Other things V added: one tile city expansion (it really leads to better looking that don't claim a bunch of land you cannot work) and city defenses. I also really, really missed hexes for both gameplay and aesthetic reasons. In Civ 4 you had to continually build armies just to defend your own land with or be crushed by the AI's stack of doom Civ 5 is a lot more forgiving on this front. Both could do a lot better - but after playing 4 again, I have a new respect for what they did with 5. City defences, and cultural policies and wonders that boost your units in your own territory mean that playing defensively is a lot easier than in Civ 4. But what it gives you in organization, it takes away by not giving you very much info to begin with (there are a few really good mods that do this, which I highly recommend). Part of this is not remembering what each did, but part of it is that there are techs and units which really don't add to the game.Ĭiv 5 also does a much better job at organizing information and allowing you to control the order you do tasks during your turn. to the point of which you're sort of lost and each step seems so minor that you wonder what the point is. In my view, there are too many units, too many techs, etc. While Civ 5 is a bit too simplistic, Civ 4 is a bit too complicated. However, it's not like Civ 4 was the perfect game a lot of posters here pretend it was. For that price, it's a good buy regardless. I didn't play Civ 4 that much (since I just used a friend's copy), but I picked it up last night because it was ~$7 and played a game to the medieval era.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |