Civ IV

[SteveThaiBinh]

Depends on what the game is simulating, I think. The simulation you create is a lovely global Shangri-La, but it bears no resemblence to the real world and geopolitics, sadly. So, as a theologian, you excel, but as a meglomaniac, You Lose! 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your cynicism is sweet, but a little overdramatic. In the real world, nations are looking for ways to improve their economies and living standards, not plotting to invade each other. Civ3 is not really a world simulator of course, but it can be fun if played as such. Go ahead, try it. :D

[213374U]

My main goal in Civ3 is to assemble an economy capable of supporting a massive army that will allow me to overrun the rest of the civs quickly... and simultaneously. Sadly enough, I never manage to do so before 2050.

 

I guess I'm a poor administrator.

[metadigital]

My main goal in Civ3 is to assemble an economy capable of supporting a massive army that will allow me to overrun the rest of the civs quickly... and simultaneously. Sadly enough, I never manage to do so before 2050.

 

I guess I'm a poor administrator. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In Civ2 that was just an expansionist philosophy, and a race to Democracy (no corruption and better production).

 

It's more difficult in Civ3.

[Calax]

yeah i'm always getting going during 2000 and by 2050 ive got half of the world under my control but time always runs out.

[metadigital]

Depends on what the game is simulating, I think. The simulation you create is a lovely global Shangri-La, but it bears no resemblence to the real world and geopolitics, sadly. So, as a theologian, you excel, but as a meglomaniac, You Lose! 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your cynicism is sweet, but a little overdramatic. In the real world, nations are looking for ways to improve their economies and living standards, not plotting to invade each other. Civ3 is not really a world simulator of course, but it can be fun if played as such. Go ahead, try it. :D

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You remember the First World War, right?

 

Remeber what that was all about? How the German soldiers were fighting, "with God" on their side, for FREEDOM ? Freedom from what, do you think? The English and French Empires, methinks.

 

Kaiser Wilhelm's Germany, and later Hirohito's Japan, were both trying to fast-track their own empires, to catch up with England. (Aside: the bombing of Pearl Harbour was an identical strategem to the one used by the British against the Italian Fleet in the Taranto harbour, in November 1940.)

 

And if you think the US is not engaged in an economic war, then I suggest you visit some of the countries outside the trade protection zones, e.g. in Africa.

 

I don't know if we'll ever stop war; I think Darths Sidious and Vader may have had a point about "bringing order to the galaxy", humans seem to only be able to do it with a central authority, i.e. Pax Romana or Pax Britania.

 

 

PS The Italians used chemical warfare against the East Africans in the Italo-Abyssinian war, in 1935.

[Calax]

I think it would be fun to have constant war zones become blasted terrain, or fortifications just pop up and there are actual battle lines that are difficult to get through. Like forcing the terrain into giving the defenders a bonus to represent the battlelines (like ww1). or set up permanant fortifications on your border with their own field guns.

[metadigital]

 

Ypres, 1917, in the vicinity of the Battle of Passchendaele. Battle aftermath. Remains of the Chateau Wood.

[Walsingham]

Meta's pretty much on target. Altrhough I'd say you CAN try to optimise for things like justice and peaceful coexistence with nautere. The trouble is you get squashed, by the angst ridden 'barbarians' across the way who think civilisation is a warm assegai.

 

Or you get culturally swamped.

 

The exception to this is that having a firstrate civlisation leads to helpful thinsg like adequate logistics for your troops, egalitarian battlefield leadership, and freedom of expression for your scientists, and non-attritional forms of warfare (eventually). Which even things out a bit more.

 

I just don't think you can get away from the fact that in a clash of systems, war will always be there. How does Fallout begin again? "War never changes..."

[alanschu]

The thing I didn't like about Civ 3 was the lack of Zones of Control.

 

 

As much as it frustrated me when I was younger, it is really the only way to set up a defensive border. It sucks to have a ton of troops on your border with fortifications and everything, but you miss one little angle tile and the guys just zip right on through.

[SteveThaiBinh]

You remember the First World War, right?

 

Remeber what that was all about? How the German soldiers were fighting, "with God" on their side, for FREEDOM ? Freedom from what, do you think? The English and French Empires, methinks.

 

Kaiser Wilhelm's Germany, and later Hirohito's Japan, were both trying to fast-track their own empires, to catch up with England. (Aside: the bombing of Pearl Harbour was an identical strategem to the one used by the British against the Italian Fleet in the Taranto harbour, in November 1940.)

 

And if you think the US is not engaged in an economic war, then I suggest you visit some of the countries outside the trade protection zones, e.g. in Africa.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's always the same minority of troublemakers who get all the attention.

 

You're focusing exclusively on the 'great powers' - but the world is full of countries that are not great powers (the great majority in fact). Yes, I'm sure you can give me lots of examples of small wars between small countries, but I stick to my main assertion: most countries spend most of the time neither at war nor planning war. How far back into the past this extends is debatable, certainly.

 

Civilization 3 simulates relations between great powers; it doesn't aim to represent a more complex reality. But I still find it fun to play it in strange ways. Thinking about it, I've probably spent more time playing this game than any other single game in my life.

[alanschu]

I think a lot of the minor powers aren't as power hungry because, for one thing, they can't be. But also because attacking other minor powers is just going to piss off the closest major power and get them crunched anyways.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

War on a grand scale is an expensive business thats why the minor powers tend to be involved in long term boarder skirmishes.

[alanschu]

Even then, aren't border skirmishes disputes about "This land is ours!" and whatnot? :D

[213374U]

As much as it frustrated me when I was younger, it is really the only way to set up a defensive border.  It sucks to have a ton of troops on your border with fortifications and everything, but you miss one little angle tile and the guys just zip right on through.

That would just not be realistic. There are no such "control zones" in real warfare. The only real limitations to troop movement are logistics and supply lines. I'd like the inclusion of such things in Civ4, but artificially limiting the way your troops can advance with "control zones" or "established fronts" would seriously decrease the strategical factor in Civ warfare.

[alanschu]

I always hated that I needed 40000 units to defend my border. I would have much preferred that the "zone of control" equal some sort of meeting engagement if you tried to run past a unit (i.e. it would intercept you). As it stands, a little angle hole lets his units march unmolested around my panzer divisions.

 

 

And then the AI just finds an unchecked mountain tile and travels along the mountains until it gets to a city it wants to plunder, with it 2000 unit stack of doom.

 

The thing about logistics and whatnot, is that the game does not model this at all. I can have an entire army deep deep into enemy territory, but he does not suffer at all.

 

I also don't see how it limits the strategy, because I find the "strategy" of moving your giant unit stack between adjacent armies an all sides to be an unrealistic strategy. Score to you though if that tile is a mountain tile, because nothing is going to stop you.

 

It also makes fortifications essentially useless, because you have to build 30 of them along your border.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Even then, aren't border skirmishes disputes about "This land is ours!" and whatnot? :D

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well most boarders have changed over time. It happens in Civ as well. Your off doing something else and the little sods steal a small city. But your occupied and its not so important. Then 50 or so years pass and your bored and you think "umm that was my city give it back" !.

 

I usually keep at least one comparable Civ around so I dont get bored :D

[213374U]

I always hated that I needed 40000 units to defend my border.  I would have much preferred that the "zone of control" equal some sort of meeting engagement if you tried to run past a unit (i.e. it would intercept you).  As it stands, a little angle hole lets his units march unmolested around my panzer divisions.

That is why fast-moving units and planning your communications and fortress networks are important. The AI is very predictable, and won't cross through mountains to avoid your well fortified army. Odds are, they will follow the road to the fortification and then proceed to get effortlessly slaughtered against the walls.

 

 

And then the AI just finds an unchecked mountain tile and travels along the mountains until it gets to a city it wants to plunder, with it 2000 unit stack of doom.

The importance of knowing the terrain around your own cities... "

 

 

The thing about logistics and whatnot, is that the game does not model this at all.  I can have an entire army deep deep into enemy territory, but he does not suffer at all.

I agree. That's why I'd like some sort of supply line simulation to be included.

 

 

I also don't see how it limits the strategy, because I find the "strategy" of moving your giant unit stack between adjacent armies an all sides to be an unrealistic strategy.  Score to you though if that tile is a mountain tile, because nothing is going to stop you.

 

It also makes fortifications essentially useless, because you have to build 30 of them along your border.

No. As I said, even the most modern units can't move very fast in regular terrain. That gives you enough time to wake up your defenders and send them to your fortifications or prepare a good defensive strategy and call for reinforcements if necessary.

 

And if they do use your roads/rail network, you should be ready to repel them with ease using artillery and infantry, regardless of the era.

[alanschu]

That is why fast-moving units and planning your communications and fortress networks are important. The AI is very predictable, and won't cross through mountains to avoid your well fortified army. Odds are, they will follow the road to the fortification and then proceed to get effortlessly slaughtered against the walls.

 

 

????

 

All the AI does is move along mountains for me. They're always the first place I try to defend.

 

As for roads, there's no point in following roads, as you cannot use enemy roads to get a speed advantage.

[Calax]

I think that Roads and Rail should be different. Rail could be used to get large numbers from city to city (instead of one unit like an airport more on those later) while roads would increase movement speed to the point but they also work for the enemy. airports would be convienent because you could place units behind enemy lines. you have units get there first and then they secure an area and you can drop say three units per city into the covered area. basically go bac to where soldiers could create airstrips in the middle of nowhere. i hate having to run a gauntlet with a worker just to see him get captured before i can move any units. And i think that marine aussalts from the sea should be easier to aussalt. Pull a rise of nations where you have just basic units automatically make boats upon entering the water but they have no attack and if you really want a challenge make the boats and units within capturable.

[213374U]

All the AI does is move along mountains for me.  They're always the first place I try to defend.

 

As for roads, there's no point in following roads, as you cannot use enemy roads to get a speed advantage.

Are you sure you are playing Civilization 3?

[alanschu]

Yup yup.

 

 

Are you patched?

 

My AI characters have fetishes for mountains...I assume for it's fat defensive bonuses. They won't touch me if I'm on a mountain though (which I can understand).

[213374U]

Well, it doesn't matter. For all I care, they can stay in my mountains all they want, my cavalry (or panzers) will be waiting for them just outside.

 

I don't know about enemy roads not giving a bonus to speed. That's stupid at any rate. But even if they don't, that's only an advantage for you. You can move your troops faster than they can, thusly being able to plan your defense in advance. I don't see how you could need overwhelming numbers in order to provide effective defense.

[alanschu]

Nope, no speed bonus in enemy territory (this was probably an overkill, but they probably wanted to prevent you from jumping on an enemies rail-line and basically zip around attacking whatever undefended city you choose).

 

The main reason I wouldn't mind the zone of control is that it would make building fortresses actually useful. There's no point in building one unless you have precisely only one tile to get through, because the AI is never going to attack it otherwise.

 

Also, many defensive units are rather poor at attacking, I don't want to have to stop my offensive push because some guy ran between my armies and my defensive armies didn't do anything about it.

 

You don't need overwhelming number, and defense is not hard, I just find it too micromanaging.

[EnderAndrew]

Nope, no speed bonus in enemy territory (this was probably an overkill, but they probably wanted to prevent you from jumping on an enemies rail-line and basically zip around attacking whatever undefended city you choose).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Never noticed that before, probably because I avoid war in Civ.

[alanschu]

It was goofy in the original Civ. Railline your way to the unprotected cities