THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

  • 28 Apr 2024, 11:36
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Civ IV vs. Civ V  (Read 8532 times)

TheFuriousWombat

  • GET ON THE NIGHT TRAIN
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,513
    • WXBC Bard College Radio Online
Civ IV vs. Civ V
« on: 04 Jan 2012, 10:32 »

Ok, so I know this might be a contentious issue but I'm looking for honest/helpful feedback on this matter. I haven't ever played a Civ game extensively enough to know what I like and don't like about the series as a whole but I do have a pretty deep strategy game background so I'm not wholly new to the idea of the game by any means. I've seen a ton of debate on this issue on the tubes but it's mostly flame wars and thus useless. Anyone have a solid recommendation either way? I'm definitely leaning toward nabbing IV and all expansions rather than V because A) I've heard it's a better, more nuanced option and B) it's almost half as much as V with the expansions. But I'm open to being swayed in the other direction. Anyone?
Logged
I punched all the girls in the face on the way to the booth to vote for Hitler.

Hollow Press (my blog)

Scandanavian War Machine

  • Older than Moses
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,159
  • zzzzzzzz
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #1 on: 05 Jan 2012, 11:49 »

they are both spectacular games, in my opinion, though rather different

Civ IV can be gotten cheap, as you said, so that's a good option. it's a little unbalanced in certain ways, but i never noticed it much. Civ V is something i've spent considerably less time playing, but i can say that it's just just as good as Civ IV (maybe better, but I don't want to say one way or the other, there).

Civ V is certainly prettier.


ok, after thinking about it, i think i'm gonna side with V, even though i've spent way less time with it since i only recently got it (compared to IV, which i've had forever).

i definitely prefer the hex map, though i'm not sure why, exactly. it feels more natural i guess. also, the fact that you can no longer stack units on top of each other helps with this.
those two changes alone could be enough to completely ruin the game for some people, but i actually really liked them.

it really boils down to personal preference, so hopefully some other people  can give you some more to think about
Logged
Quote from: KvP
Also I would like to point out that the combination of Sailor Moon and faux-Kerouac / Sonic Youth spelling is perhaps the purest distillation of what this forum is that we have yet been presented with.

Near Lurker

  • Duck attack survivor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,642
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #2 on: 05 Jan 2012, 12:00 »

I've heard they've done away with corruption, which kind of sounds like it'd wreck the game to me...

How do you build without stacking units?  Can you at least keep multiples in cities?
Logged
After seventeen years, once again, sort of a lurker.  (he/him)

Scandanavian War Machine

  • Older than Moses
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,159
  • zzzzzzzz
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #3 on: 05 Jan 2012, 15:30 »

actually, now that i think about it, i've hardly spent any time with Civ V at all, so maybe that says something about it's quality?

near as i could tell, most things worked the same way. i think you can stack units in a city, but maybe not. you might just have to fill any available nearby hexes with dudes, instead of putting them all on one square. cities take up several hexes so you can cover an entire city in units if you want, but it's usually safer to place them around a little more strategically unless you got units to burn.

i don't remember anything from previous games about corruption so i can't say how that's different


all things considered i'm probably the wrong person to ask about most things
Logged
Quote from: KvP
Also I would like to point out that the combination of Sailor Moon and faux-Kerouac / Sonic Youth spelling is perhaps the purest distillation of what this forum is that we have yet been presented with.

Near Lurker

  • Duck attack survivor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,642
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #4 on: 05 Jan 2012, 16:02 »

Corruption is the mechanism that screws up cities that are too far from the palace until you start building airports.
Logged
After seventeen years, once again, sort of a lurker.  (he/him)

TheFuriousWombat

  • GET ON THE NIGHT TRAIN
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,513
    • WXBC Bard College Radio Online
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #5 on: 05 Jan 2012, 16:18 »

I've heard the whole "I got it, but for some reason don't find myself playing it all that much" thing about V a lot.
Logged
I punched all the girls in the face on the way to the booth to vote for Hitler.

Hollow Press (my blog)

Scandanavian War Machine

  • Older than Moses
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,159
  • zzzzzzzz
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #6 on: 05 Jan 2012, 16:37 »

i mean, i know the main reason i stopped playing was because it was right before a bunch of other games came out, so i stopped to play those instead. i just never picked it back up again.

if it's anythig like IV though, it will be picked up on and off many times over the coming decade, i'm sure.
Logged
Quote from: KvP
Also I would like to point out that the combination of Sailor Moon and faux-Kerouac / Sonic Youth spelling is perhaps the purest distillation of what this forum is that we have yet been presented with.

Alex C

  • comeback tour!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,915
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #7 on: 06 Jan 2012, 01:49 »

The reason so many people hate on Civ V is because high level play is straight up kinda broken. The AI is more inept than ever at maneuvers which is really a problem since the game took a general shift away from an emphasis on strategy to operations. The AI in Civilization IV wins no prizes for military brilliance but it wasn't quite as a big deal because the game was structured such that attrition and sheer military output mattered more, so if you slacked off in other areas of the game the AI could still hurt you even if you were pretty hand at placing units. That's not really the case with Civilization V: I've breezed my way to ridiculous kill to death ratios against the AI on immortal simply because it doesn't seem to have a basic grasp on prioritizing threats and because unit recovery is quite rapid. Second, the last time I checked the multiplayer was still a buggy mess, so getting a decent opponent that way is a much worse chore than it has to be. Third, and most tragically of all, the production rate, map size and one unit per tile paradigm doesn't really hold up well to best practices. Basically, the devs bet the farm that the game mechanics they put in place wouldn't lead to the map being choked with units and cities but unfortunately they lost the wager, and it's not something that you can really just fix with a patch or two. It's really sad and annoying because there's a lot of little things in the game that are a genuine improvement but the core issues really cut the replayability off at the knees.
Logged
the ship has Dr. Pepper but not Mr. Pibb; it's an absolute goddamned travesty

FilliamHMuffman

  • Not quite a lurker
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #8 on: 10 Jan 2012, 01:01 »

Sorry if I am breaking the rules by making my first post here before introducing myself, but I had to make this account so I could share this insightful link about Civ 5. This article pretty much explains why I prefer Civ IV over V. Well, also due to all the DLC. Been playing since III first came out and Civ V has been my least favorite.

Anyway here is the article I wanted to show. http://www.garath.net/Sullla/Civ5/whatwentwrong.html

Logged
"Enter their minds, and you'll find the judges you're so afraid of - and how judiciously they judge themselves."

Near Lurker

  • Duck attack survivor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,642
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #9 on: 10 Jan 2012, 15:17 »

Well, that settles it.  I'm definitely waiting for VI.  (Then again, I didn't even graduate to IV until fall '08...)
Logged
After seventeen years, once again, sort of a lurker.  (he/him)

TheFuriousWombat

  • GET ON THE NIGHT TRAIN
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,513
    • WXBC Bard College Radio Online
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #10 on: 10 Jan 2012, 20:10 »

awesome article Filliam. Really comprehensive. Thanks for sharing!
Logged
I punched all the girls in the face on the way to the booth to vote for Hitler.

Hollow Press (my blog)

IrrationalPie

  • Obscure cultural reference
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 134
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #11 on: 16 Jun 2012, 16:13 »

Is anyone else besides me looking forward to the expansion, which will hopefully bring the game closer to the greatness that is Civ 4?
Logged

ackblom12

  • Guest
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #12 on: 16 Jun 2012, 22:50 »

I certainly am. In the past it has pretty much always been the first expansion that broke it from being good to great, so I'm hoping the same rings true here.
Logged

TinPenguin

  • Bling blang blong blung
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,136
  • Cogito ergo potato.
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #13 on: 18 Jun 2012, 08:17 »

Only Civ II is trve.
Logged

VonKleist

  • Psychopath in a hockey mask
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 618
  • First I lol'd. But then I serious'd.
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #14 on: 19 Jun 2012, 04:26 »

I started playing Colonization again last week. I remember playing it for a bit in the mid 90īs but I wasn't too much into Strategy then so I got frustrated. Now Iīm digging the hell out of the campy graphics and sound.. still it makes me feel bad for having to slaughter all those Indians because they weīre in my way and I didn't want to push Christianity on them to appease them (I guess thatīs how it works?).
Anyway itīs some great fun and I can't wait to kick the French off my main island.
Luckily the British offered me some mercenaries. That hadn't happened before so I hope thereīs more events like that coming up :-D
Logged

IrrationalPie

  • Obscure cultural reference
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 134
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #15 on: 20 Jun 2012, 06:00 »

  The sequel adds quite a bit more depth.  My first game I played as the Mongols, though, so I ended up winning via conquest. around 1485.
Logged

Papersatan

  • William Gibson's Babydaddy
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,368
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #16 on: 20 Jun 2012, 16:41 »

I have to say so far I am not impressed with the Gods and Kings expansion for Civ V.  Keep in mind I am slow to embrace change. 

The good:
I like that City States give missions with expiration dates now; previously you could court a city state for a while and then they would demand you kill another city state and if it just wasn't practical for you to do (because it was protected by another civ or was just too far away) that was that, the only way to gain favor was to gift them gold for the rest of the game.  They would hold that grudge for 1500 years and until someone killed them there was nothing else they wanted.  Now they only ask for you to "bully" city states and if after 30 turns no one has done it, they just give up.  In addition they have new "quests" to be the civ with the most scientific progress in 30 turns and the like. 

Unit HP and DMG have been multiplied by 10. This means there is more variation in the attack you can do and that bonuses to attack and defend work better.  Instead of a unit doing 1 DMG per hit, getting a +20% to attack bonus, and still doing 1DMG for the next 4 turns it goes from 10 to 12. 

The Meh:
Religion seemed neat at first, but, other than getting to choose some bonuses for cities with your religion, and yourself as the founder, I don't see what the point is really.  Once the religion is founded all you can do it spread it, which is good if you have a "founders bonus" that is based on the number of cities which follow it, but other wise does nothing.  Having another civ follow your religion has not effect on your diplomacy with them, though trying to convert the cities of another founder does have a negative impact.  So my bonus is +1 happiness for every 5 followers in a converted city.  Converting cities is all I can do with "faith" points once the religion is founded it hardly seems worth the diplomatic toll to get +1 happiness, particularly since if the civ has their own religion they will just convert back. 

Spies.  I never loved spies in IV, but it was easy enough to just defend against them.  I am unclear how I am awarded spies in V. I think you get them at the beginning of eras starting with the Renascence, but I feel like the AI civs have more than me?  Maybe I am just bad at using them, but I feel like I am not getting anything but frustration from the spy system.

Bad:
One of my advisers is broken?  I think she cannot see the happiness I get from my religion, so she is constantly warning me that my people are livid when I have positive happiness.

AI keep warning me that another AI is "plotting against me" which is info one can gain with a spy, but I don't see how they are.  For instance I was warned that Montezuma was gathering an army to attack a specific city but I could see that he was not, and he never attacked.  I don't think there is a mechanism for lying about the info gathered, it is just optional whether to tell the Civ or not.  The info seems useless, but it is supposed to be a great diplomatic thing that they shared this with me. 

Logged
[12:07] ackblom12: hi again honey
[12:08] ackblom12: I'm tired of lookin at that ugly little face

IrrationalPie

  • Obscure cultural reference
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 134
Re: Civ IV vs. Civ V
« Reply #17 on: 21 Jun 2012, 06:56 »

Religion does influence diplomacy / diplomatic relationships.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up