Is it really different enough?

[quinalla]

Originally posted by Martinus
One of the main changes from Civ1-3 to Civ4 for me is a visible attempt on behalf of the developers to change no-brainers into strategic choices.

This is one of the best changes, there are so many ways to do things and so many different strategies that work.

Combat is much different than civ3, it isn't just my number is bigger than your number anymore. The way diplomacy works and the way the AI civs interact with you is different too and makes more sense. The religions add a whole new twist and the way great people are implemented is interesting. And yes, the civic choices instead of just one type of government are cool too.

In general, things are more transparent too. You can see why a civ likes or dislikes you. You can see if a tile is starting to become more or less yours from culture. You can see the odds of a fight before you try it. You can see when a great leader is coming and what type it is likely to be. Some may not like that, but I really do.

[Dis]

Are there no armies in this game? I didn't see any mention of them in the manual. And I'm still early in this game.

I really don't see why they got rid of armies. In a way the combat went backwards and not forwards. I still like the game, but I was looking forward to armies.

[Stuie]

No armies, Dis.

[Nikolai]

In a way it is. But not as you probably think of it. More like being able to move in stacks.

[Adagio]

Re: Is it really different enough?

Originally posted by Gutz
Puitting the graphics aside is the game itself really different enough to be worth the purchase? I loved Civ III and want to get Civ IV but from what I have seen its not really that much different - opinions please!
Thanks in advance

As everybody here has said, I can only agree that the game is defently different

Some people might be scared off by that many huge changes to the gameplay, but so far it seems like most people like those changes