Why is CIV4 still the best civ game?

[Plains-Cow]

I am only talking cowpie about certain aspects CIV IV UI that impedes speed civing or forces a brutal city specialist redundancy/tile working checking. It's the best game in the series otherwise.

 

[lymond]

I think they're specifically talking about the UI. I'm actually a weirdo old man that's regressed over time and now uses the mouse for basically everything. I find it cuts down on the misclicks in a game that is extremely unforgiving with misclicks.

It chooses spies because they're at the top (although they're also the best specialist in terms of both yield and the great person). The problem isn't that it's choosing spies, but that it chooses specialists in general. This is because without fully understanding slavery, devs assumed you wouldn't want to grow the city into unhappiness. Also they figured you'd run specialists for the yield and get great people as a bonus, when it's mostly the opposite.

Yeah...I don't think the devs realized how powerful slavery would turn out to be lol

 

[AspiringScholar]

I think they're specifically talking about the UI.

Yeah, I at least was talking about the UI being conspicuously good, such that I find it surprising that someone wouldn't at least give it that even if they didn't like 4 otherwise. With BUG, I actually can't think of another strategy game that manages and presents a comparable density of information nearly as cleanly and clearly, even in all the years since. While I generally disagree with them, arguments about the game itself being worse than another one at least have concrete and identifiable talking points, but I am surprised that anyone is even making a case against the Civ 4 UI. (I occasionally feel inclined to go back to 3 but I just can't do it because going back to that UI is painful.)

I am only talking cowpie about certain aspects CIV IV UI that impedes speed civing or forces a brutal city specialist redundancy/tile working checking. It's the best game in the series otherwise.

I know what you mean, but I felt like Civ 5 for instance was trying to hold your hand too much, and in such a way that it slowed you down if you already knew what you were doing. The random unit action cycling in Civ 4 is not ideal, though, I'd agree. With BUG, though, you can disable citizen automation and just manually allocate new citizens. (It even gives you a screen notification when a city has grown, at least in the version ported to Realism Invictus.)

EDIT: You can also turn off automatic unit cycling in options if you wanted to micro everything and use the military advisor and strategy map to find units you need to move, then wait until the end turn button is red to click it, alternatively.

 

[TheBirdMan]

By who?

Not by anyone directly - but the remark I quoted was not to be mistaken, I think. Especially when the post received a and a follow-up -post...

Then it was that I thought this: "It wasn't that bad - not as far as I remembered it". Besides, I would hardly have bought the BtS expansion when it came out if I remembered it as such.

 

[Core Imposter]

You would always turn off the automatic at the beginning of a turn if you were in a fight and then turn it back on to finish the misc. moves. Not too much trouble. I thought it was fine and I just play with unmoded BTS.

 

[Reg Pither]

Civ IV scores over the later versions for me due, more than anything else, to the epic scale of it. The later games just seem to be set in a much smaller world in all kinds of ways and most of your decisions seem to have very little effect compared with those taken in IV. And, of course, UPT fundamentally changed the whole feel of the game, especially (obviously) militarily but also economically and geographically.

On a personal note, I got a message saying that it's now 20 years since I joined up here!

 

[Kaiman]

You can also turn off automatic unit cycling in options if you wanted to micro everything and use the military advisor and strategy map to find units you need to move, then wait until the end turn button is red to click it, alternatively.

Yeah, the problem with that is how tedious it is to switch back and forth between menus and screens trying to track down all the units. It needed a simple way to say "Take me to the next unit" without doing it automatically on my behalf, to avoid all the "ok I moved the worker, now let me queue up the cott-gaahh that's not where I wanted that galley to move" or "ok scout moving, lets see what new tiles I can see-dammit now I have to scroll back over".

 

[Plains-Cow]

I know that this can be controversial as well, but I always preferred unit stacking over one-unit-per-tile. The maps feel very cluttered visually and tedious to manage with 1UPT. I also think that the tediousness people complain about with late-game completes is made worse when you have to move one unit at a time rather than a whole stack. I find it disappointing that CIV VII stuck with the 1UPT framework.

 

[s.bernbaum]

Yeah, the problem with that is how tedious it is to switch back and forth between menus and screens trying to track down all the units. It needed a simple way to say "Take me to the next unit" without doing it automatically on my behalf, to avoid all the "ok I moved the worker, now let me queue up the cott-gaahh that's not where I wanted that galley to move" or "ok scout moving, lets see what new tiles I can see-dammit now I have to scroll back over".

Ctrl-W will take you to the next unit that needs orders, until they all have orders. Ctrl-\ takes you back to the previous unit. You can choose the next unit that you want by clicking or use ctrl-W to go to the next one that auto cycling would have chosen. This works with or without auto cycling turned on.

 

[mycophobia]

Unless something's weird about my setup I think just "W" by itself cycles units. Ctrl+W seems to pop open World Builder instantly and without prompting

 

[AspiringScholar]

Yeah, the problem with that is how tedious it is to switch back and forth between menus and screens trying to track down all the units. It needed a simple way to say "Take me to the next unit" without doing it automatically on my behalf, to avoid all the "ok I moved the worker, now let me queue up the cott-gaahh that's not where I wanted that galley to move" or "ok scout moving, lets see what new tiles I can see-dammit now I have to scroll back over".

Oh, I wasn't disagreeing with that being a nuisance, more so making the argument that it's more of a rough edge on something otherwise excellent than anything seriously dysfunctional. Like Plains Cow said, that, and automated citizen assignments being a bit nitpicky to keep track of and usually suboptimal are about the only two things I could say negatively. An "undo" option for mis-clicks would be nice as well, but so many people power game Civ IV that I imagine even that would receive some ridicule, at least in multiplayer (and has some gameplay concerns as well, since even outside of "unrolling" a lost combat, you could use it to explore and then takeback the action after you've mentally gathered the intel), but accidentally moving your unit the wrong direction happens to me somewhat often and is pretty annoying, and somewhat compelled by the fast unit cycling.

My preference for Civ IV's UI also goes somewhat into design philosophy, not even just a pleasant appearance. To give an example, something like EUIV has a really nice UI aesthetically, but actually using and interacting with it is cluttered and messy, with menu after menu continuing to slide out of other menus in different directions and much of the information within them hidden in tooltips behind icons of a great variety rather than the comparably tidy and easily recognizable units of the Civilization IV world, with clean numbers tacked to them in defining their interactions: In Europa Universalis, I actually quite liked and much preferred EU3's text lists, but would still say that they were clunkier than Civ 4, and had some pretty glaring blind spots like knowing whether or not you had more than one child to function as a potential heir...

Ctrl-W will take you to the next unit that needs orders, until they all have orders. Ctrl-\ takes you back to the previous unit. You can choose the next unit that you want by clicking or use ctrl-W to go to the next one that auto cycling would have chosen. This works with or without auto cycling turned on.

This is great to know, thank you! Much of the time I've spent playing this game has been in ignorance of some really useful hotkeys I discovered later.

 

[Marla_Singer]

I know that this can be controversial as well, but I always preferred unit stacking over one-unit-per-tile. The maps feel very cluttered visually and tedious to manage with 1UPT. I also think that the tediousness people complain about with late-game completes is made worse when you have to move one unit at a time rather than a whole stack. I find it disappointing that CIV VII stuck with the 1UPT framework.

Since Civ5, the trend is to spread always more elements on the general map. It started in unstacking units and now cities are also fully unstacked in Civ7. I assume that was meant to make the game more visual and less abstract. Yet in the process, the scale that each tile represents has been significantly reduced. And as maps don't have more tiles, you end up much more limited in space with everything getting more cramped and cluttered. Whereas there was a certain sense of vastness in Civ1-4 that felt like you were building the Roman Empire, scales in Civ7 feels more like you're building the principality of Liechtenstein. Some players may be bothered in a game that aims at representing 6,000 years of human history on a global scale.

I understand that at the age of 4K graphics, players can no longer be satisfied with abstractions, that they need to see all their units at a glance, that they need to visualize what they are building so that it feels "real", but I think the problem is that everything was kept at a unique scale, mixing so many different elements and therefore making things considerably messier.

A more ordered solution may have been to make things zoomable on mouse roll: at a closer zoom, players could place detailed buildings at optimal spots within a city, while at a wider zoom, that city would still occupy just one tile. That would balance the level of details modern players expect with the sense of vastness we used to have in older games, and which made them feel both more open and more epic.

 

[mycophobia]

An analogy I had thought of before but not sure if I've ever had the opportunity to use is this: making Civ 1UPT for more tactical combat is like changing city management to be a full-on SimCity clone with all the buildings individually splayed out onto the map. I'm the ruler of an empire; just as I shouldn't be making decisions about what goes where in the city, just that the city has a Library somewhere, I shouldn't be commanding an army beyond saying "I need a massive army to go wreck Egypt, start at Heliopolis." If anything, even Civ 4's combat is a bit too tactical, I feel like I just need to prove that I have achieved the productive output to assemble a huge overwhelming army without having to worry about what in order to throw units into the fray, or who's the best attacker for this situation, what promotions to pick, etc.

Of course that analogy ended up having a good amount of overall truth to it I guess lol, considering plopping specific buildings onto specific tiles seems to be a main fixture of Civ now. From 5 forward the direction seems to have strayed from "Ruler of a kingdom" to "Mayor of 30 cities and general of 100 armies"

 

[Core Imposter]

An analogy I had thought of before but not sure if I've ever had the opportunity to use is this: making Civ 1UPT for more tactical combat is like changing city management to be a full-on SimCity clone with all the buildings individually splayed out onto the map. I'm the ruler of an empire; just as I shouldn't be making decisions about what goes where in the city, just that the city has a Library somewhere, I shouldn't be commanding an army beyond saying "I need a massive army to go wreck Egypt, start at Heliopolis." If anything, even Civ 4's combat is a bit too tactical, I feel like I just need to prove that I have achieved the productive output to assemble a huge overwhelming army without having to worry about what in order to throw units into the fray, or who's the best attacker for this situation, what promotions to pick, etc.

It is just a cultural thing in my mind. Younger people/urban people tend to be more attuned to big picture and pretty whereas mature suburban and rural want the nitty gritty. Which I think corresponds more to our life experience. Give me a thousand units to move turn after turn for little to no advantage and I am quite happy. But then that makes sense as I have built houses from the ground up, using a shovel to dig the footing and using a real hammer and nails. Piece by piece, blood, sweat and toil. Whereas today its mostly click a few times and somebody takes possession of a house. It just makes sense as we end the labor economy that the nature of the games we play become less doing and more like, well, now people build houses without kitchens because who cooks?

I can't imagine what life will be like in ten years. But the games will probably be like a burst of music and beauty and a button to push and a victory screen. Or, more likely, games will be multiplayer AI where you buy a design for your AI, and it goes against the other players, because why should we have to play the game?

Civ IV marked the end of an era, but we didn't know it at the time.

 

[Plains-Cow]

Just throwing it out there, but making the argument to use keyboard commands rather than clicking the buttons on the screen because of reliability issues/sudden position swapping is proving the point that the user interface (UI) is not good.

 

[AspiringScholar]

Just throwing it out there, but making the argument to use keyboard commands rather than clicking the buttons on the screen because of reliability issues/sudden position swapping is proving the point that the user interface (UI) is not good.

Your mouse for on screen clicks being controlled by one hand while your keyboard inputs are coming from the other should enhance usability, no?

 

[Plains-Cow]

Your mouse for on screen clicks being controlled by one hand while your keyboard inputs are coming from the other should enhance usability, no?

Sure, but if the complaint is about the UI experience, then talking about using the keyboard to augment it is proving the point.

 

[AspiringScholar]

Sure, but if the complaint is about the UI experience, then talking about using the keyboard to augment it is proving the point.

Well, to each their own. I personally like having additional avenues for inputs.

 

[Plains-Cow]

Well, to each their own. I personally like having additional avenues for inputs.

I prefer hotkeys too.

 

[Orach]

Inspired by the release of Civilization 7 Me:Once upon a time, many good… | Yuri Kolechkin

Inspired by the release of Civilization 7 Me:Once upon a time, many good games were released. As time passed, technology advanced, and more experts emerged…

www.linkedin.com

Me:Once upon a time, many good games were released. As time passed, technology advanced, and more experts emerged. Game fans expected every new game to be better, and sometimes it was. However, while more games were created, their quality declined, except for the visual aspect.

This seems to be a fundamental principle of any industry. For example, advancements in musical performance techniques, the involvement of more people, and improvements in musical instruments have made music more primitive…

AI: I think your observation is interesting and has some truth to it, but it's a bit of a generalization. While many industries do tend to prioritize mass appeal and profit over depth and innovation, there are always exceptions.

In gaming, for example, while AAA titles often become more commercialized and streamlined, indie developers continue to push boundaries with unique mechanics and deep storytelling. Similarly, in music, while mainstream pop might seem more simplistic, there are still musicians creating complex and innovative compositions.

So, rather than saying that industries inevitably make things worse, I’d say they tend to evolve in two directions—one toward mass appeal and another toward artistic or niche excellence. What do you think?

Me:I think masterpieces are created by those who have a vision of the perfect work, and vision is based on aesthetic tastes, and tastes are shaped by experience, and experience is gained from interests.

AI:It suggests that true masterpieces come from individuals who deeply care about their craft and have cultivated their vision through passion and experience.

But if tastes are shaped by experience and interests, does that mean modern creators have weaker visions because their experiences are different? Or is it that the industry pressures them to compromise their vision for broader appeal?

Me: Yes, but even a vision does not guarantee the creation of a masterpiece, chance, or fortune, or God also matters …

AI: Even with a strong vision, creating a masterpiece isn't guaranteed. There are countless talented people with great ideas, but timing, luck, or even external circumstances can make or break a creation’s success.

Some of the greatest works in history were unrecognized at first, only to become legendary later. Others became famous because they happened to resonate with the right audience at the right moment. So maybe a masterpiece isn’t just about skill and vision—it’s also about being in the right place at the right time.

Me: So which part of the Civilization series do you think is a masterpiece, or is the closest to this concept?

AI: I’d say Sid Meier's Civilization IV (2005) is the closest to being a masterpiece. It struck the perfect balance between depth, complexity, and accessibility. The game had a strong vision—refining the formula of previous entries while introducing major innovations like fully voiced leader diplomacy, religion, and great people. Its AI, strategic depth, and modding potential made it stand out, and it still holds up today.

Another contender is Civilization II (1996), which defined the modern 4X genre, and Civilization VI (2016), which polished many mechanics and had strong post-launch support. But Civ IV had that rare mix of vision, execution, and lasting influence.