Do you prefer Civ 4 or Civ 5? Give reasons
Civ 4 has Caveman2Cosmos
>>322522219
but judging on the unmodded base game (with expansions) alone
>>322522438
Civ 5 is more-or-less easier to load up and can be played as "one of those fast games", meanwhile Civ 4 has more depth to it.
Both games have their good and bad points.
>civ v removed a lot of features to casualize the game for faggot casuals
>brave new world attempted to fix this but failed
>cant even make vassal states
>>322523105
You forget
>United Nations that can't be destroyed
>>322522084
I prefer Civ5 solely for the hex grid and tile unit restrictions. Makes the combat more tactical, and mobilization of units an issue, and give terrain more importance.
>>322522084
Civ 4 because of Fall from Heaven.
Stacks of doom make civ IV unbearable for casual noob 4X player like me. No need to say "git gud" senpai, I... am working for it.
Civ IV has big mods like Caveman2Cosmos.
But in terms of vanilla (with BTS/BNW expansions), Civ V. I suppose Civ IV would still be better in bigger games but why would I want to play big games in vanilla Civ? I wouldn't! Conversely, Civ V is prettier, smoother, more involved in my favoured playstyle for quick games (cultural victories, things like great works of art matter a lot and religion/culture systems are more enjoyable to play around with), combat is enjoyable sometimes rather than never (don't get me wrong, it's not like it has any real degree of depth, but it's nice seeing your dudes charging up at the enemies and with only a handful of units, it's not a bother to play while Civ IV is always a bother, although arguably a smaller one in those big games).
Civ 4 lets you pick between multiple leaders for each civ and each leader has their own traits.
>>322526546
As much as I enjoyed multiple leaders, I do have to say that it made the civs a lot less unique
>>322522612
Basically this. Civ 5 makes for a nice relaxing game that works great on a tablet. Civ 4 if I mean serious business.
>>322526734
>options is bad
>more is less
>more is bad
>less is more
>less is good
Go home casual fag
openings in BTS >>>>>> every Civ game
currency is done best in 3 and BNW
>>322522084
5 for the war game.
4 for the diplomacy.
>>322527013
What I mean is that each leader had two traits that gave bonuses that were shared by other leaders
The only thing that was truly unique to the civs were UUs and UBs, which are arguably less important
Civ IV has Leonard Nimoy and Fall from Heaven mod
But Civ 5 has <denouncing intensifies>
Combat is better in Civ 5 but Civ 4 is superior in almost everything else.
Civ 4
squares>hexes
global happiness is a travesty
religion is less retarded
fucking unit management
upkeep on tile improvements is gay
cities aren't turbounits that make early aggression useless
tanks aren't just horses for the modern era
tech tree
mods
I could think up more but everything I think of in Civ 5 just makes me angrier.
Civ 5 religion stuff is weak and bland.
Barbarians in the year 2400 in turn 1000 with XCOM units and shit are still called BARBARIANS instead of rouge nation or something
>axe barbarian throws axe at modern tanks
>a tank dies in the battle animation
ok
>infantry can shoot down stealth bombers
ok
>bombing doesnt R A P E all ground units or ships
>ships dont get air defense
On an unrelated note, why is archipelago the most fun map type?
>>322527414
I liked stacking tiles. Stupidly overwhelming armies are my favorite tactic.
civ 5 just seems too simplified compared to 4
apparently it worked for them though because it's always in the top 10 most played games on Steam
also doesn't have the zoomed out globe map which was one of my favorite features
>>322528303
Because you play early game Byzantium.
Or England.
>>322528308
Doomstacks get really boring imo.
>>322523105
Vassal states is one of the worse additions to the expansion packs, mostly due to the nonsensical way the AI uses them and the way they completely trivialize Conquest/Domination when they work out for you.
>>322522084
Civ4: BtS, but mostly for the bonus civilizations and such; most of the new stuff, like Apostolic Palace or colonial maintenance is fucking stupid. Civ5 vanilla didn't click with me at all because of the hexes; with exp packs it's a respectable game, but Civ4 still holds more appeal. It looks and feels better to me.
Civ4 is like the ultimate in the Civ1-3 formula to me, with most of the bullshit like spamming small cities with no infrastructure and no real penalty for city spam having been resolved; Civ5 feels like a step backwards in many ways, especially straight out of the package.
>>322526734
Not really. Do you want to play Churchill and spam Drafted Redcoats with ridiculous promotions right off the gate, or do you want to play Elizabeth and lead an economic powerhouse? Do you want to do some ridiculous rapid expansion with Cathy or sit back and enjoy the more balanced Peter? Wanna landgrab with Hatshepsut or spam wonders with Ramesses? Etc.Of course most of you faggots probably only play Huniepop Capac Ketchup rush
>>322528303
Because it's honestly the only way to make navy matter.
>>322529123
>Because it's honestly the only way to make navy matter.
Shame the AI can't do anything on the water for shit
>no fall from heaven mod for civ 5
Maybe in civ 6
Civ 2 reporting in
It's not needlessly complicated like I feel 5 is
Civ 6 this year lads
![Ww2guill_Screen2[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/KsoFQYH.png "Ww2guill_Screen2[1].png")
>>322529767
Civ2 has the single best WW2 scenario everIt explicitly lets you play as Hitler
>>322529971
Not happening. They're making an expansion for that horrible beyond cuckoldry shit
>>322529971
Cant wait to see how dumbed down it it.
>>322529767
>Civ2
>not needlessly complicated
Well, unlike the modern games, it doesn't save things like production or research overflow, and some of the shit in this game is really obscure. I've seen people grok that game for 50 hours a session just to get a spaceship landed on Deity in the BC years/by 1 AD.
>>322530443
doubt it, probably didn't sell that well and it's only a mod so it's not like they need the whole civ team to do it
>>322530443
What the fuck else could they possibly add to it?
>>322530581
grok?
>>322522084
Civ 4 is the best pure civ game, before Firaxis went full SJW and removed slavery and added a bunch of no name women as Leaders.
>>322530994
This desu
Civ 6 is going to suck hard.
>>322530950
Google it you retard, though I don't think he's using it right.
>>322530994
Don't forget fictional characters
>>322530456
Civ V improved when Ed Beach took over as lead designer so (assuming he's still lead designer) maybe it won't be Civ V levels of shit on release.
>>322531452
>>322530950
My apologies, in my country the word is used in some environments to describe obsessively micromanaging and perfecting something.
>>322530994
the celt leader is literally fictional
>>322530994
>slavery
>the most broken and abusable mechanic in Civ4
did you really miss that shit that much
>>322530994
They either pushed no name shit women for MUH DIVERSITY or outright MADE PEOPLE UP and removed mechanics for being "problematic"
Fuck, how dumb. Fuck CIV
Yes im triggered
>>322531732
Boudicca isn't fictional.
>>322531732
Boudicca? She a historical figure man...
Civ IV is the defining game of the 4x genre. Civ V definitely is a great game, most especially with the expansions. It really is what you prefer though. Personally, I'm all for civ v even though it's incredibly buggy and the diplomacy is even more worst than Civ IV"s
Civ 5 is far more effected by early game snowballs due to seemingly random factors pertaining to spawn location. The Civ that spawns near the most ruins and CS's and natural wonders will get 40-60 turns of advancement in a matter of a few turns and snowball ahead of other players. Sulla, Civ4's best player and the guy in charge of Civ4s balance team said it best when he described it as "in Civ4 you make moves and decisions, in Civ5 you respond to things that have already happened"
>>322531962
What if they add actual modding abilities like they're (supposedly) doing for XCOM 2? Could that save the next game?
>>322531996
>>322532073
99% inaccurate. Literally movie tier "based on historical events" bullshit. Like IP Man movies. The IRL guy simply was a good fighter who trained Bruce Lee, in the movies they had him fight off all these western fighters and imperialists and liberating China from Japanese invaders and shit lmao
>based on true events
Literally Boudicca
>>322531962
>outright MADE PEOPLE UP
>meanwhile Civ4 has a Native American Empire and Charlemagne ruling the HRE
>>322532216
>Sulla, Civ4's best player
Maybe when the game was new and nobody knew how to play it. Even then, Sulla isn't, nor ever was, even a seasoned Immortal/Deity player.
>Civ 5 is far more effected by early game snowballs due to seemingly random factors pertaining to spawn location. The Civ that spawns near the most ruins and CS's and natural wonders will get 40-60 turns of advancement in a matter of a few turns and snowball ahead of other players.
Even as someone who doesn't like Civ5, this is the case for every Civ game. Or have you never popped something ridiculous like Horseback Riding from a hut in Civ4?
>be rome master race big white dick emperor
>carthage hot white milf with wide hips offers me a trade
>"im getting hot and wet for your wine, here is gold and my empty womb for your seed"
>hit ok sure, gold for wine
>"NO FUCK YOU THE TRADE ISNT GOOD ENOUGH"
Civ 5 is fucking whack, civs offering trades but then saying its not good enough wtf?
>>322532420
Boudicca is a shit choice (brian boru pls) but if you want to complain about made up people you could complain about Hiawatha.
>>322532295
I hope so
I hate modding though. Its a cheap excuse for devs to push shit because they know people will just do the work the devs should have done themselves
Makes them lazy
>>322532201
it's so dumb sometimes, I've had the ai say that a research agreement is ridiculous would never happen then ask them what they wanted for it and asked for something stupidly nominal like 30 gold
civ v attempts to fix a lot of stuff that was broken\janky\non-fun in civ iv but ends up simply introducing a different set of problems
although i do think that a lot of civ v's systems have merit and are fun, i think that certain strategies are punished too much (most notably: having very large militaries and settling many cities). however i do think that there is a bigger diversity of strategies than in civ iv, and there's definitely more emphasis put on playing defensively
in my opinion you can have a lot more fun with diplomacy in civ v, and a lot more fun fighting and a lot more fun doing many other things, but these systems don't extend as well to every possible strategy and every possible skill levle
>>322532671
carthage btfoing rome again
...how...how about me senpais..!
>>322533586
This really offended me
>>322533586
I don't know why people clamored for another SMAC, it simply was never ever going to be as good.
>>322533586
what's the difference between brave new world and beyond earth
>>322533901
One is good the other isn't.
>>322533901
You play Civilization for the familiar tech trees (its intuitive that you want to learn Gunpowder if you want to go to war) and the feeling of being in charge of a massive, historical empire.
Beyond Earth is just generic shit factions with a dumb uninspired pewpew techtree and you're better off playing GalCiv2, actual SMAC or Master of Orion 1 or 2.
>>322533586
>lets make up a bunch of new factions and then give absolutely no flavor text or characterization to them so it's like playing against cardboard cutouts
>also if we could make it as diverse and not-white people are possible
I don't know who's behind Beyond Earth but they're fucking retarded. And the expansion pack isn't any better while charging as much as a full game price for it.
when all is said and done, i like 5 better than 4
it's the first iteration of Civ where the modern/atomic era doesn't fly by in the blink of an eye
i like the city state dynamic - having your very own Viet Nam or Afghanistan is pretty cool
it's the first version of Civ where you're going to actually need an aircraft carrier
despite what others have said upthread, it still has the better treatment of religion
having said all that, i really miss globe view on the world map from 4
but i hate one unit per tile - anybody that's ever had to move a big force overland knows why
So I got the complete civ 4 on steam.
Do I need to install the base game and expacs to play all the content or can I just install the last expansion?
>>322536139
Install the last expansion.
>>322536327
ok thanks!
>>322536467
No problem. The only reason you might want to install Warlords, by the way, is if you want to try out the custom scenarios wherein - there's a rather unique one where you take on the role of Barbarians in a normal game and end up wrecking cities with Trebuchets in a race against time. It's comfy.
>>322522438
civ v.
unit stacking is boring.
>read civilopedia
>obvious some articles are sourced from Wikipedia
>>322522084
5 because its newer than 4.
>>322536596
we're talking about beyond the sword, right?
>>322536961
Yes. Install Beyond the Sword. Only install Warlords if you want to play scenarios because everything else is in Beyond the Sword.
>>322536961
Beyond the Sword is the latest expansion pack, and it's the only one you need to install.
Warlords can be worth installing for the custom scenarios included solely within that expansion pack.
Sorry for confusion.
>>322537113
thanks
>>322537121
>s-sorry for the c-confusion
no worries, m8
thanks
>>322522084
Just imagine, there's some fucker who would answer "Beyond Earth" to this question.
That poor fucking soul.
Stacks of Doom covered up for shit AI
Carpets of Doom exposed horrible military AI
You can literally turtle any civ on deity, reduce a neighbor's military to last place, get undamaged cities in a peace deal, and win with whichever victory condition your civ is built for.
>>322522084
I like civ 3 the best.
Civ 5 with G&K and BNW is great. As good as, if not better, than Civ 4. However Civ 5 Vanilla sucks harder than almost any Civ game apart from BE.
Will they ever save BE?
>>322529767
my nigger, glad there's some taste in this thread
>>322533586
MOTHER
FUCKING
FAVORS
Thanks for making diplomacy impossible, Sid.
No one's made a Final Frontier mod for Civ V yet.
Why?
>>322528303
Because you're a babby who plays Venice after Caesar/Attila/Montezuma took a big shit on you.
>>322537760
>Save BE
It would literally need to be reworked from the ground up. Its funny though because the leaders being diverse can almost be directly attributed to SJW agenda shit and just like everyone would guess, it turned out to be shit.
I prefer Civ V mostly because of the hex grid and no doomstacks
>play Civ 4: Colonization remake
>odds system and unit stacks
fuck that noise, once you go 1UPT you never go back
>>322537760
>Will they ever save BE?
I doubt BE will have any more expansions. In fact I wouldn't be too surprised if they end up announcing Civilization VI by summertime.
>>322538986
>play Civ4: Colonization remake
that was your first mistake
>>322538310
The leaders being diverse seems more like they were poorly aping SMAC.
What does /v/ think of Fall from Heaven II?
>>322528250
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/paris-attacks-were-cowardly-act-6831104
>>322530938
well they could put back in half the civ 5 features they cut out for starters
civ 5 was my first civ game and after BE I finally understood why all the civ 4 fans were so eternally butthurt
>>322539074
I played Civ 4 too, it's not too different. spearmen beating tanks bullshit
>>322540097
>I played Civ 4 too, it's not too different. spearmen beating tanks bullshit
so you haven't played Civ4 either
Civ 4 + All Expansions + Major mod like Caveman 2 Cosmos > Dominions 4 > Civ 4 > Civ 5 + All Expansions
>>322539679
Best thing I ever played and set my standard for god tier vidya/mods
>>322522084
4 is better. 5 ruins diplomacy and removing unit stacking was a shit idea.
>>322522084
>>322522612
Civ 5 was the first I actually got into. I tried 4, but it never stuck with me, while 5 was streamlined enough for me to just play and learn as I went along. Got 4 in some bundle later on, but haven't really tried it yet. Looked like I'd enjoy it more than 5 (which I grew bored of around 150 hours in), but I'd need to get past those first few games.
>>322522084
Am I the only one that still play Civ3?
>>322522084
>Civ V making cultural victories worthwhile, combat more satisfying, and different civilizations fundamentally unique
>Civ IV had a stronger tech tree, better diplomacy (trading maps and techs) and dat era specific OST that has a mix of public domain and original music
Hard to choose.
Maybe Civ IV, it feels like the last honest attempt to make a damn good 4X game in the Civ series. It's probably also one of the only games I can recall that does streamlining properly by making the game easier to follow rather than just easier.
I prefer 5 for all the casual reasons that it's an easy game to load up with friends then fuck off for a bit and make conversation over.
I've replaced Civ with Endless Legend for 4x play though. I really wish that game was more popular, my only complaint is that there's no real modding.
So what's the consensus on Realism Invictus for Civ IV? I can't use Caveman2Cosmos, but I want something new for Civ.
>>322522084
Civ 4
And Civ 2.
I play them all though.
>>322533831
Because it could have been a 1:1 remake but with improved graphics and a few more tutorials and it would have been perfect. But no, lets not base factions off of ideologies to make them memorable but fucking countries instead making every leader a literally who.
>>322538986
>Civ 4: Colonization remake
What a tragedy, that remake, they first mistake was making the game exactly as the original. No slavery in a colonization game, only France, Spain, Netherlands and England, the natives are not in accurate places (Agueybana II in fucking North America), the game is a race against time, no real benefit of keeping native alive, since converted natives will not take up arms against the king, the king as OP units that you can't use, can't ask other civs for help in your indepence (Because the US never had help from France and Spain, right?), etcs... It could had been a great game.
>>322541293
>Because it could have been a 1:1 remake
No
It couldn't have
People always say this about reboots and remakes. 'THEY JUST NEEDED TO MAKE THE ORIGINAL WITH MORE VISUALS!'
If they did that people would bitch at them for not putting any work into it.
>>322522084
My first CIV game was Beyond Earth. So I was very pleasantly surprised with Civ V and all the depth in it with it's Xpacs, even before I added mods. BE just seriously lacks in comparison. It's somewhat better with Rising Tide and patches, but it's still missing quite a bit even if I prefer it's tech tree.
I have Civ IV but I don't think i'm going to try it, It doesn't look casual enough for me. I'll admit i'm a casual fuck who likes hexes. For all of Civ V's problems - diplomacy jesus fuck, global happiness, etc - it's still fun
>>322541771
There's the TAC mod for the Colonization remake that fixes some of these issues. It's not much but hey.
>>322541771
>France, Spain, Netherlands and England
Tbh, that's the way it was in original, 1994's Colonization. Civ4:Col attempted to be a straight-up remake, but it was just bland and boring that way, with none of the original's charm.
>>322522084
CIV V, if only for Brazils war theme
dat war zumba
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aX2CcrsxLcQ
4 because I grew up with it and can't be bothered to play 5.
>>322539191
I think it's a combination of both. BE was developed during the height of Social Justice pushing in video games and the developers aren't very good. All of their best talent left after Civ IV. If I'm not mistaken the lead designer of Civ IV, the guy who made it fucking good, left right after the game shipped.
>>322542967
>I grew up with Civ IV
I was going to be mad, then I realised Civ IV is eleven years old.
I feel old now, Simcity 4 is still cutting edge to this brain
>>322541771
I was on the Frankenstein inside testing team for Colonization. They completely ignored everyone's advice that the game was pretty shitty.
Strangely enough I am no longer invited to their alphas and betas anymore.
>>322543605
Shocker, isn't it?
>>322543676
after giving a try to that game I emulated the original DOS Sid Meier's Colonization to check if it was as fun as I remembered it to be, and yes, Sid Meier's Colonization is still a lot of fun.
I play it and in my mind I am a conquistador during the whole playthrough.
Civ 4: Colonization is just a bad game.
For me Civ V should have been Civ 4, but creating units should have strained more your cities, that is the depth combat needed, the more units you create he worse your economy gets due to lack of workers, and the more units die the more unhappy people get.
>>322541771
I don't really have a problem with Colonization, in fact I loved the old Colonization game, but when wonky Civ 4 mechanics went in along with it I was able to make a stack of three Dragoons that shared hp with a Great General.it still lost to a fucking brave
>>322544575
>and the more units die the more unhappy people get
Defender already has a ridiculous advantage in Civ4 (that the AI doesn't know how to abuse), and war weariness is already crippling if you let it accumulate.
I mostly always figured that Civ was never particularly combat-oriented, with the momentum/timing of your strike being more important than any of the macro under the hood.
You can't just pull that shit so easily on Immortal/Deity.
Maybe you could nerf drafting/slavery, but then you get Caste System/commie Workshops etc. etc. until you have to rehaul all production.
I liked the way Stack of Doom was dealt with in Civ2 - if your Stack was attacked in the open and the top defending unit lost, the entire stack was wiped out unless it was fortified in a city or fort.
>>322527839
>squares>hexes
Ciiv 5 has problems but this is not fucking one of them
>>322545872
I thought I was playing Civ, not fucking Settlers of Catan
>>322538986
End that shit.
>>322546801
>turn based game where you dick over a bunch of retarded assholes for limited resources and every time someone pulls ahead they get dogpiled
Civ or Catan?
>>322546985
I'll shut up now.
>>322522084
I've wasted years of my life playing both of these games and I prefer Civ V more. I liked the many things you could do in IV, but Civ V fixed a lot of the clutter that made IV a bit tedious to play at times.
I like that they went in a very different direction, but someone in this thread said it best when it ended up making different problems instead of fixing all the other ones. Global Happiness is probably the worst thing about the game though. Social Policies are uneven in their benefits. Diplomacy is absolutely bonkers at times.
>>322522084
I started playing Civ 5 and enjoyed going to war. But then I got denounced to hell and ended as a warmonger.
>>322522084
Neither, I prefer war games.
>>322545872
>>322546801
>it's not civ if it's not squares because I said so!
Did you bitch about every new feature and change in mechanics every time a new civ came out because it's not civ, orr just hexs because hexs are arbitrarily different?
You are like halo fans who bitch about how thusters "isn't halo" despite never saying duel wielding or equipment "wasn't halo?
Swedefags:
Was Gustavus Adophus a good choice for Sweden leader, or would you have preferred Charles XII?
Carolean Death March's don't feel the same when playing as Adolph.
>>322522084
I preferred Civ 4 until the final Civ 5 expansion, once the game was actually complete it was far more enjoyable than its bare bones extremely limited version.
The only thing I didn't like about Civ 4 was having to stack units, and thankfully don't have to do that in Civ 5, so being a warmonger is a lot more fun.
If you were choosing between the two, Civ 5 is a lot more user friendly and fun while Civ 4 has deeper game mechanics apart from the shitty combat system.
Ghandi is still a shit though.
>>322532201
This picture is a pathetic misunderstanding of game mechanics. If you're winning, why would the AI offer you straight deals?
>>322533373
>ask for open borders for open borders
>they demand half my strategic resources and one of every luxury they don't already have
good deal right?
>>322552119
And this faggot, he doesn't understand that open borders doesn't benefit both sides equally.
>>322532201
If you are in Era's above them then that's certainly not a fair trade in their eyes.
>>322552543
I know it doesn't, it's just funny how ludicrous an offer they'll come up with instead of just telling you to fuck off
civ 5 is a boring grind where none of your actions matter
civ 4 is good
>>322522084
>no stacks of death
>massive city thats probably dozens of miles wide takes up a single tile
>a few hundred archers need the same amount of space
FUCKING WHY
>>322553123
>trying to capture a city, founded on a hill, with 3 archers defending it, and surrounded by a river
>>322553123
>I can only build one farm on each tile, fucking why.
>Archers can deal damage to my tanks, fucking why.
>Military units and leaders can survive for hundreds if not thousands of years, fucking why.
Curb your autism, play the game.
>>322553672
>>322553884
Pathetic.
>>322522084
Can't say, never gave Civ4 a chance really.
Played Civ2, Civ4 looked like a bloated civ2 where bad players could just doomstack to win.
Civ5 didn't have that, and it gave an alternative to ICS, so I played that.
Immortal troops in Civ5 kinda sucks though.
>>322550354
Gustavus Adolphus is much better, but they could've at least tried to make it look like him rather than Eric XIV who was an irrelevant meme king.
>>322530437
Really?
>>322556953
please buy hearts of iron 4
>>322557157
No, it looks like casualized garbage.
>>322557157
Why would he play an inferior gameto Darkest Hour?
>>322556953
Well, from Civ games, at least.
>>322522084
Civ 5
>didn't play civ 4
>just got civ 5 in winter sale
>put in about 15hrs so far
>it's fun
>>322542847
damn that's hot
>>322550354
Would've been nice to be able to choose between them. One leader who focused more on diplomacy and the other on war.
>>322529123
Yeah really, I liked the one leader per civ as if give civs that would've never got into the game a chance and gives it more variety
>>322541037
Realism Invictus is good. I think it about quadruples the number of techs and adds a whole mess of other things. it's like playing a whole new game. Can't say whether or not it's a good substitute for C2C since I can't play it either but I would definitely Realism it a try.
>>322550113
are there still people who don't understand that the main attraction of hexes isn't the amount of movement possible but rather the fact that all tiles are at the same distance from adjacent tiles?
>>322560138
