Quote Originally Posted by Vertigo View Post
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks that's the pinnacle of the series (Alpha Centauri aside). 4's interface and religion system bring me out in a rash, 5 has horrible AI and some weird pacing, and though the combat is interesting, I think the switch to hexes was unnecessary. The emphasis on flanking could still have played a part in the traditional stacked units / eight-way-movement dynamic.
I actually prefered Civilization III because it is most suitable for multiplayer games. Civ IV and V are too slow-paced for that. But yes, the pacing in general in V is not good. There are always good ideas in every game, but part III has the best combination of them. The maps in IV and V are so small. I like huge empires. The purists would prefer Civilization II because of that. But this game is clumsy in other regards, and looks ancient.