Why is Civ 4 so difficult??

And most of your arguments will essentially boil down to "that's not how Civ 4 did it". Despite all the questionable things like religion being the greatest factor in diplomatic relations, suicide arty (I'm sorry, but this is really [EXPLETIVE REDACTED] stupid, and I will rant about it until the end of time), and...I could just go on. Civ 4 did a lot of great things, but it's also important to realize it's not perfect and not the pinnacle of strategy gaming.

Though it would be amusing to see you guys say the latter to fans of Europa Universalis games. I'll need to get some popcorn for that.
 
Let's be serious for one minute..
IV is frequently high on "best PC games of all time" lists (2 too, of course..for it's time maybe the most awesome one).

So..what arguments?
They are among the best games ever created, nobody would argue that Baldurs Gate 1 & 2 were among the best either for rpgs.
Everybody seems to know that, but in some small villages around Rome..(who did read Asterix? :b).

Despite all the questionable things like religion being the greatest factor in diplomatic relations
Wrong btw, it's 1 possible factor but Shaka will not love Gandhi for having the same Reli.
Half the Civs do not care that much about Reli, there are diplo modifiers that can be far more important.
 
Staying out of religion (even if most cities have it) but with Open Borders, trading resources, choosing right civics, not trading with worst enemies and joining into wars (sometimes passive that lasts forever) can give more than just going into certain religion :) But religion is nice - can make multiple sides of world... and you... stay alive between them all but never be clear 1st target (with some help to smaller guys to keep wars going without capitulation)... with single warrior per city up to industrial era :D
 
Civ 4 did a lot of great things, but it's also important to realize it's not perfect and not the pinnacle of strategy gaming.
.

Why? Why is this important? Is this important to you? Sorry, but I don't get your point. No one here has said Civ IV is perfect. But there is no debating that it is a great strategy game. All games have flaws. Europa Universalis IV, of which I'm a huge fan, has more flaws that I can count, but it is still a fantastic game.

Is this rant in some way related to you being a huge Civ V fan or some other version? I'm just curious. I did read that you want to "come back" to Civ IV. When is the last time you played it?

As for Religion...no...it is just one piece of the diplomatic menu and not the most important. It can be just a valuable to stay out of a Religion.

Your argument of "that is how Civ IV does it" lacks as much depth as that point itself. Most here have played Civ V.. I've played it extensively myself. It's very clear to me what is the better and deeper strategy game.

Anyway, I'm falling into same trap this thread should otherwise have avoided - becoming a IV vs. V, or anything else thread. Already been plenty of those and they usually end up nowhere glorious. Rather than just about helping a new player out, which is all anyone is really trying to do here.

edit: Also curious as to what your "opinion" is on the pinnacle of strategy.
 
Last edited:
Civ 4 did a lot of great things, but it's also important to realize it's not perfect and not the pinnacle of strategy gaming.

No one around here says that CIV is perfect. You will find numerous threads, a couple of which have had recent posts in the past few weeks, discussing what various people would like to see changed to improve CIV, in their opinions. Almost everyone thinks it could be better but everyone has their own idea of better. :lol:

It used to be that people hoped Firaxis would check comments here and go the way the posters were saying in future versions of Civ. However, after CivV and CivVI, most posters have given up on that and are hoping that modders will add the changes to their mods or make new mods with them.
 
Europa Universalis IV, of which I'm a huge fan, has more flaws that I can count, but it is still a fantastic game.

Is this rant in some way related to you being a huge Civ V fan or some other version?
Well, I don't appreciate some of the attitudes I see here. Reminds me of the attitudes of some fans of EU4 and other grand strategy games towards 4x games.
 
Well, I'm not really seeing any "attitudes" here. Seems a rather genial and intelligent, and mostly helpful, dialogue up to this point.

I respect that others like other versions of Civilization or V even, and certainly many that just played and enjoyed them all no matter. However, there's no question that the game changed significantly after IV to cater to a larger audience. Good for some folks and not for others.

i will point out, knowing the members here and in this thread, that there are some extremely good players ..advanced strategists..giving feedback here. And those players did not find V met there expectations of quality. That is what it is. I do know that there are/were some very good V players as well. But having played both I can clearly state as fact that IV is a far deeper strategic game. And I don't classify that as just opinion. V did have some good for some people..I don't question that.

Is IV the best strategy game ever or the "pinnacle"? Something like that is always debatable. But it is certainly up there and many many folks and talking heads think so.
 
While I've got the attention of several Civ 4 veterans, I may as well ask for some pointers. Specifically, a reminder of how Civ 4 did things versus Civ 5.

Some observations:
-I remember the mantra "food is king" now. Slaves seem to grow faster than the grumbling can dissipate.
-Techs can be dead ends or unneeded for certain paths. It seems I can skip Theology (and Divine Right) altogether on a Space Race. What other techs may be skipped in certain situations?
-I had more questions, but I can't remember them at the moment. I'll add them later.
 
Techs can be dead ends or unneeded for certain paths. It seems I can skip Theology (and Divine Right) altogether on a Space Race. What other techs may be skipped in certain situations?

Polytheism and Monotheism if you're not on path requiring an early state religion.
Aesthetics (and Literature, Drama, and Music) if you're not on a cultural path and/or find it easier to take those wonders by conquest.
 
Parthenon is a nice wonder though (if you have Marble, of course).
Not sure why you'd skip a nice +10% research for Monasteries.
Aesthetics is a nice trade chip.
National Epic is important.
Theatres are nice, cheap culture buildings that are even nicer with Dye.

Just to clarify, when I say skip, I mean not even trading for the tech, not just ignoring teching them yourself.
 
While I've got the attention of several Civ 4 veterans, I may as well ask for some pointers. Specifically, a reminder of how Civ 4 did things versus Civ 5.

Some observations:
-I remember the mantra "food is king" now. Slaves seem to grow faster than the grumbling can dissipate.
-Techs can be dead ends or unneeded for certain paths. It seems I can skip Theology (and Divine Right) altogether on a Space Race. What other techs may be skipped in certain situations?
-I had more questions, but I can't remember them at the moment. I'll add them later.

I assume by Slaves you mean citizens. That is, your population is exceeding your happy cap. First, and generally, whipping needs to be used wisely and judiciously. Unless gearing up for some early rush, the main things I whip in the very early game are settlers and/or workers. Settlers and workers are produced using food and hammers, so this allows one to efficiently turn food into hammers via the overflow mechanic. On normal speed you get 10 turns of unhappiness per whip, regardless of number of citizens whipped. So generally you want to 2 or 3 pop whip things to get more bang for your unhappy buck. Although 1 poppers are find too. I will often 1 pop a monument if needed or granary. Certainly not out of the question at all..just a matter of balance. Generally you want to avoid overwhipping.

However, if you city is growing fast and you don't want unhappiness, you can adjust tiles to slow growth. Also, a good reason city overlap is actually a good thing in Civ IV for tile sharing. But also, note that those unhappy citizen can be whip for the same amount of production, so you can whip them away.

Here is a little primer I did on whip mechanics...a link to links..it's on the basic side but should at least give you an idea of some usage and the overflow mechanic:

https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/going-from-noble-tooo.468987/#post-11671673

Theology and DR are not exactly dead end techs, as they do lead to other techs, but yeah, I most often do not tech these and often don't even trade for them. Here are some dead end techs I can think of offhand:

Archery - almost never tech or trade for it unless Horse Archers
Horse Back Riding - Again Horse Archers
Communism - However, State Property is an excellent civic in non-corp Space Games. Often this is a liberalism target in Space Games for me.
Military Tradition - However, this tech contains one of the best units in the game...another Liberalism target
Military Science - Almost never ever tech this or trade for it

Music is needed for Military Tradition (and it's predecessors) - can be good to go for it just for the Great Artist which can be used for a Golden Age

Literature and Aesths obviously have some good wonders for any game...and Space too, but usually you want Marble or IND leader

Drama I never tech, but may trade for. The ability to raise culture for happiness at times may be needed or Theatres for happiness

Mass Media - I'm pretty sure this is dead end and only really needed for UN victory or if you want the wonders or corp, but not really a corp for Space

I think there are several late game techs that aren't needed for Space, including that one that has the Space Elevator..strangely - in BTS
 
I assume by Slaves you mean citizens. That is, your population is exceeding your happy cap. First, and generally, whipping needs to be used wisely and judiciously. Unless gearing up for some early rush, the main things I whip in the very early game are settlers and/or workers. Settlers and workers are produced using food and hammers, so this allows one to efficiently turn food into hammers via the overflow mechanic. On normal speed you get 10 turns of unhappiness per whip, regardless of number of citizens whipped. So generally you want to 2 or 3 pop whip things to get more bang for your unhappy buck. Although 1 poppers are find too. I will often 1 pop a monument if needed or granary. Certainly not out of the question at all..just a matter of balance. Generally you want to avoid overwhipping.
Oh, I meant the "We will never forget your cruel oppression!" (yes you will, in 10 turns) malus. I don't think it's a good idea to stack those too much. I've read the articles on whipping, and I do prefer 2 pop whips.
 
Most techs have their use, Archery i.e. can avoid losing on deity against barbs.
I would also disagree on Drama, it's making Music cheaper and can also be traded well often.
So if i know nobody will get Music faster than me, or very unlikely, it's making much sense to tech Drama before.

Divine Right is one of the worst, yup..if you can afford spending so many beakers, you don't need those wonders.

For slavery, well stacking up whip anger until it's not possible anymore can make sense when you got your military breakout unit. It's unimportant if that city will recover, if the units you whipped help you winning the game ;)
 
Despite all the questionable things like religion being the greatest factor in diplomatic relations, suicide arty (I'm sorry, but this is really [EXPLETIVE REDACTED] stupid, and I will rant about it until the end of time), and...I could just go on. Civ 4 did a lot of great things, but it's also important to realize it's not perfect and not the pinnacle of strategy gaming.

As others have said, religion is not everything in diplomacy. There are other ways to make friends or enemies in this game. But it is a big part, and I think that works really well. It adds a lot of variety and strategy to the game. Sometimes all the AIs will wind up in one religious bloc, and you need to figure out how to sow discord among them so they don't all peacefully tech together. Sometimes there'll be 3 or 4 religions out there and you've got to make a tough decision about whether to pick a side and cultivate one really good friend, at the risk of annoying other AIs, or trying to stay neutral. I think Civ IV's diplomacy is really strategically rich and also allows for good roleplaying. Comparing Civ V and Civ VI's diplomacy (in which religion is way less prominent), I think Civ IV functions far better.

As for the suicide artillery, this is a common complaint about stack warfare and I sort of get it. It's weird and not intuitive, and there probably is a more elegant system out there. Nonetheless, it does work fairly well, once you get used to it. I agree it doesn't make a lot of sense--but hey, nothing about warfare in any Civ game actually makes sense if you think about it.
 
As others have said, religion is not everything in diplomacy. There are other ways to make friends or enemies in this game. But it is a big part, and I think that works really well. It adds a lot of variety and strategy to the game. Sometimes all the AIs will wind up in one religious bloc, and you need to figure out how to sow discord among them so they don't all peacefully tech together. Sometimes there'll be 3 or 4 religions out there and you've got to make a tough decision about whether to pick a side and cultivate one really good friend, at the risk of annoying other AIs, or trying to stay neutral. I think Civ IV's diplomacy is really strategically rich and also allows for good roleplaying. Comparing Civ V and Civ VI's diplomacy (in which religion is way less prominent), I think Civ IV functions far better.
I don't know, I'm not sure I like situations like the Burger King telling me he studied on killin' me when we just met. Anyway, more observations/questions:

-No Zone of Control, I remember that. And apparently rivers do not consume movement. Any other movement stuff Civ V changed I should keep in mind? I know about using transport units instead of Embarkation.
-So QSH declared war even though I'm way more advanced and productive than him (oh Civ IV AI, never change). I brought in my buddy Mansa, and later I noticed Toku (a civ on the other continent) now hates me because Mansa's a dirty heathen. Now the funny thing is Mansa is now the worst enemy of Burger King, but Burger King doesn't hate me yet. Keep in mind that I have ongoing Open Borders and resource trades with Mansa.
Would it be right to conclude that "You traded with our worst enemy" only triggers at the moment a trade is initiated?
 
You traded with our worst enemy can happen when you give an AI techs, world maps or other stuff with one time gold value.
They cannot happen cos of open borders or resi trades, so yup..only at that moment when something direct like techs are traded.

If they just dislike your trade partner but hate some other AI more, you can trade as much as you like without seeing diplo hits.
It's only happening with worst enemies, annoyed or furious do not matter (other than causing worst enemy status).

If you make fair trades (both sides get similar value), there's sometimes no diplo hit.
Can be difficult calculating that.

Once you got those diplo hits, they can fade randomly over time in steps of 1.
 
And apparently rivers do not consume movement. Any other movement stuff Civ V changed I should keep in mind?

River crossing before bridges are built as part of roads (Construction tech, if I recall properly) and off roads always reduce all units to one move to cross the river. Of course, you would not notice it with units that are already one move but mounted, workers, scouts, etc will show this. Single move also applies to moving into forests and onto hills when off roads, although there are promotions that give two moves in these situations instead. (I have never played Civ V, so I don't know if this is a change for you or not.)
 
-Techs can be dead ends or unneeded for certain paths. It seems I can skip Theology (and Divine Right) altogether on a Space Race. What other techs may be skipped in certain situations?
It depends somewhat on what your trading strategy is, and A LOT on the difficulty being played. I play almost exclusively on low difficulty because I suck (Noble, Prince) and things like Aesthetics trade and skipping Alpha for the AI to get instead work terribly, as the AI doesn't have its cheater economy bonuses down here. Read a lot of the advanced player's write-ups here or watch games from AbsoluteZero/TMIT on youtube, and you'll see this stuff work fantastic up on Immortal/Deity though. On lower difficulty you can actually self-tech any path you want to, whether going for war, wonders, or space, both because you have to (trade-bait is horrible as the AIs are slow as molasses) and because it's possible to outdo the AIs very quickly and never look back if you tie them up in diplomatic wars or go for an early war to conquer a couple of them.

In general, I find I can ignore 100% of the time:
-Drama
-Divine Right
-Mass Media
-Flight
-Advanced Flight
-Stealth
-The Astronomy line on Pangaea/Inland Sea maps.
-Military Science

No matter how long the game goes, or what victory type I go for. Drama is never important early unless you want a GT+HE city for heavy unit whipping, and you can always trade back for it later for Cultural Victory long after it's already long beyond worthless. Divine Right is one of the least useful techs in the game except for holding it over the AI as a trade chip, when you should instead be focusing on the run to Lib (I can get mild use out of its wonders for fail-gold abuse with IND leaders though). Mass Media has nice cultural wonders that you never need, and you can leave the AI the task of building the UN, it doesn't matter who does it. I don't like bombers, prefer nukes instead, and their techs aren't required for the Space Race. Stealth would be more appealing on non-Pangaea/Inland Sea maps where a powerful late game navy is desired, but again, nukes. Navies are very hard to justify on these maps at all and while I might not necessarily never trade for the Astronomy line if I have lots of coastal cities (for the extra trade from Harbors/Custom Houses), it's never a priority. I know Grenadiers are a good counter to Rifles if you are behind, but would rather go Cannons 100% of the time unless I was totally incapable (no iron).

Techs I usually never tech myself, but may trade for if it suits me:
-Polytheism: ToA sucks, don't care about religion founding
-Monotheism: OR isn't worth teching it myself, and even though the AI values it highly, they are dicks about trading anything for it fairly.
-Monarchy: even without the Mids, I just have too many other important things to tech. Tradeback if I *need* HR civic, but can normally wait as trading for their Wine works too.
-Iron Working (this is actually usually a priority trade after self-teching Alpha)
-Theology: If I want to build the AP in a throwaway religion, or if playing for an AP victory goal and got beat to it somehow. Theocracy also makes a lot more sense for war than Vassalage if you have good religion spread most of the time, instead of giving up Bureau/Free Speech/Nationhood.

Techs I PREFER to have the AI research for me, but still important:
-Code of Laws
-Feudalism
-Banking
-Replaceable parts (PP is too important to wait for)
-Artillery

Then there's a bunch of stuff that just gets self-teched or traded for as opportunity presents itself, but it's never a major thing to wait or have to do it yourself either way. Stuff like Fishing, Sailing, Masonry, Metal Casting, Machinery, Guilds, Gunpowder, etc. You will need all this stuff eventually, one way or the other, but unless going for a specific rush strategy it won't kill you to pick it up later as you can, instead of prioritizing it. Nationalism, Printing Press, and Military Tradition fall under here, but are usually prime Lib targets because they lead into Cuir/Cav wars or speed up Rifling.

What's left is either too important to put off (stuff like worker techs, Currency, Liberalism if you don't cede the race), you lose too powerful an advantage if you wait to tech it (wonder techs, war techs), or the AI is simply way too stingy to trade it/trade for it freely due to nothing more than the turn progress--for instance, they simply refuse to trade Construction even if they like you, they don't even have a monopoly, and you have put several turns into it, if it is "too early" in the game due to the way they value certain techs (Construction being one of these). Their refusal to trade along with their poor tech rates on low difficulty basically means you have to tech it yourself if you want to get any good use of it in a decent time frame, and nixes a lot of trade-bait teching strategy like the Aes line. So if your plan was early war because you have access to Ivory, you are much better off planning on self-teching Math->Construction yourself, and by the time you do this they usually are ok with trading HBR which they otherwise value very highly in the early turns. For the same reason, self-teching Alpha before Currency is much better down on Noble/Prince, because if you don't you'll be waiting even longer to backfill techs that you actually want that they may trade by then (like Iron Working or HBR).
 
River crossing before bridges are built as part of roads (Construction tech, if I recall properly) and off roads always reduce all units to one move to cross the river. Of course, you would not notice it with units that are already one move but mounted, workers, scouts, etc will show this. Single move also applies to moving into forests and onto hills when off roads, although there are promotions that give two moves in these situations instead. (I have never played Civ V, so I don't know if this is a change for you or not.)
The way Civ 5 did it was that every unit had at least 2 movement. Forest and hill each consume one additional movement, and rivers consume all movement. Really, it was the last one that caught me off guard in Civ 4.

In general, I find I can ignore 100% of the time:
-Drama
I suppose the 1000 year culture bonus doesn't make them good enough for Cultural Victory?

That Space Race game is finished now. The BTS spaceship screen is neat. And that victory video takes me back.
-I contacted QSH before taking his last city. Defiant to the end. Do all of the Civ 4 AIs not know when to fold 'em?
-I built the Three Gorges and several cities went into unhealth. I was under the impression I was building a dam, not a coal plant.
-I found Mining Inc, tried to buy some extra metals from the AI, and couldn't. Turns out you can't deficit spend in diplomatic deals. Should have turned down the slider first. Not sure what other deal stuff might surprise me later.
-I built an extra SS Engine, and it only removed 2 turns from the travel time? What a rip-off.
-Planning future games now. I guess continuing to tech until Mass Media isn't worth it, even with the Corporations that give culture. I suppose it's better to just bomb those artists in the lagging city. Not really much of a fan of the "spam culture in 3 cities" Cultural Victory style.
 
I
In general, I find I can ignore 100% of the time:
-Drama

I suppose the 1000 year culture bonus doesn't make them good enough for Cultural Victory?

When going for culture victory, I always want Drama. Those theaters are important additives to culture. However, I always want them anyway. Once monuments are gone, they are important for expanding new cities from one ring to two rings of usable tiles. But of course, I have my own idiosyncrasies regarding culture. I enjoy the culture aspect of the game. I almost always try to stay on good terms with a close neighbor, build a city near the AI city, and then steal the city using culture influence. Theaters are important for that as well. Someone will undoubtedly say that I could just declare war and take the city that way. However, the point is I enjoy doing it with culture instead! :crazyeye: :D
 
Top Bottom