OK. I'm not going to complain about archer range not scaling in Civ V. But having ranged archer in Civ V is completely due to one unit per tile rule. I think we can do better than that. In terms of enemy road, don't you think it adds to strategy to destroy your own road/bridge to slow an enemy advance? I love Civ IV, played 500+ hours. I'm just brainstorming ways to add to the game.
What keeps you playing Civ IV?
- Thread starter 605civ
- Start date
OK. I'm not going to complain about archer range not scaling in Civ V. But having ranged archer in Civ V is completely due to one unit per tile rule. I think we can do better than that. In terms of enemy road, don't you think it adds to strategy to destroy your own road/bridge to slow an enemy advance? I love Civ IV, played 500+ hours. I'm just brainstorming ways to add to the game.
Well, I'd say that's exactly what the concept of enemy roads and the Commando promotion does. I am not quite sure anyone would actually pillage his own countryside just to slow down enemy troops for a turn or two - and risk his own troops beeing caught defensless. To much effort, too high the risk, too small the gain. So as an applicable alternative it makes some sense to let forces in enemy territory move slower than on home ground. It's not like they don't use the roads at all, but they just don't move as fast as they could. Reason for that could be lack of knowledge/orientation, the need to send scouts ahead to avoid traps, sabotage and the need to repair, civil resistance, or whatever else - unless the enemy has invested some effort to overcome the odds, which is perfectly represented by the Commando promotion.
Civilization is a diversion when I want a break. Civ is a fun diversion because it has pretty colours, it relates to interesting concepts, and its challenging.
I reinstalled Civ4 today and forgot just how challenging it is! Im only playing at Monarch, but already I had to restart one game because barbarians overran me. In my new game barbs capped my 3rd city, so now I have to have a break from Civ because its so difficult!
I reinstalled Civ4 today and forgot just how challenging it is! Im only playing at Monarch, but already I had to restart one game because barbarians overran me. In my new game barbs capped my 3rd city, so now I have to have a break from Civ because its so difficult!
JohnnyRockford
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2012
- Messages
- 12
I've owned the game for a year, but only ever finished twice--there's a new baby in the house so gametime is LIMITED. What I like about this game is the relaxed pace I can play at. I can only play for an hour or so late at night and sometimes only 1 or 2 times a week. So a Quick Speed game for me can last a month or longer.
The only other game similiar that i've played is Empire Earth--but it always come down to "build the bigger army and wipe out the enemy." Still fun though, if you're just looking to pick a fight. With Civ4, there is WAY MORE DEPTH to the game than just fighting. I was SHOCKED when I created a handful of infantry in a city that I recently captured from the Aztec civ, then used those units to attack a different Aztec civ. For the life of me I couldn't figure out why those infantry units would march to the front door, but wouldn't attack. Found out the hard way that individual units have nationalities in this game. Was mad as hell that I had to go rearranging all my damn units, but at the same time it brought me deeper into the whole experience.
Love this site too---there's some really great discussions/debates on here.
The only other game similiar that i've played is Empire Earth--but it always come down to "build the bigger army and wipe out the enemy." Still fun though, if you're just looking to pick a fight. With Civ4, there is WAY MORE DEPTH to the game than just fighting. I was SHOCKED when I created a handful of infantry in a city that I recently captured from the Aztec civ, then used those units to attack a different Aztec civ. For the life of me I couldn't figure out why those infantry units would march to the front door, but wouldn't attack. Found out the hard way that individual units have nationalities in this game. Was mad as hell that I had to go rearranging all my damn units, but at the same time it brought me deeper into the whole experience.
Love this site too---there's some really great discussions/debates on here.
Er... they do? News to me.
I play civ because it's flatters my systems-thinking mind alot.
I just loooove the micro of the early game, settling those first cities, carefully managing worker turns and tile improvements.
Setting up nice bulb-combinations to reach certain key techs quicker.. Managing diplomacy, savvy tech brokering, espionage..
There is too much to mention!
I have yet to find another game that comes even close to satisfy my mind the way civ4 does.
I just loooove the micro of the early game, settling those first cities, carefully managing worker turns and tile improvements.
Setting up nice bulb-combinations to reach certain key techs quicker.. Managing diplomacy, savvy tech brokering, espionage..
There is too much to mention!
I have yet to find another game that comes even close to satisfy my mind the way civ4 does.
What keeps me playing Civ IV is that I am still hopeless on Deity. In Civ V I was a Deity pro within 2 weeks.
The old rule of playing new civ games a difficulty lower to adjust to the changes doesn't apply here, in Civ V, Deity = Civ IV Emperor difficulty. Civ V Immortal = Civ IV Prince.
The term 'dumbed down' is an understatement. Civ V is still a fun game though, its an enjoyable easy peasy laid back empire builder. Civ IV on the other hand still remains a significant challenge game after game.
The old rule of playing new civ games a difficulty lower to adjust to the changes doesn't apply here, in Civ V, Deity = Civ IV Emperor difficulty. Civ V Immortal = Civ IV Prince.
The term 'dumbed down' is an understatement. Civ V is still a fun game though, its an enjoyable easy peasy laid back empire builder. Civ IV on the other hand still remains a significant challenge game after game.
JohnnyRockford
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2012
- Messages
- 12
Apparently. I tried it again when I was playing against Roosevelt. I captured Boston and created units there. But I couldn't use those units in an attack against New York. I had to bring in units from my capital city to do the job.
I'm pretty sure you can. Maybe you're not doing it right, ie you've already attacked with those units once that turn? I always whip down cities that I'm about to capture to attack and gift back later.
Let me rephrase that. No, you are mistaken, or playing a mod which introduces such a mechanic.
JohnnyRockford
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2012
- Messages
- 12
Okay I'll figure out what I'm doing wrong. Here I thought I found something cool about the game but instead I'm an idiot.
RD-BH
Human
@JohnnyRockford
There is something familiar about what you are describing ...
... I remember a game where troops refused to attack.
... I was either attacking a Holy City or a city with the same religion.
... I don't remember encountering that in a very long time.
There is something familiar about what you are describing ...
... I remember a game where troops refused to attack.
... I was either attacking a Holy City or a city with the same religion.
... I don't remember encountering that in a very long time.
Post a save, then it'll be easy to get to the bottom of it.
I find a common gotcha is the inability to load and unload a unit on the same turn. If the unload was a planned amphibious attack...
JohnnyRockford
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2012
- Messages
- 12
I don't have a save for it. I've started a new game, so I'll be sure to try it this time around. I'll pay more attention and post a new thread about it. Gonna be awhile though, because I don't get to play as often or for as long as I'd like. As soon as my kid turns 18 she is outta here so I can concentrate on getting gametime in!
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
I did find a complete version online and it should arrive just when my wife goes out of town, so I'll have plenty of time to skip chores and get immersed
What is the easiest start? Is there a leader that is easier to start with or should I go random? Otherwise, looks like pangea, standard map, temperate climate? Does climate or sea level matter that much to start? I used to play age of empires, so with the turns, it will be nice to have time to think about what I'm doing. I appreciate the advice.
I hope I'm not too late answering this.
As long as you play a low level, I suggest that you choose a leader who you think is/looks cool on a map you think would be interesting.
I have fond memories of Civ4 back when I was a new player. I'm still not very good (Generally struggling with Prince/Monarch difficulty) but those first games of Confucian Persia really got to me. This is hilarious. Do you have a link`?
AxisOfAllies
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2010
- Messages
- 12
For me, its the decisions. Figuring out how to best use what you have (i.e. leader traits, starting spot, available land for settling, resources, etc.), where to settle, where/when to attack, who to attack, which religion to adopt/which diplomatic block to ally yourself with, what tech to research next, etc. All of these factors keep the game fresh - even if its the hundredth time you've played a particular leader, you might choose a completely different path because of the circumstances you find yourself in.
This is especially true when playing multiplayer, since humans do a much better job of anticipating your next move, and it adds another dimension since you need to figure out what they're thinking as well.
Jex
Drafted Rifles Are OP
Civ 4 is one of the few games I've played that seems to be endlessly replayable. For context, I tend to focus on only one game at a time. I'll latch onto a game, sinking my claws into it. If the game is good and suitable, I'll immerse myself inside it. I'll spend weeks feasting on it's meaty interior, exhausting it of all it has to offer. Then, the game having fulfilled its usefulness, I'll burst out of the spent husk and move onto a new host to begin the cycle anew. So, what I'm saying is, I play games like the Xenomorph from Alien. Civ 4 is unique in that it's been part of this cycle multiple times, and each time I binged on it like the first time I played it.
Why? My guess is each new map is a radically different experience. The game mechanics remain fundamentally the same, but the objectives and how you can approach them radically change. The randomness of the map generator ensures that each experience will be novel, in its own unique way. One game will have you in a Buddhist love fest, the next will have you starting next to 3 pycho warmongers. Every game is new enough that it remains interesting, even if technically it's the 50th one. Who's counting?
Also, it's been darned fun rising through the difficulty ranks. So there may be an element of skill-building there. There's a psychological reward for improving at something, no matter how trivial, so that may be just enough of an incentive to turn the randomized maps into something more meaningful. There's a goal. Sure, it's merely a goal to get better at a computer game, but your brain doesn't care about that. It thinks it's important.
So, in short, I play Civ 4 because human psychology is strange. And it's been a great sport about that whole bursting out of its stomach thing.
Why? My guess is each new map is a radically different experience. The game mechanics remain fundamentally the same, but the objectives and how you can approach them radically change. The randomness of the map generator ensures that each experience will be novel, in its own unique way. One game will have you in a Buddhist love fest, the next will have you starting next to 3 pycho warmongers. Every game is new enough that it remains interesting, even if technically it's the 50th one. Who's counting?
Also, it's been darned fun rising through the difficulty ranks. So there may be an element of skill-building there. There's a psychological reward for improving at something, no matter how trivial, so that may be just enough of an incentive to turn the randomized maps into something more meaningful. There's a goal. Sure, it's merely a goal to get better at a computer game, but your brain doesn't care about that. It thinks it's important.
So, in short, I play Civ 4 because human psychology is strange. And it's been a great sport about that whole bursting out of its stomach thing.
Mec AntiKythera
King
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2010
- Messages
- 980
You traded one vassal situation for another? 
You traded one vassal situation for another?
The only capitulation scenario where you as the vassal have to continuously buy the master jewelry.
Similar threads
- Locked
