Having played the games for so long, including a forgotten amount of time initially where I struggled to get to terms with the game's mechanics, I honestly don't have a clue how easy/hard it is for a newcomer to get into the series. If you want, you could link one of your save games in the pharaoh thread for some pointers if you'd like to shave a few days of the learning curve. I imagine that would really be helpful, but just be prepared for a small onslaught of advice like with your other thread! :)

Civ 2 is real easy, defensive strategy is formidable, and remains my favorite game of the series.

Civ 3 is good but the AI seems to be able to spam you will millions of units early on.... be by yourself on an island!

Civ 4 is great but the unit promotion system encourages too much reloading or its just moot.

Civ 5 i did not like the x 2 unit tile limit, otherwise its a great game, it does not reward defensive play.

never had a game look like that, would definitely risk that instead of guaranted stacks of doom starting in the second third of EVERY game
Also that doesn't look like it would be easier for a console gamer like you said LMAO

PS: http://civgames.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Civ4_Stack.jpg

google image search rocks :D

How many 4X games are there on consoles? I never said console gamers are stupid, they're just not used to strategy games. I used them as a example.

Panzer General was a hit because of several things but the one reason that stands out is the combat system, its user interface for the combat and the graphics. Those three things combined made it much easier for mainstream gamers to understand and play than other wargames. This is a well established fact. Civilization creators just made a conscious decision to make the series more accessible to mainstream gamers this way and it worked.

I think I'll borrow your logic. I've never had a problem with stacks of doom in civilization 4 so therefore I declare there to be no problem. Hah I win!

I did notice you made fun of it so I tried to answer in the same way with the "I win logic" one. Looks like I failed with that. :/

I don't think I've ever read somewhere that Panzer General did not get so successful because it was a lot easier to access than ordinary wargames. It would be interesting to read that side of the discussion though.

I'd argue that the 4X genre is more mainstream than the wargame one. Though Civilization series is the more complex one I believe. Honestly it was so long ago that I played PG that I have to say Believe.

Yeah I did a google search for "carpet of doom" and also got results for "stack of doom". Didn't look at what sites the pictures came from though so I can't comment on what that russian site is about. First impression from what you write is that the numbers looks like they are from a small poll.

Don't forget Civilization also drew a lot of new players that hadn't played the series before. It would be natural for them to want a core mechanic they like in the next game.

I wonder how important single player vs multiplayer is here. I'm mainly a single and coop player and this is my impressions.
The stack of doom I have never had a problem with versus the AI. I don't have to use it either.
One the other hand 1UPT easily clogs the map with units, makes combat feel like that puzzle where you shuffle small squares around and the AI can't use its units effectively for crap.

Civ II would be really grand. Civ V while its a nice games kills the gaming experience with 1 unit per tile limit.

Civ 1 was ported to the SNES and Civ 2 was ported to the Playstation. But yeah, it doesn't really happen.

You'd be surprised: http://www.mobygames.com/game-group/koei-historical-simulation-series

I think the 1 unit/tile limit opens lots of tactical options. So it's not that bad in the end. It's a matter of personal preference though. I for myself don't really care as long I enjoy the game.

me neither, but I have definitely also never heard that it was succesful because its an easy game for mainstream console gamers.

661 votes, biggest I could find. All the polls on civfanatics have similar numbers

theres even a poll on civfanatics where the answers factor this in, most people who started with earlier civs hated the stacks of doom.

Sure, it's just the way to win

Not easily,and only if you wait with war till the last ages.And even then, only if there are comparable powers left. All very unlikely. And even if, it's still more tactical fun and more like a real trenchwar than having two size 200 stacks march towards each other and the winners just waltzes over all the remaining cities. The AI can be improved. It's already much better than in Warlock.

The only problem with this system is when you are fully at war it changes into a total grinder with armies ranging for example 10 hexes in to your teritory (remember one unit per tile) and another 10 into enemy territory when you wan't to attack one city and then the attack takes hours. Previous system allowed faster battles and conquest.

I once played Civilization 2 on a Plastation, the interface was... well, not so good!

Anyways, I am wondering how come Call to Power II is available on GoG and Civilization: Call to Power is not. Perhaps it is due to the lost legal battle to the civilization name?

Regardless, it is a pity that the Call to Power series has ended. I would certainly welcome a third installment, but I am guessing it is just not lucrative enough for a huge publisher like Activision to produce what would be a relatively niche game.

we won't be civilized here :(