What is the worst thing in each Civ game?

[Optimizer]

As a complement to the other thread I started...

Civ 1: Too unbalanced.
Civ 2: No city view animations, no replay
Civ 3: All the bugs in the original edition.
SMAC: The abstract science-fiction environment. Well, it is a scifi game, but anyway...

[War4ever]

civ1 phalanx def battleship
civ2 no replay, hg ruins the game
civ3 massive lame units can def and do defeat superior firepower with ease.. not totally realistic, i can see this in a skirmist, but come one

smac, too dark and dreary

[Mark_Everson]

Civ 1: Lousy AI
Civ 2: Lousy AI
SMAC: Lousy AI
Civ 3: Hey, at least the AI is better. . .

Guess what my favorite axe to grind is.

[Method]

civ1: unbalanced
civ2...don't remeber. i didn't pay attention to such things back then. i thought it was perfect
SMAC: the AI, and the numerous bugs
Civ3: everything
ctp:havnt played

[HolyWarrior]

All civ3 games (and SMAC as well), that Communism is presented as a civilization advance.

[Cyclotron]

Civ1: No hit points
Civ2: Caravans were annoying, and spies were overpowered.
CTP: I hated almost everything. For an example, though, we'll say that I hated the way my man-o-war or whatnot was sunk by an abolishionist.
Civ3: You can't program civ relations in scenarios, and the unit graphics are a pain to edit.

[alva]

smac : no connection to it ( tech tree )
civ III : not enough strategic choices.

[Maquiladora]

civ2: ICS, settlers, losing a load of units by losing one defender.
civ3: ICS, Culture, workers, no ZOCs
CtP2: MP Rush-buy bug, almost worthless trade system
SMAC: Why did they choose those colours?

[Sharpe]

Civ 1 - phalanx beating tanks and "I hate when the computer players fortify next to my cities"
Civ 2 - spies overpowered, ICS (by humans)
SMAC/X - poor AI decisions
CTP series - slavers, etc. are too overpowered
Civ 3 - not much variety in choices, reemergence of spearman beat tanks possibility, failure to get rid of ICS

[RGBVideo]

Civ 1 - Militiary units
Civ 2 - Lousy AI, easy ways to use 'bugs' of it to your favour.
SMAC - AI was not using the new features, therefore it got crushed
CTP - Too much micromanaging, bad goverment models, pathetic endgame techs
CTP2 & SMAX - Bugs, bugs, bugs...
Civ 3 - Every new feature seems to be skrewed, in one way or another.
Predictable AI cheats make it boring.

[Solver]

Civ 1 - phalanx. vs battleship, annoying Caravans.
Civ 2 - still annoying Caravans, isometric view, fundamentalism, overpowered spies, stupid AI.
Civ 3 - lots of useless units, screwed up modern age.
SMAC - bad AI, no rewriting history feeling, some balance issues.
CtP1 - London's Exchange makes you a winner, bugs, weak diplomacy.
CtP2 - no matter what, has to be modded to be playable, PBEM doesn't work, AI is invisible. Great when modded.

[Alex]

Civ1 - phalanx vs. battleships (duh!)
Civ2 - lousy AI, overpowered spies
SMAC - Nothing. It is perfect. Ok, lousy AI...
CTP2 (never played the first one) - unplayable in its original form
Civ3 - the feeling that it is a step back with respect to SMAC. Ok, the AI is better...

[moomin]

Originally posted by Mark_Everson
Civ 1: Lousy AI
Civ 2: Lousy AI
SMAC: Lousy AI
Civ 3: Hey, at least the AI is better. . .

Guess what my favorite axe to grind is.

Mark, back when Civ3 was new and Poly flame wars where hot, a gent called Analyst Redux did a tremendous piece of work on dissecting the Civ3 AI - I'm too lazy to search for it now, but do it if you're interested in the Civ3 AI and how it differs from previous releases. It was great stuff.

[Nikolai]

Civ1: Too random what military unit wins
Civ2: All those nasty pop-ups!
Civ3: Culture flipping when at war and half of your country's army in the flipping city.
SMAC: Add-on destroyed much of the original feeling. OK, not actually a feature, but...

[Sandman]

Civ: Enemy fortifying next to my city.
Civ2: Inflexible city radius
SMAC: Utterly crud graphics; some of it looked like placeholder art.
Civ3: Bland and undifferentiated map