Winner! This pretty much the only thing he wanted to extract from this conversation,rest assured.While it's a valid point,TMIT is prepared to go as low as feeding a troll post like the OP's to do so.
Played a game of Civiliztion after a long pause - EU4 feels shallow by comparison
- Thread starter Me_
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Winner! This pretty much the only thing he wanted to extract from this conversation,rest assured.While it's a valid point,TMIT is prepared to go as low as feeding a troll post like the OP's to do so.
Civ 5 is a good game and I had great fun in multiplayer there, but AI is no less dumb. Lucky Nations pales in comparison to what Deity provides. Oh, those wonder-stealing bastards 
Civ 5 is a good game and I had great fun in multiplayer there, but AI is no less dumb. Lucky Nations pales in comparison to what Deity provides. Oh, those wonder-stealing bastards
And at least lucky nations at least feigns at some resemblance of historical accuracy while Deity just gives every AI uber buffs.
In EU4, you do nothing in peacetimes. Collecting some points, spending them on technologies every 15 mins. Sometimes building ... buildings. But the worst are the ultra simplified culture and religion mechanics (My main complains about EU4), though CIV dont cover the culture aspect too.
However, as i already wrote, i have the feeling that i always can do something in CIV, while in EU i am sitting often enough infront of my PC and waiting, waiting and waiting.
I think CIV dont do that much things better then EU, but EU is just not complex enough for a grand strategy game imo. It doesnt offer enough content for a game which it aims to be.
Dont know how to describe..
The problem with Civ5 is that it's made to make you win. The AI is so completely incompetent that it's comical.
They're both fairly arcade style. The difference is Civ series (speaking mostly to 4) does arcadey in a way where the challenges are from your opponents. EUIV has opted for arcadey whack-a-mole rebel mechanics. Anyone who thinks the current revolt mechanics are at all historical haven't been reading history.
I don't really see how it is different from EU4 in that regard tbh.
I thought Civ4 after a couple expansions was one of the greatest games ever. Civ 5 was a big disappointment. It's true there is more depth in non-warfare gameplay, but the warfare is horrendously shallow.
The Civ5 AI will send wave after wave of units nearly 1000 years out of date after declaring war on you. It's meant to be a feel good game. "Hur look at my tanks kill his spearmen, man I'm so good at this game!" The EU4 AI will actually play appropriately. You won't get Morocco declaring war on Spain, and you won't get France pulling it's punches and not preying on a weak HRE.
The point at which I stopped playing Civ5 is when the AI declared war on me then started to send great artists at me. It literally was sending me great artists. It actually took the time out of it's day to help me... in a war. A war that it had a 0% chance of ever succeeding in.
Civ5 is basically the turn based strategy version of Postal. I imagine everyone playing that game at this point is just someone who gets picked on in life and needs a way to vent, so they do it by destroying other "civilizations" in a video game so they can feel like a bad ass. It's completely different because the AI in EU4 actually tries to kick your ass, it doesn't just flip up it's skirt and go "oh no mister player you are too strong for me!"
Once you get blobbed enough gameplay becomes a bit boring:
Time to time you have to
- 1. DoW enemy
- 2. annex part of his territories
- 3. core territories
- 4. if you have enough Adm points, find another target
- 5. goto 1
Time to time you have to
- help allies
- fight rebels
- convert heretics/heathens
- convert cultures
- build more troops or buildings
- watch for possible PUs
- improve relations with allies and vassals
Civ 5 is just as boring once you´ve blobbed enough. The difference is that in Prince the game is laughably easy, while EU4 is way harder in Normal.
Folks, this is not the right place for discussing Civilization. Stay on the topic of EUIV.
I stopeed playing normals after I've realized I could handle Ironman. But still I haven't finished any because after achieving my original goals the game turns into blobbing fest. It's kinda cool to restore Roman Empire, save Poland+Lithuania from Muscovy\Russia or get Sunset Invasion achievement. But after achieving I goals the game becomes boring =(
To be fair, a large proportion of the additions in the DLCs (including Art of War) have been peacetime mechanics (although unfortunately, many of them have been focused on 'special' mechanics for specific countries, like Dutch Republic, rather than improving the base experience for a 'standard' country). But these are always going to be tweaks to what is a very limited setup, especially at the local level. I don't see how we will get a sophisticated peacetime game without a complete overhaul of how provinces work, by bringing in the POP system from Victoria 2, and/or by making the building system much more sophisticated, with more impactful choices (developing your provinces shouldn't be an optional extra like it is now).
One way I'd like EU4 to be more like Civ is to have a situation where provinces are almost always constructing new buildings (assuming you don't have a pressing need for armies/ships), but each building takes a long time to complete, and the rate of progress is affected by various factors (e.g. autonomy, stability, admin efficiency and so on). Also, get rid of 'lines' of buildings, just have lots of different buildings that all do different things. That way, you have to think about build order and priorities. You could make it so that buildings don't cost monarch power in the first instance, but you can pay MP to hurry the construction.
Your title is misleading. Civilization feels shallow compared to eu4. it is the other way around. I stopped playing civilization because it is so shallow.
Even deity is just so easy after 600+ hours of brave new worlds. At least on eu4 the AI does not feel like it is cheating. With civ 5 it is obvious the AI is cheating.
Even deity is just so easy after 600+ hours of brave new worlds. At least on eu4 the AI does not feel like it is cheating. With civ 5 it is obvious the AI is cheating.
I havent played Civ since Civ III, but i think the op is right when he points eu iv is much more about war than anything else. You spend your time warring or getting ready for the next war. Apart from colonizing, which is just sending a colonist to a far away land and wait, the game feels a bit empty during peacetime. Perhpas it is because i still have to really understand trade, but, on any case, there is nothing trade gives you that conquering also gives you.