Just How Unhelpful is the Manual & Civilopedia ?

[SorvinoBackhand]

Am I the only one who finds the manual and civilopedia rather thin? Both lack a very deep index; some concpets seem really hard to find (I can't find power, eg, & if it is in there, the fact I can't find it easily is the problem); and the entries lack lots of links to explain other terms. The Civ 3 civilopedia seemed much better on the last score particularly.

[vee4473]

You aren't the only one. There is NO index. That measly table of contents doesn't cut it.

[LordShiva]

It's got nothing on Civ2's.

[JackRudd]

Banana

[Writersbl0ck]

I am in the process of making an online "players manual" for the game. I am a law student though, and short on time, so if anyone wants to contribute for the benefit of the Civ4 community, let me know.

[Addled Platypus]

doing a "wiki" ?

[JackRudd]

Sounds like a good idea. Shall I contribute my table of Trait/Starting Tech combinations?

[Writersbl0ck]

Yes, sounds good. Anything that anyone wants to contribute, send to:

Thomaspatrickjr@sbcglobal.net

I will try to get it out before school starts up again in January!

Anyone that ocntributes, please give me your email address and your Civ4 player name on your contribution so you get credit. Also, post what you are contributing on here so I don't get 100 of the same thing.

I already have a list of all the troops, their civs, their upgrades, their cost, their required advance/building/resource. So I don't need that. The starting traits thing sounds good so please send it.

Let's get this going...

[TheArsenal]

It’s clumsy, gap laden and nowhere near intuitive. It does become somewhat easier to navigate – particularly identifying items by their graphic icons – the more familiar I become with the game units and game concepts.

This all leads to this wonderful irony: the less I need to use it, the easier it is to use.

Edit: I am discussing the Civlopedia, obviously. The manual is okay, but has its own problems. I find it to be better, however.

[rjwoer]

I dread having to open the 'pedia in Civ 4. It is almost always counter intuitive and often I leave it frustrated and without the information I sought. I find it aggravating.

The manual is at least a bit more logical, but still definitely "thin," IMO.

I'm glad you put this poll together. Maybe Firaxis will take notice of the fact that (at this point) not a single person has voted in the positive.

Memory leaks and frustrating 'pedia make Jack a pissy player.

[ghen]

its very hard to find things in game, not only because of organization problems, but also because everything is listed alphabetically by picture which is annoying.

The manual had a few good points to it, mainly the easier stuff like civ traits, but the only part I actually read from it in depth is the big game explanation at the end. That actually holds more information that the rest of the manual for gameplay stuff.

[SorvinoBackhand]

Thanks for the compliment, rjwoer. Its good to see that so many people have posted and/or voted in just a few hours. You are right too. Hopefully we can get a lot of people to vote on it, and Firaxis will take a look.

In my experience with the game so far (two weeks & a dozen games or so; played civ 2 & 3 & SMAC earlier) fixing the Civilopedia is the single biggest need for the inevitable expansion pack.

As my civs get more complex, as the number of moving parts expands quickly, my ability to manage well declines precipitously because I lack so much information. I suppose I could take notes on the manual, but who wants to write a book report on a game ! The strategy guide might help, but I resent the implication that the manual/civilopedia are so meager that I must spend money again.

[GodSpawn]

There are two major problems with the documentation:

* No index for the printed manual. This is inexcusable. The tools are there to automatically generate indices, so why didn't they?

They could make amends by making a PDF index for us to download!

* Icons instead of words in the Civpedia. I don't know about anyone else, but I cannot possibly remember all those different icons. A scrolling list of clickable item names would be infinitely better.

[Shogun Gunner]

Regarding the cIV civopedia...

I like "mouse overs" but it's really hard to locate the exact unit or building I want to check by just identifying the picture or mousing over. What I end up doing is just clicking any unit and scrolling on the right hand side down the list of units.

It's very awkward. I would like a manual with more content (then again - if they are expecting major patches with game changing elements in the patch, they won't want to write down how game features work -- they could change!), but I would be satisified if the civopedia was fully featured and easier to use. I can't believe that they just didn't use civ3 civopedia -- that's better.

[Bogdanovist]

Too many ommissions. For instance nowhere in the manual, civilopedia or in the reference sheets does it say what railroads do! You have to read the info on ALL the other improvements to find out which ones get bonus for railroads (e.g. lumbermills).