A vote

[Aramis]

AI is my serious choice, however I voted banana because . . . oh, wait, no I didn't--you didn't give me the option!

[Mart]

The five topics in the post do not quite match the vote options. I will describe more then, I voted AI behavior, though I would avoid cheating AI. While some bonusses to the AI are good - it is better to be defeated by the AI having as close abilities as possible to human player. I would see very elaborate AI in the future game.

Second goes diplomatic model - very close to AI actually. I would see more options for human-human diplo

Third - military aspect - CUSTOMIZABLE units as in SMAC/X

[Toby Rowe]

Mart,

Sorry mate- I didn't think the poll had worked, so my list should have been the poll choices- but I did say that up at the top!

Shogun,

Surely it's easier to provide scenery and then let humans use their brain for AI (Unfortunately they will lose a lot of money as the idea doesn't appeal to many- 2 hours, post work before a wife complains, even though I fit neither, but agree!

Today whilst plying through the endless cycle of cleaning pollution I got wondering about what Civ4 might bring, as this one is the worst one. like the Railroad Tycoon version is- I imagined having a settler unit in 3D looking towards a mountain range once London began- If they do it in 3D having X number of cities will be meaningless, as the defence of the (fewer) cities will be given attention- and at the end of the day, having 125 isn't fun, it's simply necessary to dominate.

Darkcloud- Diplomacy- I want real diplomacy- I can currently put 8 attacking units beside the capital city of a nation and 4 against the other city they still have and then offer "our troops....." etc baloney choice and they still refuse! Next go the naton ceases to exist.

Please X company- real al- weird- computer locked up.

Anyway, I wish all a happy Christmas- Christrian or not.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Sava
Military aspects... Civ 3 combat sucks the big one... I'd like to see a Rome Total War style of combat... you can either simulate a battle, or fight it out on the map. THAT is what Civ 4 needs.

No way... you make a game strategic like Civ and tactical like an RTS and you get two AIs that stink.

[Toby Rowe]

Hi mate,

A better combat system I'd go with also, but I think we all know thats' "said as done"; it's about 0% chance it won't be changed- Civ 2 introduced damage/death in units, Civ 3 ignored it and we all thought it daft. If we can view Civ 2 to Civ 4 whilst ignoring Civ 3 that would be good, I'm sure the programmers are ignoring Civ 3 and looking at Civ 1 and 2.

Toby

[Toby Rowe]

Trip.

I'm coming round to the idea of 3D- actually looking at a distant mountain range, and the plains before you- I guess it might be no more that 15 cities each, but could be fun- I see it that they either listen to the improvements we want over Civ 2 or they change the game radically, but it will be one- and certainly one chap on this board wished a radical change, whilst another wanted radical changes regarding grahics. Being the greedy git I am, I'd like both on a single CD- classic and 3D.

Happy Xmas all.

A special Xmas to anyone living in a society that is too afraid to allow you to legally be on the internet, that free medium that tries to sell you stuff every 5 minutes.....

[alva]

AI, if the AI is better, the whole game will be better, simple as that.