and strategic aspects of the game.

Multi-decision tiles -- I always thought that one of the best things about IV was that non-resource tiles had a real multitude of options. This doesn't seem to be case - TP vs. farm is about it and what's more - it's not a very thoughtful decision. The decision to go cottage involved a trade-off... immediate growth (farm)/production (workshop) vs longer term commerce? I never used to automate workers... now, I don't see much reason NOT to automate them.

Wonders and buildings - I think that perhaps I'm just too used to RoM/AND - but there seem to be less of them and they seem more meaningless.

 

[GreyIago]

Man, you guys kill me with this.

Go play CivIV, please. Apparently memories are a little rusty. "Back in the good ol days" blah blah.

 

[Reginleif]

Civ V is superior to Civ IV in everyway

 

[DashieBaby87]

I'm loving the diplomacy so far, at 0 AD / Settler / Epic speed. There's a bunch of back stabbing going on.

Then, you have to deal with the minor nations, etc. Feels like a real tribal world growing into civilization.

Civ V is superior to Civ IV in everyway

As a player of Civ IV, I find myself agreeing with this more often than not.

♥

 

[bjbrains]

Rivers are just as important if not moreso. Yes you can build farms anywhere, but civil service (aka an early medieval tech) makes riverside farms give an extra food. This is *HUGE*. Also, watermills are a useful building that can only be build alongside rivers, and hydro plants are really powerful late-game buildings. Oh, and don't automate workers. You're going to want to specialize your cities properly, and automated workers will never do that. Civ 4 had fewer options for most of the game:
Riverside=farm or cottage
Flatland=cottage, farm possibly later game, workshop once state property is done.
Hill=mine.
Forest=chop.
Definitely a huge difference


In other news:
I like Civ 5 a lot. Is it perfect? No. But a lot of the mechanics a huge step forwards from Civ 4 (Trade routes, no slider, global happiness).

 

[gunburned]

One word , just one word,
Content.




Or in civ4 youd say plastics!