• We need to know your opinion about our social media accounts! Tell us here if you follow us on social media and what we could improve.

When Civilization was the most fun?

Civ 1 was the most fun because it was new, even though it was by far the simplest iteration. Civ IV the best version of the series.

Civ 1 had what may still be the best answer the series has had to date to unit stacking... There was a cap on stacking of 8 units per tile, and if you lost as a defender in an unfortified position (no. City or fort), you lost every unit in the stack. Civ 1 did it better than the current 1 UPT nonsense.
 
Civ 1 was the most fun because it was new, even though it was by far the simplest iteration. Civ IV the best version of the series.

Civ 1 had what may still be the best answer the series has had to date to unit stacking... There was a cap on stacking of 8 units per tile, and if you lost as a defender in an unfortified position (no. City or fort), you lost every unit in the stack. Civ 1 did it better than the current 1 UPT nonsense.
You might have a point. Civ 4 and civ 1 are both good.
 
I first squatted in a friend's home playing Civ1. He thought this game could please me, for some reason. I was really hooked up in my first play at whatever difficulty level it was (Settler ?), discovering how to improve the land and such, discovering I can settle new cities, discovering there is other civs in the game... I was really scared by AI, they felt so invasive, whereas I was quiet in my little garden. obviously, by a point I asked my friend : "what is the goal of the game if there is one ?" I don't remember his answer, but most probably something like "conquering the world" or such. I didn't push my game too much after I discovered India, but it still seems I played quite a lot.

Well after, a guy in my classroom gave me a CD with Civ2... I was like "Hmm ok, so there is a Civ2, but I don't know if I want to play it" Then I played it. I got absorbed by the graphics, so much better than Civ1. To me that was the main reason to play the game : graphics. The false 3D was cool too. Then I wondered how to beat the game, and I really discovered Civ by then. I had plenty of remarks to do, that I wrote on many many many papers during my plays. It was part of the fun for me I guess. Then, I synthesised those remarks into a not too long document that I sent to Firaxis.

So, in a sense, the series was not finished, eventhough the only point I saw first in Civ2 was better graphics and some tweaks (like the false 3D). Also, I was like "the game is too easy to crack, Deity is a piece of cake, AI is far too passive". I also wanted multiplayer for that reason. Now that I find my limit in Deity, I do not feel the same. I could beat Deity in Civ6 a couple times, but it was not a piece of cake. And I'm not like youtubers who win their Deity games 99% of the time. There is far too much randomness for that : map generator that puts you near toundra, deserts, water, all at the same time, or city-States all around you that prevent you to settle, not talking about other AIs that can send all their army in your direction as soon as they reached you, and then you have no chance at all, I even saw a youtuber (Marbozir) lost this way once. That's... not what I expected. Even Civ5, eventhough I beat it on Deity only once, was more fair. So I can't say I really appreciate Civ6.

Honestly, eventhough beating it on Deity is a chore, I think Civ3 was fine. I loved the second palace. AIs were less likely to forward settle you since that city would be full of corruption. I must say city borders worked quite well by then. It was not the same with the following game at all, sadly. Civ4 I was invested in multiplayer, subscribed to this league ladder site and even managed to get in the first 20 worldwide for a moment (short). I was not the best player of all times, but I had my good moment on it, performance-wise. As to single player, I don't even remember if I beat Deity. Civ4 MP was very stressful. It was a totally different game than SP. It could definitely be qualified of e-sport. It was insane. In comparison, Civ5 MP¨was totally lame. For once, I bought it for it. Huge deception. I didn't buy Civ6, got it free on EGS and for expansions, "got them from a friend".

I wish Civ7 previews will make me buy the game. (I have hopes and other ideas, see in my signature)
 
Civ 1 was probably one of the very first pc games I ever played after Wolfenstein 3D. Very addictive, i still play it from time to time. Civ 5 was nice, but forcing you to play tall wasn't much fun and I say this while playing CIV VI and mostly not going over 10 cities.
CIV VI is the most fun for me, even tough late game can be a chore, going back to standard turns and keeping strategy as much KISS as possible to win makes the chore bearable even on Emperor. Just wish I could have go on Leader Pass with the Nintendo Switch.
 
When I first played civ 2 at the library, I was just obsessed with it. I got lucky that the computer lab operator would give me hours to play that day I tried civilization 2 when I visited the library. Every turn would seem like progress. The town would get bigger, and the wonders would be built. Civ 4 was the actual one that impressed me with the graphics later on in life because it wasn't out yet, but civ 2 was just better than civ 1 by many things. I used to spend hours in civ 1 at home and spending hours at the library on civ 2 was kind of limited so there was a time where I missed out on civilization 2. Until later I was able to get it off a friend. I tried civ 2, saved up some money for civ 4 and got the whole expansion. I was going to go for civ 3 but civ 4 was out on sale in Target so I bought that instead and the graphics were 3D and were way better than civ 2 and obviously civ 3 so I skipped it. civ 4 was so entertaining, I spent lots of time online on Gamespy, the old multiplayer server for Firaxis. I had a better computer then and I was able to play more often than on this computer I have now. I could play online but on single player since it gets kind of slow when going online.
 
This game just gets worse and worse. I used to be able to win at Emperor but now it's literally impossible.

Is the game trying to tell me something?

Even a simplistic early-warrior rush doesn't work. The AI has multiple cities and horsemen before I can do anything to respond. Look at how close the AI has me hemmed in. EVERY game plays on some variation of this now. But it didn't used to?!
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot from 2023-07-16 06-33-59.png
    Screenshot from 2023-07-16 06-33-59.png
    3.2 MB · Views: 53
This is what I think is difficult for the game devs. Emperor is my fun level that I play on because I can get a religion and win any victory condition I want without touching any of the settings. Standard speed, standard map, standard resources, etc. Just pick a civ and play. You add in secret societies and corporations and it is even easier. The more you add to the defaults to easier it is for the human.

But I have been playing Civ since it came out in 1991. Already had RailRoad Tycoon, and when my birthday came around in October I got Civilization from my dad. I am not sure how many thousands of hours I have into this series but it trumps every game and even many hobbies. Older now but I still probably get a few hundred hours in a year. Hard to balance a game series that has fans who have been playing for over 30years with new players.


Seems like I've played my last of Civ6, because it is now so punishing and unpleasant and unnecessarily difficult that it's impossible to play it without softening up the options to reduce the AI's bonuses.

If Civ7 is like this, I probably won't ever touch it. But with that being said, I tried playing Civ2 again recently and it's nowhere near as fun as I remember.

Maybe I'm done with Civ altogether... what a thought!
 
When I first played civ 2 at the library, I was just obsessed with it. I got lucky that the computer lab operator would give me hours to play that day I tried civilization 2 when I visited the library. Every turn would seem like progress. The town would get bigger, and the wonders would be built. Civ 4 was the actual one that impressed me with the graphics later on in life because it wasn't out yet, but civ 2 was just better than civ 1 by many things. I used to spend hours in civ 1 at home and spending hours at the library on civ 2 was kind of limited so there was a time where I missed out on civilization 2. Until later I was able to get it off a friend. I tried civ 2, saved up some money for civ 4 and got the whole expansion. I was going to go for civ 3 but civ 4 was out on sale in Target so I bought that instead and the graphics were 3D and were way better than civ 2 and obviously civ 3 so I skipped it. civ 4 was so entertaining, I spent lots of time online on Gamespy, the old multiplayer server for Firaxis. I had a better computer then and I was able to play more often than on this computer I have now. I could play online but on single player since it gets kind of slow when going online.



Same here, I began with Civ2. It left a lot to the imagination, which gave you scope to roleplay with it.

It was extremely good fun at the time, but we can see (today) how flawed it was in design and gameplay.

Ignorance is bliss, I think.
 
This game just gets worse and worse. I used to be able to win at Emperor but now it's literally impossible.

Is the game trying to tell me something?

Even a simplistic early-warrior rush doesn't work. The AI has multiple cities and horsemen before I can do anything to respond. Look at how close the AI has me hemmed in. EVERY game plays on some variation of this now. But it didn't used to?!
The AI bonuses are massively frontloaded. The same trick as always, only military units and settlers for early game. Turtle up and develop your empire. From frigates and onwards you can start to snowball the map. Or bombers.
 
The AI bonuses are massively frontloaded. The same trick as always, only military units and settlers for early game. Turtle up and develop your empire. From frigates and onwards you can start to snowball the map. Or bombers.


The early game bonuses are insurmountable (now), and the AI is quite competitive into the late game. It's often impossible to eliminate them all before one of them launches a space rocket.

I still think something is off with early game difficulty... but must just be me
 
This game just gets worse and worse. I used to be able to win at Emperor but now it's literally impossible.

Is the game trying to tell me something?

Even a simplistic early-warrior rush doesn't work. The AI has multiple cities and horsemen before I can do anything to respond. Look at how close the AI has me hemmed in. EVERY game plays on some variation of this now. But it didn't used to?!
Seems you had a terrible starting location. Toundra, water, forward settling AI. The best is to reroll. Your second city was tempting, but suboptimal I would say. At his point, the best you could do is waiting for horses or iron, or at least build a couple spearmen. Personnally I never warrior rush like this. But in this case, if your second city was in the place of the one you besieged, you would have had iron and could take the other one with swordsmen. And maybe get a fourth city (the natural wonder one) while doing so.
 
The early game bonuses are insurmountable (now), and the AI is quite competitive into the late game. It's often impossible to eliminate them all before one of them launches a space rocket.

I still think something is off with early game difficulty... but must just be me
That is like me saying running a sub 4 minute mile impossible. Might be for me, but tons of runners do it every year.

I crush the AI with standard settings. I will give you that deity is a bit tricky and you won't win every game, but if you get past the initial rush you are normally setup for at least a shot at winning. If you allow for saving/reloading I am guessing you could win almost every game.
 
My first Civ game was Civ II, which was fun...but at the time I had plenty of other games to play which were also fun, so that was just a phase.

Then Civ IV came along, at which point at which I realized that I could modify an already-solid game's local files for endless customization and replay value. And thus I began my journey as a modder and the series has been increasingly fun ever since.
 
Then Civ IV came along, at which point at which I realized that I could modify an already-solid game's local files for endless customization and replay value. And thus I began my journey as a modder and the series has been increasingly fun ever since.
Are you of the belief or notion, somehow, you CAN'T do this with Civ2?
 
Same here, I began with Civ2. It left a lot to the imagination, which gave you scope to roleplay with it.

It was extremely good fun at the time, but we can see (today) how flawed it was in design and gameplay.

Ignorance is bliss, I think.
I didnt start with Civ 2...
 
Civ2 was very mod friendly for non graphical stuff (I never tried making my own visual stuff). A lot of it was basically editing text files
 
Civ2 was very mod friendly for non graphical stuff (I never tried making my own visual stuff). A lot of it was basically editing text files
It was far easier for graphical modding than any other iteration, because you just edited bitmaps.
 
Top Bottom