Civ 4 or TW:ME2

[johnmcd]

ME: TW is broken beyond belief. The computer simply doesn't understand the rules, it's pathetic.

[Targonis]

Medieval 2: Total War has a lot more detail than what you see in the Civilization series. The battles can also be a lot of fun, but at the same time, there is a point where you learn the strategies and it becomes almost too easy to win battles.

The other downside to the Total War series uses territories, and you can not place where your cities will be since all of them are pre-established. This means that you do not have freedom to expand your "empire" the way you want to.

Civilization allows you to really build your empire and expand(or not) based on how YOU want to expand and build. As a result, Civilization gives you more control, and you also control the way technology advances.

So, Medieval 2 lets you play out things in Europe, but you can't found your own cities, you can only expand via the capture of enemy cities. The technologies are also not under your control, and come along the way they did in the real world. With Civilization, you can guide your civilization, expand peacefully, or by taking over enemy cities. You also can win through more peaceful methods(space race, cultural). The world in the Civ series can either be a static map, or dynamic, so each game can be really really different.

For a short-term game where you play for a while and then put the game away, Medieval 2 has more of a "wow" factor due to the details and such. For a longer-term game that you can play for years, Civilization 4 is your best bet.

Some have said not to buy Warlords, but while the rule changes from Warlords are included in Beyond the Sword, the leaders and scenarios are not. The Civilization 4: Gold Edition comes with the base game as well as Warlords, so you can start with that, and then add Beyond the Sword to complete the set. The Gold Edition is sold at EBgames/Gamestop for $50 or so, with Beyond the Sword going for $30.

There was word a while back about a Civ 4: Complete edition(includes base, Warlords, and Beyond the Sword) that was going to come out over in Europe(in the UK), but no word about a version here in the US ever popped up.

[Virulent]

Originally posted by Targonis

Some have said not to buy Warlords, but while the rule changes from Warlords are included in Beyond the Sword, the leaders and scenarios are not.

That is incorrect. All of the leaders and Civs from Warlords are included in BtS. The only Warlords content that is not included in BtS are the scenarios.

[Slimrock]

Gundawg, I got both and I love to play MTW2 but the hours I have played Civ4 are so much more then what I have played in MTW2. I just got some online gaming FPS friends into Civ4 , they love it and now we are doing multiplayer, something you can not do to any real level with MTW2. Civ4 is probably the most relaxing game I have ever played and even though I got it at launch it is one of the few games I keep coming back too. Lastly as many have said the AI is very frustrating in MTW2 and I have logged off many times to take a break from the aggravation, some times for weeks/months. With Civ4 you take a break because you realize that you just poured to many hours of your day into it and need to get some other things done. So if your an uncontrolled game addict get MTW2 and it will help you curb that impulse. If you want pure fun and enjoyment with tons of depth, then grab Civ4.

ps sorry to hear about your many money grabbing events and at such a great gaming time of the year too. My two cents is to get the original Civ4, enjoy it as I know you probably will and when you can afford it then grab BtS for a whole new experience. Warlords was fun but I never play it now with BtS out.

[Asmodeous]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
If you don't believe me, look at the bug thread for the latest patch. Some of the bugs are huge, game-breaking, and will be encountered in a huge proportion of games. (I'm thinking especially of the bug where your vassal declares war on you.)

Still never had that happen.

In fact, the only one of the bugs I've really "seen" in the game is the "culture not displayed on tooltip" bug.

I'm sure others are affecting my game, just not enough for me to care.

Me.

[ChrisiusMaximus]

For me MTW2 is the better game, but this is merely a flavour thing.

RTW sucked up a lot of my time too,

I like Civ4 but i prefered civ3, though civ4 has improved greatly with its expansions.

Technically civ4 is superior to the total war games, its huge whereas total war is focussed. Civ does everything that total war does far better, with one exception, battles. To say total war has more content is wrong, but to say total war has better more detailed combat is very true.

However ive often found myself auto calc'ing the battles in a total war game when it gets so far in, empires become so large that it gets tedious fighting out battles. The best part of any total war campaign is always the first 100 turns or so, whereas you can often enjoy a civ game right through to the 2050 date and beyond sometimes. Ive carried on past 2050 many times with civ.

My conclusion is that i love both games, but I play more total war than civ4, though in terms of scale civ wins hands down.

[Todd Hawks]

Gunndawg, looking at what you wrote, I'd actually suggest to take a good look at Europa Universalis and maybe Crusader Kings. They are closer to your descriptions of what you want than both CIV or TW:ME2. That said, I'd take CIV over TW any time.