Why not the best of every game?

[One hit poster]

Oh hi.

Since this is my 1st post, allow me to introduce myself: I'm fairly new to this. Started with CIV4. Tried CIV5. Switched back to 4 and added BTS and the Varietas Delectat mod. I still play on the easier levels (and I still find them challenging); I'm an awful planner, but I enjoy the game. I come here for advice/explanations every now and then. I always find answers, so kudos to you all.

I don't want to trigger the nth discussion here about how much CIV5 sucks (or doesn't); I just thought it was a different game and decided I liked CIV4 better. But it was a hard choice.

That said, I wanted to bring this up, just for the sake of argument. Seeing how the CIV4 gamestyle is preferred by so many but how CIV5 was all slick and cool (I LOVED the looks) and had some uncontroversial features (I've read few if any complaints over the hexes)... I was wondering, how difficult/cool would it be to have a CIV4.5 game? Like, a CIV5 mod downgraded to CIV4 rules?

By 'how difficult' I mean compared to some complex mods I've seen around. I think that adding new units and leaders that require art and animation is difficult and time-consuming. On the other hand, adding civ4 civics to civ5, to name one thing, is a major change in the rules requiring mostly coding and playtesting. I don't mean to underestimate how difficult and time-consuming coding is (please don't be offended); I am clearly no programmer. I just wonder, how hard it would be? Has it been attempted? Just asking.

But wait, don't just reply your pants yet, there's more. I understand that the main setback in undertaking such an enterprise (a CIV5 with CIV4 rules) would be that not all (if any) of the CIV5 features are universally hated, so in the end the resulting mod would only please the modder who chose what to keep from CIV5 and what to dump. For example, I'd keep the hexes and the art, but many would keep the new combat system. So, another question is: would it be that difficult to build a Game (thinking beyond the mod here) where EVERY aspect is customizable?

I say this because I fail to see how some game features are already discardable and some are not. For instance, espionage was the extra task imposed by BTS that I didn't need, so I just play with the No Espionage option toggled and I'm a happy customer again. Why can't a game be made with a No Religion option at the beginning? Why can't a game be made with a No Religion/Civ4-Style Religion/Civ5-Style Religion option? Why can't we decide over even smaller details?

I mean, Civilization is about (micro)managing. Then, why not allow the player to micromanage the rules themselves at the beginning of the game? Have a super-advanced custom game menu where you can toggle everything ruleswise?

Again, it's just for the sake of debate. Now, please jump in.

 

[Lord Silverkey]

I'm going to be a critic here, with no intention to burst your bubble so please don't take offence if I come across as harsh.

I'd love a game that combines the best of both, but what "best" is completely depends on who you talk to, as you mentioned. For example, do you stack units like in Civ 4, (commonly known as "Stack of Doom" or SOD for short) or use the one unit per tile (commonly known as 1upt) that was implemented in Civ 5. A lot of people who switched to Civ 5 did so because SODs were no longer in the game, but others (myself included) stayed with Civ 4 because it KEPT SODs in the game. (fierce discussion ending with toxic flaming starts here)

The second problem with the whole SOD issue is that Civ 4 AI is designed to use it, Civ 5's has no such ability. Just implementing it would require a complete AI rewriting as well as coding in how it would work. Some would say this would be an inefficient mod as it would take a lot of work to produce something already done well in Civ 4. This is only one example of why this mod would be difficult to make.

Now you say at the end that it would be cool to have a custom game menu where you can toggle every rule. I for one would be absolutely elated with this, but the difficulty of making such a mod would multiply against itself every new rule you make (especially where the AI is concerned).

I think in conclusion to this awfully confused post (mine, not yours) this mod should be made but only the maddest (or most brilliant) coders would ever start the project, let alone get it to work.

 

[robbus]

I am stuck on c3! Hoping to 'graduate' to c4 in the futur

 

[AdamCrock]

Welcome to CFC ! ^^

I think You are aiming at the right angle friend ! This would have to be Civ 6 More customization and options the more pepople would like the game. About the SOD's and 1 "unit per tile" - Choose: 1 unit per tile OR x units per tile OR infinite units per tile and there You go - problem solved ! Of course this would be time expensive to program the AI for each option separately but it would be great improvement.

Hexes are cool but tiles not bad too - the difference is that in hexes You have 6 move options and 8 with tiles - hexes are there to simulate realistic movement of units (cavalry for example) used in tactical games to simulate that formations need to "turn around" before thay can retreat Hexes implementation in Civ 5 made the combat system tactical , while in Civ 4 it was strategic system. So I would implement this option too. Choose Your combat system : strategic or tactical - in other words hexes or tiles I believe it would not be impossible either. Or perhaps this is bad ..... wait I have another idea - "keep You pants on !" xD :

Imho Civ IS a strategy game but some guys like tactical combat better and it can be mixed together to appeal to all players by introducing 2 layers (something like in Total War series) You can pile up Your units in stacks in strategic tile layout and when it comes to combat You switch screen to tactical "field" battle layout (with hexes). ^^

Other than that all good assets from both games, mix n' match, polish it here and there and there You go ! .... drumroll please .... Civ 6

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The second problem with the whole SOD issue is that Civ 4 AI is designed to use it, Civ 5's has no such ability. Just implementing it would require a complete AI rewriting as well as coding in how it would work. Some would say this would be an inefficient mod as it would take a lot of work to produce something already done well in Civ 4. This is only one example of why this mod would be difficult to make.

You are right about people having different opinions on what is best, but frankly the AI doesn't know how to play in either game and won't try to win most of the time, so such a complication is limited at best anyway.

Before they touch anything else, they need to make a game that runs decently, has a UI from 2013 and not the late 1990's, and that has all of its features available to everybody who makes the recommended specifications. Failaxis hasn't managed that in around a decade at least, so the talk of some great combo solution is silly.

 

[Funky]

For me, and I believe many people in this part of the forums, the best of both games means Civ 4 BTS! In my opinon literally every single change made from Civ 4 to Civ 5 is for the worse, including hexes and graphics. Well maybe limited resources, if implemented in a meaningful way, would be something to consider. But I really hope that otherwise Civ 5 will have zero impact on future Civ games.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

Before they touch anything else, they need to make a game that runs decently,

But Civ5 does run decently -- on my AMD 8 core.

Seriously, there is no lag, but four of the cores are pretty well maxed out most of the time. It's sad when that amount of overkill is needed to play the game smoothly.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Seriously, there is no lag, but four of the cores are pretty well maxed out most of the time. It's sad when that amount of overkill is needed to play the game smoothly.

You forgot that "recommended specs" part at the end of the sentence you quoted! Last I checked, the game does not recommend an AMD 8 core .

That said, do you really avoid a 1-4 second pause after moving units and have sub 5-10 second turn rollovers on standard maps? That's some incredible machine power. Someone a while back told me that constantly rendering all this stuff is a big problem for the game.

That said, if they're going to make it so resource intensive, they should then recommend high-end machines, not machines that can't even function too well on large maps. Or maybe, they only needed to use 3d rendering for some of the stuff...or make it optional? I don't know. I do know that it's asinine to emphasize graphics to the extent of inhibiting performance on recommended specs in a *strategy* game...

The state of MP for over a year after the game was out was a travesty too...I've heard it's better now but that doesn't excuse the review publications lying outright ^_^.

 

[jihe]

For me, and I believe many people in this part of the forums, the best of both games means Civ 4 BTS! In my opinon literally every single change made from Civ 4 to Civ 5 is for the worse, including hexes and graphics. Well maybe limited resources, if implemented in a meaningful way, would be something to consider. But I really hope that otherwise Civ 5 will have zero impact on future Civ games.

Hex is a good change, other than that, civ5 has nothing

 

[vincentz]

Hex is a good change, other than that, civ5 has nothing

It has been ages since I played it, but iirc then (ranged) siegeweapons in 5 is also better than suicidefrontlinemeleeattackingciv4sieges.

 

[Funky]

Hex is a good change, other than that, civ5 has nothing

IMO even hexes are a bad change.

- Hexes give the game a wrong feel. Hexes are typical of classical boardgames as well as many wargames. Civ shouldn't feel like either, since it is a different genre.

- Hexes limit movement by reducing movement options from one tile to the next from 8 to 6.

- Since civ maps represent an (alternative) earth, it makes more sense and adds to immersion to be able to move in the four (eight) points of the compass.

I really hope we will get squares back in Civ 6, though ultimately it's a superficial matter.

 

[Lennier]

The problem with squares is that 4 of the possible moves move the unit ~1.4 times futher than the other 4 possible moves, which can also break immersion.

But for Civ, I'd rather have squares in a game that is otherwise well designed than hexes in a game that is otherwise broken.

 

[happyturtle]

I like hexes, 1 UPT, and being able to barrage by siege and archery. But not being either a programmer or a game designer, I have no idea how one would make those work in the Civ IV system.

 

[vincentz]

1upt will most certainly not work in civ4 (but then again, from my understanding of civ 5, it doesnt work there either )
Someone tried to make hexes in civ4 once, but I dont think anything workable came out of it. I feel very much like Funky, that its not a local tactical map, but a world with longitudes and latitudes and 8 directional compass movements. Sure there is the 1.4 factor, but if movement was scaled by 10, then a cost of 14 could be applied to diagonal movement. But... what would be the point, as a unit with 0.1 movement left is still able to make a "complete" step in civ4 as it is (I guess its the same for civ5).
The archery "I can shoot longer than modern artillery" barrage is imho a joke, but I do wish the sieges (and modern ships) could do ranged attacks in civ4 (it can with DCM, but the AI doesnt understand how to use it, which then it becomes a player advantage/exploit.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Hexes were a great change. Getting rid of tech trades was great too (tech trades being one of the more broken and imbalancing things in all of the civ series). Too bad they downgraded UI, downgraded MP, downgraded game run quality, downgraded controls, and left things like "city can change worked tiles and starve you between turns" in the game.

The fact that the AI in either game is considered materially better than the other, or the suggestion that either "tries to win", is ludicrous. We've not seen a civ AI actively attempt to win the game on a consistent basis on a long, long time. It plays something other than civ.

 

[Gotrilliten]

I like hexes, but I think you should have more units per hex than 1.

 

[Gotrilliten]

The fact that the AI in either game is considered materially better than the other, or the suggestion that either "tries to win", is ludicrous. We've not seen a civ AI actively attempt to win the game on a consistent basis on a long, long time. It plays something other than civ.

The AI isn't trying to win?!? Now I just feel bad ...

 

[Drakarska]

1upt will most certainly not work in civ4 (but then again, from my understanding of civ 5, it doesnt work there either )
Someone tried to make hexes in civ4 once, but I dont think anything workable came out of it. I feel very much like Funky, that its not a local tactical map, but a world with longitudes and latitudes and 8 directional compass movements. Sure there is the 1.4 factor, but if movement was scaled by 10, then a cost of 14 could be applied to diagonal movement. But... what would be the point, as a unit with 0.1 movement left is still able to make a "complete" step in civ4 as it is (I guess its the same for civ5).
The archery "I can shoot longer than modern artillery" barrage is imho a joke, but I do wish the sieges (and modern ships) could do ranged attacks in civ4 (it can with DCM, but the AI doesnt understand how to use it, which then it becomes a player advantage/exploit.

Just curious, but I thought Dales Cbt Mod solved the ranged attack problem. I haven't played that mod in forever, so not 100% sure there.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The AI isn't trying to win?!? Now I just feel bad ...

I a game of civ IV, unless you're playing BTS the AI has no coded victory strategy whatsoever and will only win on higher difficulties by lazing its way to space in a non-cohesive manner.

In BTS, the only programmed AI victory attempt is culture, but in a given game you rarely see more than 1-2 AIs try for it. The rest are all following no global victory condition strategy whatsoever, and are just spamming dice rolls to pick techs, pick units, and declare war at random.

The only thing that makes it remotely challenging are its bonuses, and despite insinuations otherwise noble actually does give them a few bonuses even .

 

[reddishrecue]

The AI advances better than the player at higher difficulties like if they were cheating, but they're not.