CGW Preview

[Jonny]

The June 2005 issue Computer Gaming World has a preview of Civ IV. It doesn't give too many details, but it does mention things from several areas, though many of those things we already know.

Here's a list of the things that the article mentions:

- There will be multiplayer from the beginning, and it's already been in testing. There will be a co-op mode, were several people will run one nation at once. There will also be persistent turn-based servers.

- There will three game lengths: a short one (that can be finished in a few hours), a "normal" one (about 15 to 20 hours to play), and a really big one...

- Soren says that he is spending much of his time now on improving the AI. One goal is to have rulers with distinct personalities... i.e., Gandhi will be generous to weaker nations, while the Khan will shy away from any diplomacy at all. Also, governors to auto-manage cities will be improved.

- A new flexible technology tree will let for different civs develop more uniquely than before.

- All resources in the game will offer distinct terrain improvements.

- Editor with Python and XML.

- Combat will be simplified. There are no longer separate attack and defense strengths. Units will now have one single base strength that are increased or diminished in certain situations (for example, infantry will have defensive bonuses in difficult terrain, while cavalry will have an advantage attacking ranged units such as archers). Artillery/Siege units will be stronger and will allow for damaging all of the units in a stack. These chagnes were supposedly done to ensourage use of combined arms...

- The switch to 3D allows the interface to be streamlined: for example, all of the information about a city, its buildings, and workforce is now all accessible from the main screen.

- As units increase in experience, they will gain special bonuses, such as extra movement or bonuses against certain types of units.

- There will be "great people", such as artists or scientists, that will provide bonuses to cities or bring about Golden Ages.

- There will be "civics" choices, i.e., social engineering. The player can change settings for such things as allowing slavery or freeing slaves, or the amount of religious tolerance.

- Religion is in, but the seven different religions in the game are generic in ability.

There are also a few screeenshots in the article.

[Vince278]

The co-op mode and turn based server sounds interesting...

[Adagio]

- Combat will be simplified. There are no longer separate attack and defense strengths

Sounds a bit weird... but let's see how this turns out

One goal is to have rulers with distinct personalities

Great

[FrostyBoy]

Yes! Co-op sounds REALLY interesting.

more than 1 human player for one nation?

That must have spawned from the Democracy games!

[Maniac]

Originally posted by Adagio
Sounds a bit weird... but let's see how this turns out

You probably have to think "Age of Empires". There units have a single combat strength, with specific boni or penalties when fighting against certain unit categories. Personally I like that better than the ADM system, if at least it's moddable enough to create your own units for scenarios etc.

[Solver]

AoE combat sounds bad. No more defense or attack units and even simpler combat... gah. I was hoping for more complex, CtP2-style combat with real mixed arms.

[Maniac]

Originally posted by Solver
No more defense or attack units

A strict distinction between attack and defense units is silly anyway. AFAIK Phalanx/Spearmen and Musketeers were used for offense as much as defense, while in the civ series they all have low attack values.

and even simpler combat...

I would indeed dislike simpler combat. I can only hope they're referring to the removal of ADM when they say that, and that the situational boni/penalties will in fact increase the choices and tactical level of combat.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Solver
AoE combat sounds bad. No more defense or attack units and even simpler combat... gah. I was hoping for more complex, CtP2-style combat with real mixed arms.

CtP2 actually has the same system: attack and defense have no value there, they're both the same. That makes sense though: it's quite silly to assume that it would matter who initiates the attack, a phalanx would fight equally well when someone attacked them as when they commenced the attack themselves. OTOH, a tightly packed phalanx with long spears does of course have a distinct advantage against lighter infantry, and a distinct disadvantage on an open field against cavalry. So the new system actually makes more sense.

Of course, CtP also has stacked combat, which adds a whole new level of realism: units don't act on their own but in coordination with each other. It would be a major disappointment if Civ4 wouldn't offer anything like that, but frankly I wouldn't be terribly surprised...

[Nikolai]

- Soren says that he is spending much of his time now on improving the AI. One goal is to have rulers with distinct personalities... i.e., Gandhi will be generous to weaker nations, while the Khan will shy away from any diplomacy at all. Also, governors to auto-manage cities will be improved.

Me likey. With more leaders than civs, I hope we'll get an approach that makes it possible to have any leader leading any civ of our choice. As it is in Civ3, I'll almost always play the Egyptians. It makes the game have less replayability... Imagine a Mongol Empire led by Gandhi...

- Religion is in, but the seven different religions in the game are generic in ability.

My first thought:
I'd hoped Firaxis would make use of the extensive amount of ideas from the old List in particular, in addition to the new List. Random generated religions with all the possibilities suggested there...

[Locutus]

I'm happy with the religions (or what little we know of them) Fantasy religions is a crap idea: this is a history game, not a fantasy one.

[Nikolai]

I at least hope there will be some of the possibilites suggested in the List present in the game. Only adding a new element without making it give anything else than f.ex. happiness bonuses and a SE choice is not what we need.

[Locutus]

Great Prophets are also included. We don't know anything about the bonuses religion may offer, all we know is that religion will "offer myriad tools to control your people more effectively and keep them happier". So it's more than just happiness, but how much more we just can't tell yet...

[Myrddin]

Religions do not have bonuses but

-will impact diplomacy
-can build shrines,monastries and missionaries
-associated with certain technologies

Also can change religions

[Solver]

Sounds like EU2, where you get along better with other countries of the same religion and have to tend to provinces that have a minority religion.

[TechWins]

Originally posted by Solver
Sounds like EU2, where you get along better with other countries of the same religion and have to tend to provinces that have a minority religion.

It would seem difficult to find a scheme of implementating negative tendencies toward specific religions. I bet there will only be bonuses toward same-religion nations, which from my understanding, isn't entirely accurrate.