So, I’m a computer gamer with an interest in turn based strategy, but for some reason I’ve never gotten around to playing any of the Civilization games. From what I hear they sound immensely fun, but also immensely complex. I am interested in trying them out don’t want to be overwhelmed by all the myriad options and strategies to the point of paralysis. So I guess my question is should I just jump into CIV 5 with both feet now, wait for CIV 6, or start with one of the earlier ones to get used to the system and work my way up from there.
I’m in the same boat right now. My solution was to start with the plain vanilla version of Civ 5 and to watch a lot of YouTube videos. This guy is my favorite but there are a jillion others.
It’s been since, like, Civ III or so since I spent any real time on games, but I will say that one of the nice things about Civ is that they’re as complicated as you want them to be. On easier levels, you can spend your time building a nice, happy, healthy civilization and mostly ignore other civilizations, or conquer them if they’re in your way. Or you can get all hardcore and calculate exactly what order you should build things in, and which mix of units is best, and all that kind of stuff that, to me, sounds more like work than fun. So I say just dive in, and adjust it to your level of interest.
Popular consensus seems to be that Civ IV is the best of them, so you might want to start there. Civ V changed a lot of things about the game, not all of them for the better, and even if you like the changes, it’s certainly not representative of the series as a whole. And I have no idea when VI is going to come out, or what it’s going to be like.
Civ 5 is actually one of the easier games in the series. They took a lot out of the gameplay from Civ 4. Also, in Civ 5, you can only place one unit per hex, so you don’t have massive stacks of armies marching all over the place. Sometimes this makes the logistics of getting all of your units into a battle much harder, since you can’t walk over your other units. I still play Civ 4 for hours on end.
I’ve played every Civ game since Civ 1, and I don’t see any reason why you shouldn’t jump in on the latest. It had its hiccups when it came out, but they’ve largely been ironed out, and I think it’s a great game.
As others have said, it’s as easy or as hard as you want; playing at the lowest level is very forgiving, and you’ll get a good feel for the game.
There’s plenty of pop-ups to help you in Civ 5 (select “New to Civ” in the option screen). I do recommend getting the Gods and Kings expansion pack. It adds a lot to the game without making it much more complex. Once you get the hang of it you can get the Brave New World pack.
Wait for a sale of Civ 5 on amazon, steam or GMG so that it includes the 2 expansions. They make the game awesome.
As for playing through, follow the advice of your in game advisors. Everytime you have to do something, like build something in a city or research a technology they’ll have recommendations based on what they specialize in - the war advisor will suggest technologies and buildings/units to make your empire stronger militarily, etc.
After awhile you’ll understand enough about the various systems to deviate from their advice.
One of my favorite builds is with the celts civ. They get bonuses to faith for every forest tile you own. I settle in a large forest and use my early faith bonus to dominate with my religion, then I go for the traits that turn faith into science bonuses and ride that to either a science or diplomatic victory.
I was lucky: a friend sat me down and “mentored” me through my first game. By and large, he let me have my head and make my own mistakes, but he advised me out of making the biggest, stupidest mistakes, and politely nudged me in the right direction now and then.
This was extremely helpful in understanding some of the technical aspects of game mechanics. “How do I reassign labor?” Here’s how… “Ah! Thanks!”
One of the great strengths of all the games in the CIV series is how well it explains the concepts and features to new players. So as Smeghead said above I think anyone with a background in strategy games should be able to pick up any of the series and play well.
Personally I haven’t played V yet, but IV is awesome and some of the fan-made mods are amazing. Fall from Heaven II in particular is like a completely new game with a fantasy theme.
Playing the games on their easiest level, it’s nearly impossible to lose. I suppose you might not win but you won’t be overrun and destroyed either. Since it’s turn based, you have all the time you want to plan a move and the game can automate nearly the entire game for you (resource production, building management, scientific research, etc). Even when you choose to handle those things yourself – and I recommend it since that’s half the fun of having your own civilization – there’s “advisers” to say “Military recommends we build city walls” and “Economists recommend building a marketplace”.
I would pick up Civ V Complete which includes the Gods & Kings and Brave New World expansions. Those expansions return many of the things people missed from previous games (religion being a prime one) and add new features as well.
I don’t see any current sales on Civilization V but GameAgent is supposed to have it for 75% off on Saturday, April 12th. Although it’s a “Mac” game store, Civilization V is a “Steamplay” game and the Steam key they sell works for both Mac & PC versions of the game. I don’t know if they’ll have the Complete edition on sale or the expansions but, if you’re unsure about investing any more than you have to, this would be an easy way to try the base game out for cheap.
I’m not worried about losing, I’m more worried about constantly second guessing myself. I’m a bit of a perfectionist when it comes to these things (I’ll replay an easy battle in Hero’s of Might and Magic over and over until I manage to win without losing any units) and I was worried that with too many options I would be endlessly going back to old saves to do things differently. Having the advisers and tutorials on CIV 5 is appealing. I’ll just try to make a rule for myself not to constantly reload earlier saves.
For most decisions, there isn’t a single best choice. There are many paths to victory, and one choice might lead to one path, while another leads to a different path. Some people prefer to go all-out military at the beginning and quickly overwhelm other civs with efficient early-game units, and if that’s your playstyle, then building a library is a mistake… But on the other hand, some prefer to get an edge on technology, and use that technological edge to bribe their way through early wars, in which case building a library instead of early military units is the right choice, after all. And you might even switch intended strategies mid-stream, depending on what techs you get from goodie huts, or what you see your opponents doing.
While that’s a good idea, replaying from a certain point to see how you could do better or differently is a good way to learn. “Hmm, Russia really got me when she back stabbed. Think I’ll reload from the starting autosave and try it again but this time invest in more archers.” There’s also the satisfaction of revenge in that example.
I vaguely remember my first games of Civ I. I did some hilariously noobish things, but I managed to muddle through (on the lowest difficulty level). It took me a few games to get the hang of things, but I didn’t need to read strats or anything.
I like Civ IV better than Civ V. I think it’s more representative of the franchise; it may give you a better idea of what the fuss is all about. It’s also a bit cheaper.
To be fair, there are some things that are counterintuitive. Like, in Civ 3, if you want to fight your wars mostly defensively, you should mostly invest in offensive military units, not defensive ones.
Civ V is accessible and pretty, I’ll give it that, but in every other category Civ IV with the Beyond the Sword expansion blows the doors off of all the others (save Civ II just for a nostalgia scratch). The pletora of clever fan based scenarios and mods keeps it fresh even after all these years.
Civ V attempted to bring in a tactical element, a goal I respect as a wargamer, but the scale these games are played at makes tactical combat ridiculous.
+1. This succinctly summarized everything that I wanted to +1 for the other Civ4 voters above. Civ4 is just a much better builder game.
Very different. The entire dynamic is flipped on its head. In AoE and Warcraft, you build your civ to sustain your army. In Civ you build armies to sustain your civ.