Chukchi Husky
Lone Wolf
I've always found Civilization IV too hard. I don't think I've ever finished a game even on the lowest difficulty.
Which game is better: Civ IV or Civ V?
- Thread starter Leathaface
- Start date
Why am I not surprised? You're obviously wrong and may god have mercy on your soul.
Civ IV is clearly the best.
Civ 5 introduced some interesting concepts both visually and in gameplay, but Civ IV (particulary BTS) is just superior hands down in almost every category. Frankly, I don't mind SOD's, but to the extent that folks hate them, 1UPT isn't an improvement... its just too much of a mess logistically.
I think the SOD/too many units "issue" could have been better be resolved using Civ V's resource requirement system, and Civ III's "resource depletion" function.
Last edited:
Synobun
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2006
- Messages
- 24,884
Civ 5 has better culture/tech than Civ 4. If I want expansion/war, I go Civ 4.
Lexicus
Deity
I like that the Civ 4 tech tree has some "or" logic. I also hate population=science. I like the sliders much, much better.
We x-posted. I said more about Civ 5. For me its mostly the 1UPT that was the dealbreaker. I'm not in love with the graphics either... everything looks too similar.
However using clouds as fog-of-war was just magnificent... so beautiful and fits so well with the "God's eye view" concept... I wish they's stuck with that for Civ 6.
I also like the policy trees. That was a better approach to civics. There's even a mod out there which changes the name of your country to match the policies. Very cool.
While 1upt was annoying due to the logistics, the maps where what killed it for me. Everything was the same. Rivers were big but that was it. At least in IV, the land could determine your strat. In V it just didn't matter. It was the lack of WOW. The wonders weren't that wonderful. Great people weren't really great.
The great works system in V was a nice addition. I really liked getting the splash screen which actually displayed the work of Art that you produced.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 9,305
@Commodore - Interesting. I don't suppose it also changes 1 UPT? If so I'd be interested in the name of it.
I like Civ4's "or" tech tree as well. I agree with Sommerswerd that the logistics of 1 UPT is the real killer.
Rhye's of Civilization in Civ IV also does the country-name change-by-civics thing. Definitely cool.
I like Civ4's "or" tech tree as well. I agree with Sommerswerd that the logistics of 1 UPT is the real killer.
Rhye's of Civilization in Civ IV also does the country-name change-by-civics thing. Definitely cool.
Unfortunately, no. 1UPT is still in and I don't know of any mods that get rid of it. And given how unpopular that mechanic is, I'm guessing if there isn't a mod to get rid of it, then it might not be possible.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 9,305
Yeah... I'm familiar with hard-coded limits in Civ. Oh well. I have plenty to keep me entertained between III, IV, and other (non-Civ) games.
Same here. I've been spending a lot of time with Warhammer 40k Gladius since I bought it.
Anyway, if you ever do go back to Civ 5, the name of the mod that removes happiness is called "Really Advanced Setup". It adds a bunch of options to the Advanced Setup menu when you start a new game, one of which being the option to turn off the happiness mechanic.
Ryika
Lazy Wannabe Artista
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 9,393
Beyond Earth basically already works like that. There is the health system, but the "ideal" way to play is just to ignore it and the penalties that come with it in the early game (as the benefit of extra cities outweighs the penalties of negative health until you're at -40 or something like that). Later on, you will be swimming in positive health anyway.
As for the 1upt thing, there are mods that remove it.
This one for example: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1285970979
The real problem is that AIs won't make proper use of it.
Meh, the AI always seems to struggle with any mod that messes with core mechanics of the game. I remember in the heyday of Civ 3 modding it was generally accepted that trying to get the AI to properly use some of the more innovative ideas was an effort in futility and the question of "can the AI use this properly?" was a question that should be largely ignored. Otherwise mods would have remained extremely narrow in their scope.
Ryika
Lazy Wannabe Artista
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 9,393
That works fine for yield-based game mechanics as you can just increase some modifiers to make up for it. On the battlefield, that's a wholly different story, as stacked defensive units become basically invincible against any army. That's already a problem with 1upt, as armies will clog up and can be picked up one after the other, but when you have 5 times the fire power and the AI still attacks with a carpet of unstacked units that defensive power becomes rather comical. 
ashendashin
King
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2016
- Messages
- 989
The AI barely works in the first place. It depends on whether or not it's possible to rewrite the AI itself and if the modder is willing and able to do it, as shown by Vox Populi for Civ5. It's weird that I see it brought up more often outside of CFC (barring the community patch project forum). But then I was uncertain about mentioning it around these parts.
Yeah it would seem the player would become almost unstoppable at that point.
The thing that really bothers me about 1UPT in Civ is that the general concept of 1UPT doesn't have to be terrible. There are plenty of turn-based hex war games that came before Civ 5 that also did 1UPT and the mechanic works perfectly fine without being a hindrance to the player or the AI. Now I know Civ isn't supposed to be strictly a war game, but it's like Firaxis just simply didn't do any research on how other games handled 1UPT and just decided to wing it. And the result we got was an absolute mess.
Ryika
Lazy Wannabe Artista
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 9,393
I think there isn't even that much wrong with the system, or rather, the things that are wrong, could be fixed pretty easily. The only thing that would need some more work is the terrain, because it hinders the flow of combat so significantly.
The Civil War Scenario is a perfect example of how combat SHOULD work in Civ 5; if you haven't played it, I very much suggest you give it a try.
The Civil War Scenario is a perfect example of how combat SHOULD work in Civ 5; if you haven't played it, I very much suggest you give it a try.
I remember in IV when the nerfed siege units so they couldn't kill units. The devs couldn't even be bothered to change the AI programming to adjust for it.
A ship would show up at your shore for that dreaded naval invasion catching you with your pants down only to unload a stack of siege only next to your city with 0 possibility of ever taking your city. So if the devs themselves have those kind of issues, what chance would modders have?
A ship would show up at your shore for that dreaded naval invasion catching you with your pants down only to unload a stack of siege only next to your city with 0 possibility of ever taking your city. So if the devs themselves have those kind of issues, what chance would modders have?
Lexicus
Deity
Similar threads
