I really liked all the Civ games. 1 was special of course because it was the first of its kind. 2 was a big improvement and the advisors rocked. 3 was pretty cool, and I think 4 was the king. I really don't see how you can say that 2 is better than 4? I mean is this from memory or are you seriously played 2 for weeks nowadays instead of 4? Why? Civ 4 must be among my most played games ever, along with Imperialism and Eador. Sure 2 was great at the time, but I couldn't play it for more than 1 or 2 games now, mostly to laugh at the council skits.
I didn't play 5 yet, but I'm sure I will like it,too.
And I like Warlock,too, I don't see how it is simplistic or casual? It is basically MoM mashed into the graphics and combat of Fantasy Wars. It has a ton of units, spells,buildings, terrain features, a complex combat system with damage types, resistances and terrain boni. Sure the difficulty was way too easy on "impossible", but not because the game wasn't complex. With a proper difficulty setting I'd probably still be playing it.
Mrstarker: Speaking of Civ-like games, anyone have experience with
Pandora: First Contact? More specifically, how does it compare to Alpha Centauri?
It's supposed to be something like a unofficial remake. From what I saw it's pretty good.