Any civ'ers?

[Cry Havoc]

Honestly, I never claimed to be an expert at any Civ.

Ive never been able to break the Monarch barrier and even then I routinely lose.

I scoured civfanatics a long time ago to learn more about Civ strats and tbh, its too much to learn. So I just enjoy the game(s) for what they are. I think I can speak effectively to the differences between 4 and 5, but I have always made two things clear...

1) I am not very good. Playing at Monarch level is noob-level and I dont win very often.
2) I do not play online and have no will to.

But I understand what youre saying about the social differences between 4 and 5....and youre right. You can hot-switch your entire empire in 4 from a warmonger to a cultural dynamo whereas in 5 the moment you pick, youre locked in for the rest of the game.

I treat the two games as different experiences. Is fully expanded 4 better than 5? Yes, undoubtedly. But to me theyre just different games all together. I like the new combat and have not experienced the Longbows/Cannon overpowered aspects you have, thats for sure.

But your understanding of the various methods of play are more on par with the civfanatics, and thats just beyond me...and I kind of prefer it that way. Civilization4 is a game I could never master, I never excelled at it and I enjoy it more because of that. I dont know if I am going to win or lose until almost mid-game....before then, its a toss up and thats why I keep playing.

The difference between you and rickross, IMO, is that you are fundamentally different players. You play Civ because it's an enjoyable experience and you want to build a Civilization and command armies, etc. You want the theater and the suspension of disbelief.

Rickross would beat you, but it's because he's researched it to the point that he knows every potential game breaking strategy and tactic possible to exploit the imbalances that currently exist in Civ V. They are two equally valid ways to play the game. You play for the experience, he plays to be as good as possible.

To be honest, I'm never going to be that great at the Civ games. I don't have the time to really invest in learning the nuances that make every city as productive as possible, etc. If I want to game compe ively, I'll go play Starcraft II (amazing to see that game developing into a real eSport in the US) or Bad Company 2. Civ is something I play because I love the concept of developing a nation into a world power. I'll never strive to beat it on the highest level unless my natural ability takes me there, as opposed to SCII where I will research and watch tactics online to become better and refine my gameplay.

[The Reckoning]

i used to be that way with Rome...id research and try out military maneuvers that would completely stump the AI, but would no way work in real life. id have battles where id kill/rout 5,000 and lose maybe 2 people to friendly fire on expert difficulty. id even play until i conquered every province on the map.

thats when it got boring as to me. i remember putting the disc into the computer for the first time not knowing what was going to happen. every campaign would blow my mind, especially when id try something different like abandoning all my cities and creating a horde
(actually works perfectly to pull all greek troops from asia minor and syracuse to own macedon. rome or carthage would march into syracuse, but since theres hardly any resistance theyd declare peace).

when i began to be serious about the game and tried to be as dominant and efficient as possible, it felt more like a job. thats when i stopped playing. the best times i had playing that game was when i first started, and id be really drunk/stoned and watch all my elephants plow through formations in awe. i didnt freak when they died either. i thought it was awesome. later on it got to the point where id be pissed to lose a single elephant because they cost so much denarii.

[hater]

Bump

DarkReign is my kind of guy. I have dusted off my Civ 4 Warlords and was playing heavily. Crazy that a 6 year old game still being incredibly fun.

Finally can kick ass in Noble level. (after reading some tips) Keep in mind I play high as most of the time and only take 5 secs per move.

I can see Civ 5 is still $50 to buy which means it is been selling well. Will get into it eventually but still having too much fun with Civ 4

[Cry Havoc]

Bump

DarkReign is my kind of guy. I have dusted off my Civ 4 Warlords and was playing heavily. Crazy that a 6 year old game still being incredibly fun.

Finally can kick ass in Noble level. (after reading some tips) Keep in mind I play high as most of the time and only take 5 secs per move.

I can see Civ 5 is still $50 to buy which means it is been selling well. Will get into it eventually but still having too much fun with Civ 4

Any tips you'd like to share? I play 4 on my laptop because it runs so much better than 5.

[Vici]

Y'all should check out Supreme Ruler Cold War.

[hater]

Any tips you'd like to share? I play 4 on my laptop because it runs so much better than 5.

well I'm pretty rookie but let's see.
- read the guides here, it helped me a lot http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/stra...uctory_courses. Civ is a game you actually have to study for. I didn't know about Great People, culture bombs and shrines till last week
- AI sucks at combat, so that's you main advantage, use it
- use your traits to your advantage. http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/strategy/synergy.php
- make other civs go to war with each other
- get at least 2 friend civs
- only build what you need. Don't waste
- get religions, form shrines, make money off it

I can probably win at Prince if I play sober and take my time. Once I win at Monarch I will retire to Civ 5. long way to go...

[DarkReign]

rickross ended up being very correct about Civ5, fwiw.

I dominate at Civ5 at every level except Deity.

[The_Worlds_finest]

The expansion is pretty freaking good. It only took $80 to finally get a game that is playable and entertaining.

[Cry Havoc]

The expansion is pretty freaking good. It only took $80 to finally get a game that is playable and entertaining.

Yeah but that'll go on sale, and it's a game you can sink thousands of hours into.

[The Reckoning]

imo i'm clearing prince fairly easily but don't really feel inclined to up the difficulty


except when i thought i could throw modern infantry at cities with over 100 defense....completely wiped my military...but i play culture/currency playstyle so i can purchase atleast a new unit every turn. you really have to think tactical...

as far as the game itself goes, it's all about how you research tech to what tiles you have and stick with your resource and civilization strengths. i kind of hated in civ 4 how you could take a one way tech path and just trade for everything else. now you have to play an overall game at least into the 20th century. i do notice that most civs won't rush to build wonders anymore, so it's fairly easy to build most of them and then use whatever currency you have to purchase regular structures. but it's nice that civs actually have personality and playstyles. the AI is much better. except city-states can be re ed, especially when they're at war.