You did know, the creator of RON came from the Civ team, and he said he made RON to be like a RTS version of Civilizations. Ignorance is bliss, no?

Not ignorance at all. He was in fact the person who started out as head programmer for Civ 3 but left part way through to form his own company and make RoN. He was also the one in charge of Alpha Centauri. I base my observations on having played them both. RoN is nothing like Civ. Yes they both have the same premise, but that's where the similirity ends IMO.

Well, yes, they're of two different genres. Nevertheless RoN retains a lot of the "feel" of Civ, incorporates an abnormal number of TBS ideas considering it's an RTS, and I have to admit has had more staying power on my hard drive than any Civ title to date. Civ's so light on history it seems reasonable to have a light game to accompany it, I suppose. At least that's my opinion.

I appreciate all the feedback here by the way. It sounds like I should wait until the new expansion's out and then re-evaluate. It also sounds like my caution was warranted.

Well, I loved it... The opening music still gives me goosebumps and I prefer it over Civ3. I find that I can't go back to Civ3 after Civ4. I can't say about Civ2 since I didn't play it... I still remember the good old days of CivI though...

Nice times..

If only RoN:Thrones & Patriots had more campaigns (or had a campaign editor), I would still be playing it to this day.

geminisama.... oops! Ah the joy of making a smart comment and then getting shot down! hehehe, lol

Civilization 4 is a ruin. A great game with a great concept, now has turned to be a blockbuster.

The graphics make you feel playing theme park. The complexity of the games could more about management and building your civilization than a tech tree wich is hard to understand and incomplete.

I paid too much for that game, sold it half-price on ebay.

I played the game 3 times, 15 minutes, I was not able to have fun with thoses kind of graphics, I prefer to play a game with poor graphics than playing a game with graphics designed for kids.

+ you notice that the game has been designed for rookie who dont have any history knowledge. If you compare the the civilization 3 complete version, it's nothing.

I played since the first civilization, but after playing the 4th, I abandonned this series.

The reasons you give for it to be no good, i would not have expected to hear... how come no one else seems to care about the nerfing of the bombard feature? Thats the only thing that killed civ4 for me!

i would recommend that you try Alpha Centuary series also by Sid Meier.

Excellent overall game, compacted with space-age imaginary events.

Civilization 4 is not recommended for those who get easily bored. The game is very complex full of materials, but with many FAQs and helps available on the internet, i find no reason why you cant learn to play well.

Good luck man ! CIV 2 WAS THE BEST !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I enjoyed Civ 3 the most, but I like 3 and 4 about the same.

You now have to have massive armies as a peace player if you want to avoid being attacked, because you need a counter for everything they might throw at you, and the enemy likes pillaging, A LOT. It doesn't help that towns and villages take ages to develop either. Combat in 4 has become a micromanagement nightmare, and for a traditionally peaceful player, it often drags you kicking and screaming into war mode. Diplomacy is nerfed, because you can't do anything until you get the relevant techs.
Civ is basically a war game now.

On the plus side, you don't get cheeky spearmen and settlers trying to run through your territory even though you told them to get out. There's no pollution or corruption (yay!), and its more efficient to build new cities slowly (and carefully decide where to place them).

I really enjoy Civ 4 and GalCiv 2. I use the present tense because I play both in fairly equal measure.

Civ 4 is highly modd-able, and part of the slowdown that you see is a series of python checks for practically everything. There is now a speed-mod out that removes those checks and improves the turn processing considerably.

Also, there is currently a very impressive mod out for Civ4 called Fall From Heaven, which makes use of the promotion system and other things to create a strong magic system.

Good Changes from III --> IV

- entering borders w/out permission is an act of war
- RoP rape is gone
- corruption no longer removes a city's productivity, and is reflected in a maintainence cost instead.
- shiny
- a single power number for units instead of an attack / defense value, with counter bonuses. ie. the spearman is a Str 4 unit with a +100% bonus v. horse units.

I would recomend buying Civ4, you get the base game, and you get the engine to play some truly excellent mods.

I just tried playing a game of civ3 yesterday again after a long break. The stupid Americans decided to send a horde of settlers through my area, and i did not have enough units to block their path, so that destroyed the game for me.

Civ IV was a break from "the way it was done" previously in the Civ Series, and those insisting playing it like previous versions declared it a dog. It is a more complex version and the graphics 3D rendering takes a lot out of your PC, but its the old story you dont get something for nothing. Purists will say 3D makes no difference, and in many ways thats true, but many lose sight of the purpose of the game - FUN, not endless bloodletting to be seen as the Worlds highest scorer. There is little doubt the 3D implimentation achieves what it set out to do, and the proper use of the 3D camera zoom and game table manouvering produces some eye catching effects.

I am a Civilization fan, although I wilted a little at the buggy initial V4 release. It is however stable now - has been for some time - and given todays entry level standard of PC will run fine, anything less and you will start to have a few speed issues. However I would always say dont hesitate, go get it - it makes a refreshing break between GalCiv games every now and then if nothing else.

It has far more depth to the game than GalCiv, but thats hardly surprising given the time the Civilisation series has been going. However for all that GalCiv is rapidly catching them over time, so Sid needs to watch his mettle - the rate these guys push out GalCiv updates is enough to make any Game Developer sweat

Which is better ? Hard to say, both come at TBS from different angles, and its like comparing chalk and cheese. Acknowledging the current lack of depth in GalCiv compared to Civ IV, my long term money is on GalCiv providing Brad keeps on going aka GalCiv III / GalCiv IV etc [ pretty please    ] as I believe these guys have got the right focus and take enormous trouble to involve and listen to its gamers. Sid's guys are a little too distant for my liking, and since Sid sold it, they essentially now have to respond to Production House, Distribution and Revenue pressures. I think that the Civ series will wilt on the vine - in the end - allbeit a few years yet. Frogboy and GalCiv have the formulae right, and guaranteed longevity as long as their internal interest in it stays up - lets hope it does.

Regards
Zy

It's funny - I considered Civ 3 to be more complex than Civ 4..... but I still consider 3 to be the better game. Civ 4 has more things to do, but less complex strategy (imo) than 3.

I'd still say buy it. It's definitely worth every penny - you will more than get your money's worth long before you start digging into mods too.

When most games these days are expensive and shoddy, with 10 hours playtime, there really is no question that a game like Civ 4 is worth buying. If you really are worried about the cost though, perhaps wait until the next expansion comes out and they are sure to offer some kind of bundled box soon thereafter..... then you can get them all for the price of one! A real bargain!