I missed out on the games prior to Civ3. Of the games I played:

1. Civ4
2. Civ3
10. Civ5

I tried replaying Civ3 and I just could not get back into it. Partly the graphics, but mostly the control scheme seemed so alien to me after the thousands of hours with 4.
Civ5 I really tried to like, but it just removed everything I loved about Civilization. The one unit per tile is just too limiting for my play style (the war mongerer), not to mention how long it takes to build troops. The map seems very small, I don't like city-states, and everything just seems so dumbed down. Being penalized for too many roads is stupid, and I think resources should need a road to them. Removing something because it looks messy is a stupid reason to remove it.
I'll just go back to Civ4 until there is a good reason to replace it.

That was a problem with Civ3, where the AI would massively abuse any rights of passage you gave it. It's not so much a problem with Civ4. Even if you can't keep other units out of your territory (which should be easy if you have other means to get to good relations, for example religion), isolated cities are expensive and can often be overwhelmed by culture.

Build siege units to get the city defenses to zero, only then attack with other units. Also, having units with high level city fighter promotions (there are three levels to it) helps a lot. Also, make sure you have enough units. Taking a well-fortified city with classic or medieval troops will entail losses.

Hmmm. I loved Civilization: Call to Power... And the space layer :D And the space elevators to ship units halfway around the map quickly. Ah and the public works system is much better than the worker system used even today by the other Civilization games.

They are all great but Civ 1 obviously is the best...



... for its time.

unfortunately I missed out on civ 2 :(
However, I definitely would not place civ 3 on a higher pedestal than civ 4. Civ 4 for a long time I thought of as the pinnacle of the series, but the recent improvements and additions of civ 5 have begun to change my mind.

These are such insanely brilliant games though - I remember this one morning 1 or 2 years back, I got civ 1 running through dosbox as I felt an urge to see my old friend again and perhaps mess around with France for 20 minutes or so. Yeah right! I couldn't tear myself from the screen for the rest of the day :)

Just Psyringe said, siege units are key, especially when the AI builds units on hills and defends it with archers with 2 city defense upgrades. You can see droves of knights go down to their deaths just trying to take that city with no siege units. You've got to have patience and spend a few turns to bombard the defenses to get that additional defense percentage down to 0 or you will sacrifice a lot of good men.

I like this, to me this feels real. It seemed at times in other Civ games taking cities could be too easy. With Civ IV, both buildable defenses AND culture add defense bonuses, and if built on a hill, you bet that city can be tough, but it's very, very doable if you have patience, spend a few turns bombarding them (think damaging their walls and castle and cultural buildings and thus lowering morale) and it will lower those bonuses down. With hilltop cities, and if you're reasonably close in technology, it usually requires taking it all the way down to 0. With other cities, you can probably get away with being a little less patient and just cut their defenses in half and if you've got them outnumbered you'll still take the city.

When I attack a city, relative close in tech, I always think first of all 2Xnumber of defenders PLUS two, and start by spending a few turns besieging them and wearing down their defenses. Trust me, it can be done, I've won by conquest in this game and that's something I was never able to do with Civ 2. I was able to do it in 3, but it was just no fun because of the waste and corruption crap, but with 4 being a war monger can be fun, even though my preferred style of play is actually to be peaceful. But then they piss me off, and well, I can't be held responsible for my actions when they do that. LOL

Also, someone mentioned religion above, yes, that was a great addition, and if you play Betrayal of the Sword you'll find corporations can be an AWESOME time. I always go after the best hammer adding corporation (it's either the mining company or the construction company, I think it's the construction company) and if you have lots of resources it will add 10, 15 or maybe even more hammers to each cities production amount (that has that corporation, you have to spread the corporation like you do religion) and that's raw hammers, as in before all the other adjustments kick in. So, if your city has a forge, a factory, and power, a 15 hammer corporation bonus adds 30 hammers PER TURN to that city's production.

And if you go with the food corporations, it can really, really increase a cities population capability, to the point that you could maximize every tiles hammer output (or income output) and feed the city through the food bonuses from the corporation.

I really liked the corporation added, but I read on other sites that a lot of folks didn't. Oh well, we're all different.

Alpha Centauri is still my favourite out of the civ-alike's.

Civ 4 was great for the mods - and really what makes it worthwhile owning. I haven't played Civ 5; Civ 3 always felt like an in-between step from 2 to 4, really. Adding new things to the table but not really getting them together all quite right; a change in game play that blossomed in Civ four (once all the expansions were out).

Civ 1 & 2 are just brilliant for the simplicity combined with depth. I am more and more in awe of games that manage to pull that off - simple mechanics that allow for a lot of gameplay.

Ultimately though I hate how most of the games in the series end in much too long turns with far too many units running around. I don't quite have the patience for the late game and it drags. That's something that none of the Civ games ever managed to improve on / get right. I love the begining; exploration part. I seldom end up playing a map to the finish because of the tediousness that comes around, eventually.

Link has been redeemed

Is there anyone else out there that might want Civ IV complete???

The person I tried to give it to said it wouldn't work for him, but he said he thought the problem was on his end, and that the game is still good. I do know for a fact that I had not given that link to anyone else, but don't want to contact Humble Bundle until I'm sure that something is wrong. If the problem really was on his end, this link should still be good, so is there anyone out there that might want it and willing to take a flyer on a free one??? I can't promise it's good, all I can promise is that it is a valid HB purchase, I did not give that code to anyone else, and the one person I did give it to believes the problem he had in claiming it was on his end and that the link should still be valid.

Anyone out there wanna give Civ IV a try??? As I said in a post above, even if you don't like Civ IV itself, Civ IV Colonization is an awesome game all by itself.

ADDED: Oh, and I meant to ask, since I never, ever got to experience Civ I, does anyone know if that's available anywhere in a state that I could just buy it and play it???? (i.e., it has all the DOSBOX work done just like when we purchase a game here at gog. Man I love gog. My favorite forums and my favorite gaming store.

I loved Civ II. Except for Zoo Tycoon (the original) Complete Collection, Civ II is my most-played pc game ever!

What about Warlock: Master of the Arcane? It plays a lot like Civ II, only heavily fantasy-themed, and with some great graphics. Love it! It was my first ever Steam game (would've preferred to get it here, but... ya know ;) )

I would probably also rate Civ II the highest, no doubt partly because of nostalgia, and partly because I simply enjoy its gameplay the most. Well balanced, and just the right amount of complexity. IMHO none of the later games managed that "balance in design" so well.

If also considering some "unconventional" Civ games... Civ IV has some of the finest mods I've ever played, namely Fall From Heaven 2 (and various modmods of it) and Caveman2Cosmos. Those two play so differently to Civ IV that I might well consider them different games entirely; if doing so, I think I'd rate them (along with Alpha Centauri, which I suppose could also be considered part of the "Civilization series") ahead of every Civilization other than II.

edit:

I see Civ I has been on Abandonia for just over a decade now, which is unfortunately a pretty solid indicator that it's been impossible to buy it for a long time (they're quick to remove games if they become available again). Might find a copy on eBay or Amazon Marketplace, but little chance of getting it already set up with Dosbox in that scenario.

Oh geez, sorry, pretty dumb question I guess, LOL, wow, I had no idea.

I don't think I have any hope of setting it up myself, so I guess i'll never experience I. I've still got Civ II loaded on my old Win 95 machine, which last time I tried still fired up and worked great despite being nearly 20 years old. But I haven't tried it in about 3 years so it may no longer work. Might see if I can get that one going and get a taste of II again.

But of course the first time the AI builds a city right in the middle of "my" territory, I'll realize I have a better option now and just go back to Civ IV.

I don't understand... You have Civ II, so you can play Civ I -- just play the original non-extended edition, and that's Civ I!

Here’s my experience with Civ:

Civilization -- awesome
Civilization II -- even more awesome
Alpha Centauri -- best Civ game ever
Civilization III -- meh
Civilization IV -- a vast improvement over III, good balance, possibly my favourite after Alpha Centauri
Civilization V -- meh (haven’t tried the DLC)

Couldn't have said it better myself! These would have been my choices as well - it's a testament to how great the game is that in those early days the late game slog didn't take away from how great the games were