Which aspect of Civ 4 do you dislike the most?

[Xanikk999]

My biggest pet peeve is we get a spreadsheet for advisors but no really people. We had advisor heads in civ3 and an advisor council in civ2 with real animations. I especially miss the civ 2 advisors because it was funny.

Also the fact railroads are less effective then in previous civs. In the other civs railroads dont expend any movement points when you move on railroads. So you could move infinite moves as long as it was on a railroad. It seems unbalanced to people who have only played civ 4 but it really wasnt if you actually played the other versions.

 

[Abdomination]

Diplomacy certainly hasnt been very great in civ 3 or 4

 

[InFlux5]

My biggest pet peeve is we get a spreadsheet for advisors but no really people. We had advisor heads in civ3 and an advisor council in civ2 with real animations. I especially miss the civ 2 advisors because it was funny.

Also the fact railroads are less effective then in previous civs. In the other civs railroads dont expend any movement points when you move on railroads. So you could move infinite moves as long as it was on a railroad. It seems unbalanced to people who have only played civ 4 but it really wasnt if you actually played the other versions.

The "people" who were your "advisors" in previous versions were totally useless. You liked the council from Civ 2? I'm pretty sure I turned those annoying movies off after my 2nd game.

And I'm glad the railroads are more realistic. You don't think moving your entire army to the other side of the world in one turn is unbalanced? What WOULD be unbalanced in your book? This was one of the best changes in Civ IV.

 

[sfuller]

1) I want to purge cities of religons that I don't like. I'll take the population hit.

2) I want to earn techs when I destroy a civilization.

That's all.

 

[Morten Blaabjerg]

The "people" who were your "advisors" in previous versions were totally useless. You liked the council from Civ 2? I'm pretty sure I turned those annoying movies off after my 2nd game.

And I'm glad the railroads are more realistic. You don't think moving your entire army to the other side of the world in one turn is unbalanced? What WOULD be unbalanced in your book? This was one of the best changes in Civ IV.

The advisors added character, if nothing else. They weren't personally so important to me, but I'm personally sorry to see the "citizen row" of a city gone. In every earlier build they've made seeing your population at a glance very easy, unique and interesting. It was a brilliant way of showing the gradual increasing specialization of the population, with a touch of irony with the elvis entertainer appearing, as you took people "off the work of the land".

In Civ4 the specialist system has been improved in some ways, but in others detract from what made the citizens so iconographically unique.

As for the railroads and unlimited movement - it made the point of the industrial revolution come across very efficiently. For someone like me, who loves history, it spelled marvels to see how railroads drastically changed industry, trade and warfare. You still had to build the railroads in the first place, and by this you earned a huge advantage. I thought that was fair enough. In Civ4 you get a slight advantage, but railroads doesn't really suddenly, drastically change the game, as railroads did in earlier builds. That was what I liked about it. Yes it was unbalancing, but it was also very much unbalancing in history, making european and american expansion possible in a way the world never had witnessed before. It gave birth to a new kind of warfare of the masses, of the US Civil War and WWI in particular.

So for me, lessening the bonus of RR's, also makes the point of the industrial revolution come across in a lesser way. It makes taking the time to build a railroad system much less rewarding, less powerful and much less revolutionizing. But these days automated workers do the trick anyway, so you may even hardly notice if tiles have rails or not. Lesser reward, less history for me, less incredible, because it doesn't really change the game dramatically anymore.

Don't get me wrong - I love the game as much as I hate losing it on the higher levels, and this is a lot! These details just annoy me the more.

When they captured such things so brilliantly in earlier builds, why the h**k couldn't they keep it in? Or didn't they realize how great an impact some of the series' great concepts had? Apparently they thought it had too great an impact on the game, but I loved the way that suddenly the game had to be played very differently, which made a historical point get through to me.

 

[Mirc]

I like the new Combat System, however they could have kept attack/defense points of units. Not eliminating bonuses against certain units though. So I voted option 3. BUT I LOVE THE GAME ANYWAY!

 

[Freedom]

I really, really hate diplomacy. I think just about every single change made from III to IV was a mistake. Well, maybe it's not that bad. Where is my foreign advisor to tell me when I am close to a deal? Where is the fun in negotiating prices for things instead of simply pressing a button where the opponent will put absolutely everything on the table (very boring, by the way )? What is this nonsense about being "worst enemy" by virtue of doing well? It's like, if a civilization that is a hundred times more powerful and could feasibly knock me out with a click of a button comes knocking for a fair trade I certainly wouldn't tell him to screw off. Why can't I demand anything (because it's redded out, of course)? It's just stupid...

 

[Jaytravis]

Here's my laundry list of little nitpicks, many of them echoed before me.

My first gripe is the elimination of little things that were staple touches of the previous entries: 1) Railroads not behaving as they once did, 2) Random Events, 3) How the City Interface works (Bleh, can't stand the icon-driven system now). 4) Familiar units in the game, like the hidden nationality Privateers, are now gone. 5) The usefulness of the city advisors and screens.

The performance of the game is another detractor -- the 3d engine just didn't add anything for me to merit the slowness it incurred. And the nature of the engine means we won't likely be seeing the hundreds of original unit graphics that we had with Civ3.

Which brings me to my next point: Modding. I'm sure for the more programatically minded, the dozens of XML files are great, but for the casual modder, like me, who just enjoys adding new units here and there, finds this system far more difficult than even Civ3 (which at least had a GUI screen to help). I wish there had been some Mod-based GUI's that would edit the XML files for you.

And there seems to be a lack of units to build. The Ancient age seems good, you have all these numerous types to build and play with, but it buzzes by so fast I rarely have a chance to use any of them (I wish the turns didn't chew up so many years in the ancient times -- even if things took longer to build/research, I'd like to feel like the Roman Empire for once). Then post-muskets, there seems to hardly be any choices at all as to what to build, sort of defeating the purpose of all the new combat bonuses they put in.

Ok, whine mode off. It's a fun game and as a long-time fan, I'm glad to see the Civ line continue, but I think there's too many misses in this entry to make it have much lasting replayability for me.

 

[steview]

I do like the game, played it to death first on noble, then prince then monarch.

Few gripes, diplomacy..going from friendly to cautious and then being attacked a few turns later..after hundreds of years friendship seems a bit wierd..all because the leader changes religion?.

Killing catherine to her last city..and her attitude is 'annoyed' lol

I find the colours fudged sometimes. At war with germany as england i missed units frequently.

I personally dont like the way arty works now.

Spaceship too easy to build, but can turn it off..

would have liked real armies instead of units .

Biggest one, ancient and med age are nicely paced.

Ind and modern fly by and space is not far away

But i DO like the game a lot.

 

[Commander Bello]

Religion. A complete mess. They could have put so much in it, but they utterly failed, since they "had" to use real life names - and then they made artificial somethings from it. Just a crazy decisioin.

Next to it are the system requirements. Once again, a proof of a decision which seems to have been taken after a long night at the local bar. Almost no gain for very high cost.

Moddability seems to be the next. In principle everything is moddable, yet you have to know everything by heart, and have to avoid things, which for unknown reasons have been hardcoded.

Then diplomacy. You have to offer 5 expansive techs, and somebody won't even give you Wheat for it? Come on!

 

[mystikmind2005]

There is only one thing which stands out from older civ games... what have they done to the precious bombard?!?! AAAARRRRGGH!! Lets face it, the AI loves to cheatingly win combat battles that it has no right to win. I used to be able to reduce this cheating effect by bombarding their units into the red before attacking. but no more (sad face). It's back to civ3 for me

 

[Zombie69]

AI limitations. I understand, however, that a computer doesn't think like a person, i.e. irrationally and out of the box.

Idem.

Since this was left out, i voted for system requirements. Why this game needs to be 3D is beyond me.

 

[Zombie69]

the graphics. I didn't play civ 2 or 3 to look at pretty things. I don't even find civ4's graphics to be even very good to justify their system usage. There should be a mod or patch that allows for 2d civ1,2,3 style play.

A mod with pure 2D civ 1 graphics? I'd jump on that in an instant!

 

[Slip de Garcon]

The frequent (if varied) crashing.

 

[Frostyboy]

On my PC it gets too slow

And the Wonder videos are Sluggish

 

[Traflagar]

I can't stand it when Cathorine turns her back on me. I think she is hot!!!

 

[gunkulator]

My list:

3D graphics - a pointless addition to what is essentially a 2D game

No unit health bar - Civ2 and Civ3 had it and it was very helpful

Selecting a unit in a stack - Where's Civ3's right click?

Icon based city screen - Can anyone really figure out what the build options are just by looking?

Redded out items - Ok, I know you don't like me. I get it.

Spies - I usually end up Zzzz'ing or hitting the space bar every turn. There's nothing for them to do.

 

[King Flevance]

I have to say System reqs too. The graphics arent anything too snazzy. Sure it looks nice. But that's it, nice. There is plenty that is unflavored IMO, mainly anything that is GUI. As it was said, patches have adressed this, but this game is more demanding than a couple MMOs out there and it is TBS. I dont care what anyone says, there is something wrong with that.

Other: "We demand you cancel your deals with the vile *insert seemingly random civ here*"

I think it would be nice to use your foreign advisor here before making any decisions. Sometimes AIs fluctuate in attitudes, friendships get nulled or enemies become friends. If enough time passes and you havent been watching your relations in the last 10 turns, you can screw yourself here. I have done it a couple times.

That is one you missed on here IMO. Advisors, though I guess it could tie in with Civilopedia stuff. Advisors were thrown together in like 20 minutes before they published or something.

 

[mystikmind2005]

I think that the missing ranged attack from artillery and ships against units is a complete and utter disaster. For me, it destroyes the game. I mean who want's to watch five hard one frigates sacrifice themselves against one lone AI frigate?? It is rediculous, you need to be able to bombard the prick.

 

[TRONBurger!]

Diplomacy can be such a *****. All the negatives you can acrue with a Civ you may have met ONCE is ridiculous. I like the religeon hate, but not if I've traded with someone, or declared war on someone, or I refused to give away freaking 5 future techs to Izzy or Monty. Ease up a bit there Firaxis!

Oh yeah, and would it be so tough to make era bonuses to high-grade units? IE, a helicopter gets a 25% bonus against a melee unit. I know I'm harping on an old subject, but it really wouldn't be that difficult to fix!