Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

DamoclesX -> Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/22/2005 5:30:40 PM)

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/civilizationiv/preview_6125513.html?q=1&tag=gs_pc_topslot_click

Oh no, this game, god, civ was the most addictive game I played -EVER- so many nights I would be up till 4am playing totaly having lost track of time.




Lucifuge -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/22/2005 8:13:31 PM)

Wow alot of great changes, religion (holy cities!), unit levels, 'great' people units...man cant wait :) Looks like not making same mistakes as Pirates remake and advancing gameplay to a new level.



Platoonist -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/22/2005 8:26:09 PM)

I remember the entire summer of 1996 being a blur of marathon Civilization II sessions. I'd start in the afternoon promising myself only a few turns before I'd get some important and overdue things done.....the next external stimulis I recall after that was sunrise birdsong.

I was never able to warm up to Civilization III as much tho.



TheHellPatrol -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/22/2005 9:05:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Platoonist
I'd start in the afternoon promising myself only a few turns before I'd get some important and overdue things done....
[:D]LOL, and just when i thought i could end it for the night an ex-ally would invade me[;)]...there went another 6 hours[8|]



Terminus -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/22/2005 9:14:36 PM)

Well, after Civ3 things can only get BETTER...



Platoonist -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/22/2005 9:17:42 PM)

The worst thing for me was having a Wonder just a few turns from completion. Couldn't wait to fire that baby up when the final shield was put in place and see the boost it gave economically or militarily. The game was pure crack from my standpoint. [:D]



Brady -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/22/2005 9:46:20 PM)


Ya I played the piss out of that game, seriously adactive, I played a lot of III as well, but I too found it not quiet as good as II, I will defanatly Buy IV though[:)]



reg113 -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/23/2005 12:45:24 AM)

I still spend hours playing II. Justa can not get it off my hard drive.



EricGuitarJames -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/23/2005 1:33:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: reg113

I still spend hours playing II. Justa can not get it off my hard drive.


You ain't the only one[:D]



DamoclesX -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/23/2005 3:22:01 AM)

Civilization was my first introduction to any kind of strategy game, and, well, it was the first game my dad actually liked a lot, we both spend SO many hours on that game.




Pippin -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/23/2005 4:42:17 AM)

That god damn Civ strikes again! Some people complain about drugs, I'd say Civ III should be placed on the CONTROLLED software list by governments around the world. Just one game sucks about a day of life out of you, and for what? Just to force you to retry again the next day. I wonder how many lives have been lost, and families torn apart by this substance.

And of course, every time I uninstall it, I pray that I will not pick up the habbit again. But once your in, you are always in. Not many people get out of this trap.





ravinhood -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/23/2005 5:55:51 PM)

You uninstalled it? I never could even get that far. LOL CIV II remains and even CIV III which I will play from time to time because I love the resource features of it and the trading, but, the combat game is rather dull, unlike CIV II where action heats up quickly and continues until I fly away to Alpha Centauri, right after I launch every ICBM I have. ;) lol


Also it doesn't sound impressive when I read they are "dumbing down the AI", that's what made the Civilization games stand out among the rest, the challenge the AI gave on it's most highest difficulties. I'm reading simple AI coming your way, no longer the challenge it once was. It needs cheats, all games need cheats, the AI anyway. Kneeling to the cries of babies who couldn't beat the most difficult level. Another bargain bin game waiting for me on this one.



Hanal -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/23/2005 6:37:20 PM)

I was debating with myself whether or not to purchase Supreme Ruler....since both these game require alot of time to grasp and play, I think I'll pass on SR and await the arrival of Civ IV.........



oi_you_nutter -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/23/2005 6:41:59 PM)

CIV II was the cause of many a lost day, CIV III still gets played

Alpha Centuri never had the same appeal to me, but the ability to design your own units was a good idea.. I would like to see a little bit of that idea again: choose to trade off one attribute to gain a little advantage in another. speed over armour for ships, aircraft range over bombing ability etc

The Call to Power games (CIV clones) had a longer game period with some futuristic building and units. The fixed length to CIV3 is an annoying restriction that I never liked, there is nothing more frustrating that having your world domination plans running out of time [:@]

Apolyton.net link is a great CIV/CTP site. The source code for CTP2 was released by the developers and is still being developed by fans.


CIV4 will be a must buy for me !



Pippin -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/23/2005 7:56:59 PM)

Seems so many people prefer civ II over civ III. If this trend continues, then Civ IV may be a big flop. Though I loved Civ III a lot. I play nothing but Diety level now, and have achieved I think every possible victory there is, except for the one where you get a victory by having a city achieve X amount of culture points. Almost impossible on diety as you need to build almost every wonder there is for that one, and the AI is making what, 400 or 800% more shield production than you are? Not to mention all the other bonuses. The AI is pretty stupid, but those modifiers is what makes it damn tuff!




Rik81 -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/23/2005 9:10:42 PM)

What? Just a bunch of younsters here[:D] talking CIV II. What about the game that started it all CIV? For me, the first was the best. Somehow, there just was enough "difference" in moving along to II and then III. Yes, I had them all, including the expansion, even a couple of the "clones" which I likewise didn't like.

So, now CIV IV? Yeah, no doubt I will get it. I hope it can grab me, like I did, and like II seems to have grabbed most of you.



Blum -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/23/2005 11:20:22 PM)

don't remember if a played civ 1 or 2, just scratched it from my HD AFTER destroying the disk.
i did so together with PACWAR, when i found myself playing at work.
had to choose between my job and CIV + PAC.
but god, what i did suffer... those so called tobacco addicted or alcoholics have never felt the pain of quitting CIV and PAC on the same day.

Leon



ravinhood -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/23/2005 11:33:50 PM)

I myself would like to see them slow down the time movement from one age to the next, upgrades to military techs came so fast one hardly had time to enjoy a war with legions and phalanx, before muskets were entering the picture. Needs more 5 year turns in the early game I think instead of what is it now in Civ III 50 years? Before I turn around it's 1ad, and I haven't even started on a good war yet. ;)

And yes I played the Mighty Civilization I, the most addicting game of it's time. And the AI was battle hardened and ready to wipe you off the map in a hurry (I even have CIVNET who else has got that one? ;)). Through the years now with CIV III, the AI has gotten lazy, wants to be friendly too much, goes to wars and then makes peace too easily. I want the combat and challenge of the origional back again, with the resources and trading of CIV III. Civ II is sort of the middle of the road of the two, though it lacks the resource trading, the combat game is still as fun as CIV I.

I also don't like the new spying system and stealing technologies of CIV III, the fun of CIV II was sending spies out and doing it yourself, not paying for it only to have 10 attempts in a row yield nothing but a loss of gold. CIV II rules, CIV III is merely ok.



ioticus -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/24/2005 12:33:36 AM)

I agree with Ravinhood. Strategy games may be getting prettier but they are losing their intelligence, especially where the AI is concerned. The new breed of computer game is WOW! 3D! but so shallow underneath.



pasternakski -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/24/2005 4:13:24 AM)

After browsing through the screenies, this one looks like a definite pass for me. CivIII was bad enough with the farmland mineshafts, swirling rollercoaster railroads, Sid Meier lookalike advisors and all that, but now we're going to get an impossibly cluttered landscape where you can't even see the cities under the three-mile-high ghetto gang combat units...

"Jewish cathedral"? Ah hah.

No, thanks. Civ I was great, Civ II was just enough better to justify moving up to it, but that's the end for me until someone reaches back to the good old days, grabs what was charmin' and cookin' about it (remember the CivI caravans?) and takes it in that direction instead of whatever this is.



SemperAugustus -> RE: Oh Noes!! Civ 4! (5/24/2005 4:23:38 AM)

I liked CIV1, but I hated the isometric view on Civ2... I think I'll give this one a pass too



33Vyper -> Nope (5/24/2005 4:30:19 AM)

Hate to be a naysayer....but this series has been there done that. It looks like all they have done is rehash the same old thing with new 3D graphics. New graphics are always nice....but no breakthroughs here.



Pippin -> RE: Nope (5/24/2005 4:50:24 PM)

quote:

I also don't like the new spying system and stealing technologies of CIV III, the fun of CIV II was sending spies out and doing it yourself, not paying for it only to have 10 attempts in a row yield nothing but a loss of gold.


LOL! I finaly did find a use for that useless small CIA wonder. When ever you want to wipe out a tuff AI that is under mutual protection with everyone else, I suggest use an exploit to get around another exploit.

First I give the same agreement with EVERYONE BUT that one AI. Then I try to use that stupid espionage building to plant a spy. Of course it always fails, this is CIV III and the spying stuff never works a damn. And because it will fail, the AI will automaticaly declare war on you. In doing so, he is the one starting the war, so suddenly everyone had to protect YOU! Oh, and if by accident the spy you plant into the AI happens to be succesfull, just try to steal a tech, and it will automaticaly get caught anyway. So no worries there.

Another exploit with that retarded spy building, is build it, then just before it's built, shift to building a big wonder just after you buy the tech for it. You will get a huge shield jump.




ravinhood -> RE: Nope (5/24/2005 5:42:14 PM)

The only 3 AI's I play today that give me any challenge come from games like Civilization/Alpha Centauri, Combat Mission (with advantages) and Spartan. Most AI's today are so simple even on their highest difficulties, they aren't even worth playing against. I took Rome Total War, very first day, put it on most difficult (very hard) level on everything and proceeded to just pound it silly. The very first day!!! Now, that's an AI that suks badly. Oh and this new, Civil War: Battle of Bull Run, haven't played it much, but, the AI has kicked my butt every game so far.

I don't know if I've just gotten smarter in the last 20 years or the AI has gotten dumber, but, I can sure see a difference from 20 years ago when all AI's were challenging and fun to me.

In the Koios thread of Caesar I've asked twice now why games can't be made with difficulty sliders/option settings for combat/defensive stats of the AI units from -10 to +10 and both times the devs and one matrix official have come back with "how we made the AI", and/or have you played it since patch 1.1. But, neither have answered MY QUESTION, why can't you put in a slider/option to put the AI difficulty more into the players hands?

Combat Mission, Steel Panthers, even Madden Football gives these abilities to increase the difficulty of the AI. This is what makes these games good and/or great. I can go past the hard-coded AI difficulty and make it even more difficult by increasing it's advantages, which I have no problem with, overcoming the odds has been part of warfare for centuries, so I don't see it as a problem in wargames to have overcoming the odds difficulties part of the game OPTIONS.

Merely creating a difficult level by design of a developer is no way close to comparing what difficulties others out here can play against. That developer might not even be a good or experienced advanced wargame grog, so what is difficult for him by design is merely easy or normal for the average grog wargamer out here.

I think Sid Meier was a wargamer and a darn good one, he certainly made some damn difficult settings for me as far as Civilization an Alpha Centauri goes, in fact the only complaints I've ever heard about the Civilization/Alpha Centauri AI is how it CHEATS. lol People want an intelligent smarter AI on harder difficulties and that's just not possible, so, it takes cheats and advantages and handicaps to make the AI's continue to be a challenge "the overcoming the odds factor". That's what makes them fun, and maintain longevity.



Charles2222 -> RE: Nope (5/25/2005 8:17:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 33Vyper

Hate to be a naysayer....but this series has been there done that. It looks like all they have done is rehash the same old thing with new 3D graphics. New graphics are always nice....but no breakthroughs here.


I think that is the case throughout the series actually. Sure there's a difference here and there, but I've been playing CIV3 for like the last 1 1/2 off and on, and this weekend decided to try CIV2 again. I just hate the spies in CIV2. Anyway, there really isn't much of a difference and I was somewhat amazed how much knowing CIV3 got me IMO playing better on CIV2. I'm probably still no good on CIV2, but I at least can see where I can find ways to break through the stalemates I used to go through so much.

One thing I like about CIV2, is that your Allies will probably actually stay on your side, as opposed to the constant backstabbing of CIV3. I just wish I could jack that thing to around 1000 turns like I can with CIV3. Perhaps I can go back to the file in CIV3 and see if there's a similar file in CIV2 and adjust it.



Warfare1 -> RE: Nope (5/25/2005 8:57:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22


I just wish I could jack that thing to around 1000 turns like I can with CIV3. Perhaps I can go back to the file in CIV3 and see if there's a similar file in CIV2 and adjust it.



You can easily make the default game in civ2 1000 turns and more if you want.

If you are playing the long game, then set up the paramaters for the scenario, load it up and then pull down the "Cheat" menu (found at the top of the map screen).

In the cheat menu you will be able to change lots of game settings: tech length, game turns, pollution, give more money to all AI players (makes for a tougher game), etc...

When you are done, then save the game as a scenario.

Then when you want to play it, just select this scenario as you would any other scenario.



Warfare1 -> RE: Nope (5/25/2005 9:04:19 AM)

And civ2 is still number one in my book... [&o]



pasternakski -> RE: Nope (5/25/2005 9:08:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Warfare1
If you are playing the long game, then set up the paramaters for the scenario, load it up and then pull down the "Cheat" menu (found at the top of the map screen).

In the cheat menu you will be able to change lots of game settings: tech length, game turns, pollution, give more money to all AI players (makes for a tougher game), etc...

Problem is, when you enable cheat, you turn the game into another version of "t-ball for retards." It doesn't keep score anymore.



Warfare1 -> RE: Nope (5/25/2005 6:45:22 PM)

It should still keep score. The only addition will be the fact that you will be told that you cheated. lol

However, enabling the cheat mode allows you to change things in a scenario to give yourself a tougher game. I do it all the time for the longer game and scenarios.

When you finish making the changes, save the game as a scenario, then turn off the cheat function.



Charles2222 -> RE: Nope (5/26/2005 7:23:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Warfare1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22


I just wish I could jack that thing to around 1000 turns like I can with CIV3. Perhaps I can go back to the file in CIV3 and see if there's a similar file in CIV2 and adjust it.



You can easily make the default game in civ2 1000 turns and more if you want.

If you are playing the long game, then set up the paramaters for the scenario, load it up and then pull down the "Cheat" menu (found at the top of the map screen).

In the cheat menu you will be able to change lots of game settings: tech length, game turns, pollution, give more money to all AI players (makes for a tougher game), etc...

When you are done, then save the game as a scenario.

Then when you want to play it, just select this scenario as you would any other scenario.


Will this cost you any ranking in the HoF? It does in CIV3 if do any tampering (though the adjustment I was talking about doesn't affect it).





Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.75