Originally Posted by andrews2547
SC4 is probably a lot harder and realistic than SC5 as well, but I wouldn't know because I have never run a city or played SC5 before.
From what I have seen in videos, I would rather play SC4 over SC5. I might buy SC5 if the price drops below £25 and they sort the server issues out.
Having played both SC (It's specifically not SC5 or SC2013, it's a reboot more than a sequel) is a lot harder than SC4. Yes, you can "fill" a city with low density quickly, but doing so and then having the infrastructure for the city to increase in density. Suddenly that massive garbage dump is actually a huge hindrance, it's not off in some remote corner anymore. Those oil wells? They're not dry and they're still making money, but that's huge portions of your city that people don't want to live in. Having a separate city
set up just to take care of different things is important. There's no more having a single city take care of low, medium, and high wealth residential and commercial. You can set up an entire city without a single residential zone, and you're not really doing it wrong if you do (A pure industry/mining/drilling city just rolls in the simoleans) so long as you've got another city with a lack of jobs. Get an Arcology up and you can easily have a pure industry city.
The way the game is set up is that the massive cities of SC4 are functionally equivalent to regions in this game, I'll readily admit the server issues are impacting this, but in my experience keeping the city functioning just requires watching for the connectivity problem and pressing pause for 30s, found it was always a decent time to upgrade roads