Civ4 complexity

[Naokaukodem]

I want a very complicated game that makes my brain to become hot.

[Max Sinister]

Try Win XP. Or MoO 3 :-)

[Odin]

Micromanagement sucks, especially when you have more than 20-something cities.

[Naokaukodem]

darn it what kind of key can shut a window without asking...?

well i was saying that micormanagement was not my meanings, much more a tactic triangle if you see what i mean, like the actual civ economic one, but i have to say that it became a reflex more than a reflexion for me now, in epic games mainly. the thing is that in epic games, the goals aren't that clear and universal, the player can fix them according to the difficulty level and his experience, so that he will take care of this side of the game, or not. I mean there is not limit that will force him to look and think for more, he finally may just lose or win. this is a good thing for very new players and replayability, but it put the accent on experience more than on reflexion finally. also, civ systems and aspects like upgrades aren't firstly that obvious or explained, but secondly they aren't that complicated or stategicfull, because upgrades are just top and noting can beat them, you just have to take care enough about them and think or read somewhere why they are and how to profit from them. Well i'm talking about my own experience, i never really tried to calculate if upgrades were just better than anything else, i was just looking at my money and said "haha" and went to something else. but it is true that in Civ3 military units are more important as the difficulty level is increased. but in the same way, upgrades keep to be "automatic" and very benefitfull, and the simplicity of the whole game come out from those automatisms and this massive use of war (which is simple). we can nearly draw a typical scheme for epic game to be score maximised, and it depends more of our attention, which is already a good point and even a great part of the intelligence, than of some other aspects of the mind like compromises, thoughts and deductions, acts and so.

I'm sure that civ can fight against the evil powers of our modern world that want to enslave me and the others by psychologic methods and modern religions by just building and reinforcing the intelligence of the game. There are too much of silly psy-trick annoyers bastards in Civ3 multiplayer lobby. how come those fools could find the entrance? and what about some obscure ladders that sell and spread addictivity for a game that can't receive that much of it, being more a pool of talkers, kids and other "testers" who does not really play but live or sur-live when the majority came here, once, to have an experience. Let's make civ a real game for humans with brains, and not only psycho trickers whom tricks can pass through a condom to make and replace true and fair sociability. it's too easy nowaday for somebody to claim that he is one of those kings on the hill just because he have been ****ed in the ass by king kong who told him what is supposed to be bad, what is supposed to be good, why and how.
Let's do civ a game for real brainers, not for kids, rogues, pervert and personnal computer squaters and frustrated social-psychologists with no life. Let's see how easy it is to manipulate a game with no emotions and to think about a complex situation and drink Coca-Cola in the same time.

[Naokaukodem]

Win XP yeark yeark... this thing is for me not "complicated" but more like impossible... this is just like a huge Civ game with micromanagement without the notice.

MoO3? What kind of game is it? Can it work on a weak computer?

[Naokaukodem]

Some ideas? More strategy...

Example, hex squares. Stacks are lame, especially when they are surprise.

Too much simple battles. Few units. Few strategy possibilities: the game goes on and the attcks are limited, on complexity particularly, and due to slow units.

I don't like capture city principe. it is too brutal in MP elimination and too slow in the same time (depending a lot on strategic position in fact) and can be boring in single player, with a poor AI. I would want some kind of combo strategic civ capture. Maybe according to some cities strategic positions (like the cultural effect civ3 zone system) and the number taken in a turn could decide what cities would surrender arround. Puyo civ or somethin'?

[Lord_Davinator]

the more the merrier

[Naokaukodem]

Originally posted by Lord_Davinator
the more the merrier

Of course.

... In order to make the system "complicated" i mean. More mental.

But stacks are lame-and-boring.

Luxury rate should influence some field components also, like troops moral. Example:

If the luxury coefficient is set so that there are more happy citizen in a city than unhappy one, let's say 2 more, those 2 "units" would go for troops moral, like if they are in a country with a high comfort, military troops would have a comparable comfort, for the moral of the soldiers, which is plainfully realistic (not like this "text" ). Therefore they would take their job more seriously and accomplish their tasks in a better way. I saw it! All the troops could take some benefits from this, like one movement point bonus, bombardement accuracy bonuses, better vision range, better logistics... the bonuses would raise in nature and/or number with the luxury rate "excedent" as explained before.

[Jon Shafer]

Civ 4 will not be more complex than Civ 3, so don't get your hopes up.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Odin
Micromanagement sucks, especially when you have more than 20-something cities.

you're a whimp



I never use governors with my cities, and I rarely automate any of my units no matter how many I have.

[Naokaukodem]

Originally posted by Trip
Civ 4 will not be more complex than Civ 3, so don't get your hopes up.

1) It may be

2) I'll not wait for civ5

3) the moral concept is not that complicated, gameplay related.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Naokaukodem
1) It may be

Soren Johnson, aka the Lead Designer for Civ 4, aka the guy who decides everything that will or will not be in the game, has stated that for every feature added to Civ 4 (compared with Civ 3), another would be taken out. This states, quite plainly, that Civ 4 isn't going to be any more complex than Civ 3.

So don't get your hopes up.

[Naokaukodem]

I read on this forum that somebody around Firaxis said that a good nowadays civ sequel would be 1/3 new, 1/3 improved, 1/3 changed.

just talking and suggesting...

[Jon Shafer]

Wouldn't improved and changed be the same thing?

Unless you're assuming the "changes" are making the game worse than its predecessors.

[Naokaukodem]