Originally posted by Magter

Also on a related note, I don't know why people didn't like Civ5. I've only played Civ3 and Civ4 and both were great but I love the way that Civ5 has more layers than the previous ones. Civ3 and Civ4 were relatively easy,  especially Civ4 because of how easy it was to tech up and get ahead of your enemies. While in Civ5 you have to actually engage with the other nations and city-states if you want to get anything done.

What difficulty level were you playing at? I can tell you there are still Emperor (and higher) level games that prove exceptionally difficult (at least for me). I'm no fanatic though, so it's probably just a case of me sucking. Still, even Prince and higher can be a challenge if you have a poor starting spot or some bad luck at the start (e.g., random stack of barbarians spawn on your border).

P.S. I guess it's been changed since launch, but Civ5 boasted about being "streamlined" (not having more layers). Diplomacy was broken, the AI's ability to fight battles was broken, tech tree was UBER-simplified, and many of the aspects of Civ4 that added replayability (e.g., religion, corporations, espionage) were canned. From my perspective, Civ5 is feature-lite and the inclusion of some new features like city states and an AI that behaves like a two-year old in the throws of a temper tantrum doesn't mean much to me.

Not trying to change your mind or anything (to each their own, after all)... But, I am trying to understand how we could experiencing such different games xD

Definitely Alpha Centauri. I'm still kinda pissed that Civilization picked off instead of Alpha Centauri which I found way more interesting back in the day.

Originally posted by Methos12

Definitely Alpha Centauri. I'm still kinda pissed that Civilization picked off instead of Alpha Centauri which I found way more interesting back in the day.

I loved Alpha Centauri, been a long time now though. Also playing Anno1404 and  2070, I have but have not yet played Sins of a Solar Empire with the expacsand Sword of the Stars and xpacs can't wait to give them a go as I'm yearning for a good space themed game but want to give Anno a little more time, it's bloody addictive :)

I think with these types of games picking a subject matter you're interested in can be a good start.

Originally posted by MustaphaMond

Originally posted by Magter

Also on a related note, I don't know why people didn't like Civ5. I've only played Civ3 and Civ4 and both were great but I love the way that Civ5 has more layers than the previous ones. Civ3 and Civ4 were relatively easy,  especially Civ4 because of how easy it was to tech up and get ahead of your enemies. While in Civ5 you have to actually engage with the other nations and city-states if you want to get anything done.

What difficulty level were you playing at? I can tell you there are still Emperor (and higher) level games that prove exceptionally difficult (at least for me). I'm no fanatic though, so it's probably just a case of me sucking. Still, even Prince and higher can be a challenge if you have a poor starting spot or some bad luck at the start (e.g., random stack of barbarians spawn on your border).

 

P.S. I guess it's been changed since launch, but Civ5 boasted about being "streamlined" (not having more layers). Diplomacy was broken, the AI's ability to fight battles was broken, tech tree was UBER-simplified, and many of the aspects of Civ4 that added replayability (e.g., religion, corporations, espionage) were canned. From my perspective, Civ5 is feature-lite and the inclusion of some new features like city states and an AI that behaves like a two-year old in the throws of a temper tantrum doesn't mean much to me.

 

Not trying to change your mind or anything (to each their own, after all)... But, I am trying to understand how we could experiencing such different games xD

I 100% agree with you.  Civ5 was way less complex than Civ4, let alone all the fantastic Civ4 mods which added layer after layer after layer of additional complexity.  As I said earlier, Civ4-C2C mod makes Civ5 look like tic-tac-toe.

   I would say black and white 1 or 2.  They're real time city builders where you play as a god in the form of a floating hand.  The whole point of the games are to specialize your worshipers so they make a fantastic city.

   One important thing to note those is the creature.  The creature is your avatar in eden.  You can teach him miracles (Abilities you use when your worshipers obtain enough points to be able to cast it either by worship or sacrafice).  You can also send him to villages to impress the town folks into worshiping you ( or migrating to your city in  the 2nd one).  Your enemies will also have creatures and when they meet they fight each other.  In the first game you control the fight with clicks on the ground and on the enemy creatures body to make him act.  In the second game its all automated :(   theres more to explain but I think if you went to lionhead you would get a better description of the more advanced systems the creatures have to offer.

    The object of both games is to sway (or capture for the second game) all the cities on the island you are currently on. You can do this in different ways, I.E. sending missionaries, building a nice city, sending your creature to impress.

    In the second game you can even amass armies and capture the cities. I'll admit that the AI is terrible and the armies will just stand outside your walls while your archers take em out.  Also they use no real strategy as in they just send wave after wave of enemies at you until you or them are dead.  They only have 3 different unit types also - Swordsman, Archer, and catipult.  even with the very shoddy AI it's still fun to build your armies and level them up.  

All in all they're very good city builders and might be a good game to check out if you like CIV.  

(There is alot of features I didn't list, http://lionhead.com/ here's the link to the website to get more info (Ignore fable 3 lol))

Originally posted by gainesvilleg

Originally posted by MustaphaMond

Originally posted by Magter

Also on a related note, I don't know why people didn't like Civ5. I've only played Civ3 and Civ4 and both were great but I love the way that Civ5 has more layers than the previous ones. Civ3 and Civ4 were relatively easy,  especially Civ4 because of how easy it was to tech up and get ahead of your enemies. While in Civ5 you have to actually engage with the other nations and city-states if you want to get anything done.

What difficulty level were you playing at? I can tell you there are still Emperor (and higher) level games that prove exceptionally difficult (at least for me). I'm no fanatic though, so it's probably just a case of me sucking. Still, even Prince and higher can be a challenge if you have a poor starting spot or some bad luck at the start (e.g., random stack of barbarians spawn on your border).

 

P.S. I guess it's been changed since launch, but Civ5 boasted about being "streamlined" (not having more layers). Diplomacy was broken, the AI's ability to fight battles was broken, tech tree was UBER-simplified, and many of the aspects of Civ4 that added replayability (e.g., religion, corporations, espionage) were canned. From my perspective, Civ5 is feature-lite and the inclusion of some new features like city states and an AI that behaves like a two-year old in the throws of a temper tantrum doesn't mean much to me.

 

Not trying to change your mind or anything (to each their own, after all)... But, I am trying to understand how we could experiencing such different games xD

I 100% agree with you.  Civ5 was way less complex than Civ4, let alone all the fantastic Civ4 mods which added layer after layer after layer of additional complexity.  As I said earlier, Civ4-C2C mod makes Civ5 look like tic-tac-toe.

Well let's not forget we're most likely comparing Civ IV BTS to a vanilla Civ V. Don't get me wrong i was hugely dissapointed by Civ V but compared to vanilla Civ IV it's not that bad. Personally i'm waiting for the expansion and see how it will be than, if i still remain dissapointed , well... I'll be a sad panda.