Civilization 4

[Reveilled]

What I find sad is that AC had this a looooooooong time ago, then ol' Sid decided to take a step down for Civ3...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Personally, with what it looks like they're doing with Civ4, I think AC should just be an expansion. Have 2 modes for it, one you can just play a standard AC game from the start, or in a regular game it bypasses space race victory and starts you up on AC once your colony ship reaches the planet.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

They had that in Civ 2 Test of Time, but personally I didn't much like the execution of it. And having played SMAC, I'm not sure it'd feel right playing on AC without the storyline and the factions I have come to love over the years. Kicking the Russians off AC as China just wouldn't be as much fun as kicking the University off as the Hive. But who knows, maybe they'd be able to pull it off better than last time.

[Oerwinde]

What I find sad is that AC had this a looooooooong time ago, then ol' Sid decided to take a step down for Civ3...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Personally, with what it looks like they're doing with Civ4, I think AC should just be an expansion. Have 2 modes for it, one you can just play a standard AC game from the start, or in a regular game it bypasses space race victory and starts you up on AC once your colony ship reaches the planet.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

They had that in Civ 2 Test of Time, but personally I didn't much like the execution of it. And having played SMAC, I'm not sure it'd feel right playing on AC without the storyline and the factions I have come to love over the years. Kicking the Russians off AC as China just wouldn't be as much fun as kicking the University off as the Hive. But who knows, maybe they'd be able to pull it off better than last time.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Test of Time was made after Sid left Microprose I think, which is why ToT wasn't quite as good. I think with Sid in charge, they just might be able to pull it off. And the various factions and back story I figured could go in the first of the 2 modes.

 

Maybe it could be a separate game that could integrate into Civ4? Kinda like Sonic and Knuckles for the old Genesis. Actually yeah... I like that idea better.

[EUIX]

Paradox Entertainment owns the Civilization series up the ass. Play Victoria, blows Civilization out of the water.

[Oerwinde]

Paradox Entertainment owns the Civilization series up the ass. Play Victoria, blows Civilization out of the water.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Looked it up, looks a lot like Europa Universalis, which is so different from Civ that you can't even compare them.

[EUIX]

Paradox Entertainment owns the Civilization series up the ass. Play Victoria, blows Civilization out of the water.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Looked it up, looks a lot like Europa Universalis, which is so different from Civ that you can't even compare them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

All Paradox games look the same cause they use the same engine. It's a grand strategic simulator, which is essentially what Civilization boils down to.

[Oerwinde]

Paradox Entertainment owns the Civilization series up the ass. Play Victoria, blows Civilization out of the water.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Looked it up, looks a lot like Europa Universalis, which is so different from Civ that you can't even compare them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

All Paradox games look the same cause they use the same engine. It's a grand strategic simulator, which is essentially what Civilization boils down to.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Is the gameplay in Victoria anything like Europa Universalis 2? I know a lot of people praise EU2 and while I had fun with it, it didn't compare to the addicting fun of the Civ series. And the depth they're adding to Civ 4 makes it sound even better than before.

[random evil guy]

ok, this is just wrong:

During early prototyping, it was determined that more is not always better. In order to streamline the process as much as possible and to highlight the new promotion system, we decided to actually reduce the number of units some.

 

morons! this is supposed to be an epic game; not some dumbed down board game... i guess the mod community will have their hands full once again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Having less units doesn't mean a dumbed down game. This promotion system sounds quite a bit like the workshop in SMAC, so there will be less units, but you can tailor the units in-game to make them individual. Why have Infantry and Mountain Infantry, when you can just have Infantry and give some the mountaineering ability?

 

Less units, more choice.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

no. less units, less options, less advanced. look at a game like hearts of iron; tons of units. tons of options.

 

like the carrier; why is there only one type? there's a big difference between modern carriers with nucluear propulsion and the old carriers from the 40s... like i said; dumbed down.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Uh huh, so you take a carrier unit, fit it with the nuclear propulsion upgrade, upgrade it with a bigger deck, add x, y, and z, and you have a modern carrier. Without the upgrades, you have a carrier from the 40s.

 

And if you want to look at Hearts of Iron, why not look it's predecessor, Europa Universallis? That had only three units, infantry, cavalry and artillery, and that was hardly a "dumbed down board game" for it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

well, first of all eu sucked big time!

 

second, what makes you think the upgrade system will actually work? i can see it being very limited and basically useless...

[Oerwinde]

second, what makes you think the upgrade system will actually work? i can see it being very limited and basically useless...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It has just as much chance of being good as it does of being useless.

[random evil guy]

i don't think so. these overly ambitious things usually end up pretty useless. at least the first time around... it'll probably work per say, but i think it will be too limited to have a genuine impact on the game.

[Reveilled]

well, first of all eu sucked big time!

 

Bah! The second one at least was way, way better than HoI or HoI2.

More events, more epic, more fun. Then again, medieval history interests me far more than WWII.

 

second, what makes you think the upgrade system will actually work? i can see it being very limited and basically useless...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Workshop system worked extremely well in SMAC. While I have no doubt that this new system won't be as good as the Workshop system (which offered basically unlimited choice), I am confident that it will at least be a good system, since it seems the system will be loosely based on the Workshop.

[random evil guy]

well, first of all eu sucked big time!

 

Bah! The second one at least was way, way better than HoI or HoI2.

More events, more epic, more fun. Then again, medieval history interests me far more than WWII.

 

second, what makes you think the upgrade system will actually work? i can see it being very limited and basically useless...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Workshop system worked extremely well in SMAC. While I have no doubt that this new system won't be as good as the Workshop system (which offered basically unlimited choice), I am confident that it will at least be a good system, since it seems the system will be loosely based on the Workshop.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

hm, i've never played alpha centauri... :">

 

btw, HoI is way better. more units, more tactics, more options and more fun.

[Reveilled]

hm, i've never played alpha centauri... :">

 

You should. It really is supercoolmegawhoppingubertotallyawesome. Everything from the in-game graphics to the wonder movies to the technology voiceovers is superbly done.

 

btw, HoI is way better. more units, more tactics, more options and more fun.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmph. What option have you besides war?

[random evil guy]

[

 

btw, HoI is way better. more units, more tactics, more options and more fun.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmph. What option have you besides war?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

what other options do you need...?

[poolofpoo]

http://pc.ign.com/articles/614/614551p1.html

 

Sounds awesome, looks awesome, hopefully its as good as it sounds.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

sounds ****ing awful, i hate how he says "stream lining" over and over, which usually translates to: "yes! we're dumbing the game down".

 

They are making the NWN of Strategy games. The horror...

[Oerwinde]

http://pc.ign.com/articles/616/616871p1.html

 

More info. The religion system and the new culture system sounds awesome, but I have mixed feelings about the removal of corruption and pollution. While they were a pain in the previous games, they kinda made sense.

[SteveThaiBinh]

They're getting rid of pollution and corruption in order to reduce micromanagement. Micromanagement? In Civilisation? How appalling! More seriously, I'm worried that with multiplayer integrated from the start, the single player epic game will be neglected. Time will tell.

 

I thought pollution was a good and realistic element in the game, and I will miss it. I suppose that means they're getting rid of global warming as well. Too 'controversial', perhaps?

[Oerwinde]

I'm kinda glad they're getting rid of corruption, it was a real pain and I didn't like how it limited your empire size so much. Fun before realism I spose. Pollution wasn't as much of a pain. By the time you actually had to worry about it, you had a railroad system connecting all your cities and a whole whack of workers, so it wasn't a problem, just a necessary evil.

 

The promotion system needs a more in depth explaination. Does it replace the old simple experience system? Or is it on top of it?

 

From all the various screenshots, it looks like you can rotate the map to various views. Which is neat.

[Deraldin]

I'm kinda glad they're getting rid of corruption, it was a real pain and I didn't like how it limited your empire size so much. Fun before realism I spose. Pollution wasn't as much of a pain. By the time you actually had to worry about it, you had a railroad system connecting all your cities and a whole whack of workers, so it wasn't a problem, just a necessary evil.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I agree. Pollution wasn't so bad but that corruption that limits you to 30 or so cities that can do something beyond just enlarging your cultural border was annoying. I ended up changing some values so that you can get a much larger amount of cities before have to worry about crippling corruption because of your number of cities. Distance corupption was fine though.

[FaramirK]

hm, i've never played alpha centauri... :">

 

You should. It really is supercoolmegawhoppingubertotallyawesome.

 

I can't find that word in my english dictionary, and yet it seems so perfect for describing AC...

[Enoch]

I'm kinda glad they're getting rid of corruption, it was a real pain and I didn't like how it limited your empire size so much. Fun before realism I spose. Pollution wasn't as much of a pain. By the time you actually had to worry about it, you had a railroad system connecting all your cities and a whole whack of workers, so it wasn't a problem, just a necessary evil.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I agree. Pollution wasn't so bad but that corruption that limits you to 30 or so cities that can do something beyond just enlarging your cultural border was annoying. I ended up changing some values so that you can get a much larger amount of cities before have to worry about crippling corruption because of your number of cities. Distance corupption was fine though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think that, from a game design standpoint, pollution is the worse of the two. The "whack-a-mole" approach they took was just conceptually weak. You shouldn't be able to fix pollution problems just by recruiting more workers-- there should be noticeable side effects to using 'dirty' production methods. I think they're doing this by having factories, et al., affect public health (and thus production, pop growth, etc). This is a vast improvement-- more realistic and more fun to play.

 

The corruption approach in Civ3 was, I think, more sound. There has to be way of enforcing a diminishing return to empire size (i.e., you should benefit less from gaining your 12th city than you did from gaining your 2nd). Without something filling this role, a large empire will always dominate a small one. Diminishing returns gives the underdogs a chance. The corruption stat isn't a perfect way to do this, but it's a decent attempt. I'm not sure how they'll accomplish this in the sequel.

[Oerwinde]

I think that, from a game design standpoint, pollution is the worse of the two.  The "whack-a-mole" approach they took was just conceptually weak.  You shouldn't be able to fix pollution problems just by recruiting more workers-- there should be noticeable side effects to using 'dirty' production methods.  I think they're doing this by having factories, et al., affect public health (and thus production, pop growth, etc).  This is a vast improvement-- more realistic and more fun to play. 

 

The corruption approach in Civ3 was, I think, more sound.  There has to be way of enforcing a diminishing return to empire size (i.e., you should benefit less from gaining your 12th city than you did from gaining your 2nd).  Without something filling this role, a large empire will always dominate a small one.  Diminishing returns gives the underdogs a chance.  The corruption stat isn't a perfect way to do this, but it's a decent attempt.  I'm not sure how they'll accomplish this in the sequel.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think they'll accomplish this with the new culture, trade, religion, and tech tree systems. The new culture system will make it harder to hold on to conquered areas, or even areas that you have just neglected culturally, the religion system will allow smaller, but religiously expanding empires to have a huge influence on the larger ones, the new tech tree system will allow smaller nations to catch up to larger ones militarily by sacrificing civil technology, and if you have a small nation with lots of resources it could make you extremely valuable to the nations with more passive AI.

 

Speaking of the AI... its nice that they're going to have multiple leaders for some nations, with different AI and such. The fact that pretty much everyone had the same AI in Civ3 bothered me. God damn warmongering Ghandi.

[Darque]

Despite how it may look on paper, I think it won't work well... <_<

[Reveilled]

I totally, totally hated corruption in Civ 3. It didn't matter how big your empire was, for the most part, all that mattered was the distance from your capital. You'd build a city on a small island a few squares away from your continent, and have to wait eighty turns befor it could finish a harbour to bring in resources for other projects. That sucked. I'm sure they'll find a decent way of replacing it, but Corruption as it was in Civ 3 just didn't work.

[Deraldin]

I totally, totally hated corruption in Civ 3.  It didn't matter how big your empire was, for the most part, all that mattered was the distance from your capital.  You'd build a city on a small island a few squares away from your continent, and have to wait eighty turns befor it could finish a harbour to bring in resources for other projects.  That sucked.  I'm sure they'll find a decent way of replacing it, but Corruption as it was in Civ 3 just didn't work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You only got the massive corruption if you had passed the map size's optimal city number which turned all your citizens in any new cities into damned dirty thieves. On a standard size map the city number was only like 30 or so cities.

[Reveilled]

I totally, totally hated corruption in Civ 3.  It didn't matter how big your empire was, for the most part, all that mattered was the distance from your capital.  You'd build a city on a small island a few squares away from your continent, and have to wait eighty turns befor it could finish a harbour to bring in resources for other projects.  That sucked.  I'm sure they'll find a decent way of replacing it, but Corruption as it was in Civ 3 just didn't work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You only got the massive corruption if you had passed the map size's optimal city number which turned all your citizens in any new cities into damned dirty thieves. On a standard size map the city number was only like 30 or so cities.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You got massive corruption if you tried to build a city far away from your capital and forbidden palace too, whether you had exceeded the limit or not. Compund that with all the things which are continent based in Civ, and island based civilisations are placed at a huge disadvantage. If you were playing England on one of the player-made Earth maps, this became a *real* bitch if you tried to do anything like the colonisation it historically did. Want a city in South Africa? No problem, as long as you don't mind your harbor being finished in 2050.