![]() ![]() Great write-up! While I prefer Civ IV myself, I agree with most of your points. The important thing is THEY ARE ALL VERY DIFFERENT. it is perhaps not a complex as civ IV BTS (they are trying with brave new world) but it is accessible and some of the changes they have made (IE: one unit per tile, hexes ect.) are indispensable even if they don't all work properly quite yet. If I had to suggest one to a new player it would be 5. TLDR: The short answer is: They are all good. Like Civ III i feel like ciV is trying to shake up the game by adding new systems and adjusting old ones that will only be fully fleshed out in the next iteration. This despite what you may think is a very abbreviated list of the changes made in this series of wonderful games and in fact many subjects a skirted or entirely left out. Religion (added in Gods & Kings) received an overall shifting it from the less meaningful (personal opinion) Civ IV of foundation based on tech discovery to the faith point system which allowed for religion to have a greater impact on a civilization. Further culture now takes an active role in the development of a civilizations government by building up to allow the election of social polices that take the place of the governmental types and choices of previous titles. Notably "cultural combat" has been removed from ciV as you can no longer culturally convert a city but this seems to be returning in brave new world in the form of tourism. Further the cultural system received an overhaul by having cities expand through culture tile by tile rather than by each surrounding tile by thresholds additionally gold has been allowed in the purchase of tiles as a way to rush land grabbing or circumvent cultural almost all together. ![]() Where as in previous titles you could stack as many units on a single tile as you pleased ciV opted for the more tactical one unit per tile system that despite AI issues is an objective step up. Next the combat system received a complete overall. No one (and rightly so) seems to think that this was any thing but an improvement. First ciV switched from square tiles to hexes. As a starting point I would like to point out that it is far more accessible than previous titles and despite some wonderfully conceived but ill executed concepts (see Civ III) it is still easily the civ game i would recommend to a new comer.ĬiV has, I would argue, made the largest and most audacious steps in the series so far and by in large, though the implementation hasn't been perfect, I would say they have done well. By Beyond the Sword it added the arguable exploitable (but fun) Corporations system that spiced up the late game and is notably (for better or worse) missing from ciV.ĬiV, i would argue, in the same tradition of civ III attempted to fundamentally alter the systems that were in place in the frankly near perfect preceding title, and as the expansions have been released it has done a pretty good job IMHO. It refined the culture system into a coherent form that was lacking in civ III that allowed real "cultural combat" and added the fascinating religious system. ![]() It removed the absurd connection between units an cities, added a governmental system (inspired by Alpha Centauri) that allowed the player to tailor their government to their choosing with a 4 section system of traits. In short it was Civ II with some tech refinement, more advanced governmental choice and a cultural border system.Ĭiv IV really came into its own. We also saw the addition of a cultural victory. Culture was now gained in a city that hit several thresholds that would then expand the boders around a city by one. But they added the cultural boundary system which really changed things from civ II where each city simply occupied the square surrounding it by a factor of two. Government was still a static choice of a few options that directly and completely changed the nature of your civ and the abilities available to it. For instance, as in two you still had to pay by city production cost for units produced in (or assigned to) the city. Well this is quite a question apt for a long-winded answer and note this is according to my much faulted memory.Ĭiv III differed from Civ II (if I remember correctly) more in an addition of mechanics than in straight deviation in existent concepts. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |