Is this still the height of 4x? 6 looks like shit

Is this still the height of 4x? 6 looks like shit.

yes

ok

You look like shit

V + Expansions/Mods is better than IV + Expansions/Mods

one unit per tile is unfixable

This. In before contrarians.

I'm pessimistic about VI though, the design of those leaders make me want to vomit.

Mods? Top kek V fags are delusional. Name me literally ONE mods that even comes close to fall from earth 2.

I'll wait

from heaven?

unit stacking is retarded and 6 seems to have the perfect middleground

yeah Civ 5 is the best civ but here on v we just shitpost and spew memes so just go with everyone and call 4 better even though 5 is better in everyway

Beyond the sword is my shit op

>6 seems to have the perfect middleground
but muh GRAFIX

Not talking about overhauls, because IV would win that hands down. Talking about mods that made the game better to play. V got that shit in spades.

Fall From Heaven 2 by the way senpai.

Unit stacking makes perfect sense and was already balanced by artillery and flanking. The alternative is playing a sliding puzzle every single turn you want to move a decent size army. Archers have a range of hundreds of miles. Flanking maneuvers take centuries. It makes no sense on any level.

No it's fucking not. Civ V is so shallow.

>Infinite stack on a single tile
>Makes perfect sense

How the fuck do you even get that many units in a normal game anyway without your economy tanking?

>IV comes out
>everyone hates it, because it's hip to hate modern games, people say it killed the franchise
>V comes out
>everyone hates it, IV becomes retroactively the greatest game of all time
>VI comes out
>everyone hates it, V becomes retroactively the greatest game of all time
Just watch, the fedora tipping cycle continues.

do you think armies in real life aren't concentrated into an area of hundreds of square miles?

how does it make more sense for ancient battles to have battle lines stretching across an entire border?

its not a question of what make sense

the single unit per square combat has much more depth

This, and it's basically a board game anyway, not a fucking military simulator.

What are you arguing about here?
Every Civ after Alpha Centauri was a regress.

Civ5 > Civ2 > Civ4 > Civ3

>depth
aka being able to cheese your way through the dumb AI hordes with minimal units

The funny thing is, with the community (balance) patch, it fixes the wartime AI so much this isn't the case anymore. The fact that Firaxis didn't code in archer type units being able to move and shoot on the same fucking turn says something.

>chess has no depth i played a shitty ai and stomped it

>it somehow makes more sense for frontline battalions to be separated by hundreds of miles

chess AI can easily beat me without cheating, can't say the same for Civ 5

>depth
Having to manually move every single unit and navigate all the bottlenecks and traffic jams is time consuming and not fun at all. There is nothing deep about it.

that not because of the game's depth its because the AI is fucking shit. its always been shit in every civ

Alpha centauri is certainly the peak of the Civ franchise.

so why pick a combat system that is even harder for your AI to handle?

I don't know why they chose it, to be honest.

They really need to re-think how they're doing AI if they want to make any reasonable improvements to the series.

>five iterations of civ
>not a single one has competent naval AI