And yet another weekly update...

[AeonOfTime]

@Yin26: I'm against the ensuing, mindless micro that tending to these billion cities forces on the player.

True! I would hate not to be able to build giant empires anymore, after all every Civ game is a story of truly epic proportions... But I also know that the micromanagement of large empires, especially in the late game where cities produce buildings and units faster is always quite tiresome - and unfortunately quite necessary.

I think the way Civ4 will go is simply that you can still build mind-boggingly huge empires, but will need less cities to do so. That's a welcome change IMHO.

[MarkG]

patience (= not judging (or even making assumptions) based on a single preview from a civ newbie) is a virtue

That's because the expansionism strategy of previous Civs, where you tried to build as many cities as possible as quickly as you could, has taken a hit in Civ IV. There are many more pressures on you at the beginning of the game, and it can be unwise, as well as downright difficult, to expand too rapidly. What you need to do is balance your priorities between expansion, research, building military units, and improving your core cities. Build too many cities too quickly and you'll have a lot of vulnerable cities to defend. But if you wait too long, the enemy will get the jump on you.

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/civilizationiv/preview_6133286-2.html

[Atahualpa]

Originally posted by yin26


Sounds like Civ as always, frankly. The bottom line in ICS has ever been that it's perfectly acceptable to lose some of your young, outlying cities if the overall benefit is that your sheer volume of cities is powering up a huge production base. And I'm not against this on paper. I'm against the ensuing, mindless micro that tending to these billion cities forces on the player. Yes, there are governors, and if they ever worked well, I might use them and feel that the micro is tolerable.

Also, there do seem to be some nice tweaks to the formula overall, still Civ, of course. If anything, I'm now at least eager to have some fun ICS'ing for a few months.

The only thing I can remember to you is playing on smaller maps and with more opponents. This pretty much kills the expansion thing and gives you an interesting challenge more quickly.... okay it'd be interesting if the AI would be more intelligent, but well.

Anyway, however Civ4 will turn out, this time I guess we'll have a chance to mod it well enough to have a radically different game. At least I hope it.
I like what the Rise and Rule mod has done to C3C, it's still Civ3, but different in a good direction.

[Japher]

Awesome... I need a new computer

[yin26]

Markos: I'm glad you're fighting the good fight. It reminds me a bit, though, of Hussein's Communications Director standing near the exploding Bagdhad Airport claiming all the infidels have been wiped from Iraq.

Wise Ass: I've actually been playing Ages of Man quite a bit. While there is still a lot of city-based tedium involved, I think public works is nice. I've heard some gamers say "Yes, but I feel like the work it takes me to give my engineers endless build commands means I've earned the road" -- well, O.K. Frankly I'd like to reserve my time and effort for a mental challenge, but that's just me. Anyway, it's Stan's mod (or expansion pack) that really throws you curve balls, and I've enjoyed some of the AI and scripted elements he has done.

AeonOfTime: I don't doubt that with Civ 4 you'll be able to do more with fewer cities...and this might even work well against a hobbled AI. But at more competitive levels, doing that will likely put you at a self-inflicted disadvantage. Again, this is nothing new, and I'm not crying about it. I just hoped for something more radical.

Atahualpa: Good point. It's such a give and take. On the one hand, starting an epic game on a huge map really gives you a sense of the sweep of time, the grand battles, etc. But the AI simply can't keep up. On smaller maps, AI weaknesses aren't allowed to gather as much steam (usually), and as long as they have been programmed to have an aggressive opening build sequence, ICS does keep limited -- at least for some rather tense turns in the early going. Of course, this type of game doesn't tend to offer that grand sense of space feeling, but that's life. Compromise. As I've said elsewhere, and as you've said here, I think the unprecedented modding ability is central to the game's future, and I'm willing to bet some truly great work will come not too long after Civ's 3-4 month buzz dies down.

[Kataphraktoi]

It reminds me a bit, though, of Hussein's Communications Director standing near the exploding Bagdhad Airport claiming all the infidels have been wiped from Iraq.

have to admit that sounds very familar to cIV reports

[MarkG]

so suddenly ign writers are good and gamespot ones are bad?

[Fidel]

Originally posted by yin26
Markos: I'm glad you're fighting the good fight. It reminds me a bit, though, of Hussein's Communications Director standing near the exploding Bagdhad Airport claiming all the infidels have been wiped from Iraq.

yeah, and you are a spitting image of dubya: claiming that there are wmd there 'for sure'. let's wait for inspectors to investigate it post-oct24

[Atahualpa]

Atahualpa: Good point. It's such a give and take. On the one hand, starting an epic game on a huge map really gives you a sense of the sweep of time, the grand battles, etc. But the AI simply can't keep up. On smaller maps, AI weaknesses aren't allowed to gather as much steam (usually), and as long as they have been programmed to have an aggressive opening build sequence, ICS does keep limited -- at least for some rather tense turns in the early going. Of course, this type of game doesn't tend to offer that grand sense of space feeling, but that's life. Compromise. As I've said elsewhere, and as you've said here, I think the unprecedented modding ability is central to the game's future, and I'm willing to bet some truly great work will come not too long after Civ's 3-4 month buzz dies down.

I can only agree, though for me epic doesn't mean big, it means deep and I can have that on a small map as well.

A downside with smaller maps is that everything weighs a little bit more and with civ3s combat system I couldn't get too friendly. The RNG becomes more and more important the smaller the maps and the more you depend on the outcome of just one unit. I am looking forward to what civ4 can offer and I really think that smaller maps need more deterministic outcomes, so that it plays more like chess, because you cannot 50:50 out the RNG with masses that you don't have. That's a disadvantage. OTOH, these are still epic battles and the fate of your empire sometimes is just this one archer that either survives or dies. And it'd be a fun experience if it weren't for so much randomness.

[Mace]

Originally posted by The_Aussie_Lurker
OK, I read that same article, and I confess that I am incredibly disappointed by the claim made by the reviewer in regards to expansion.

I too, noticed this, with some disappointment. I am in the yin school of thought though...I do not necessarily think ICS is evil--I just don't like excessive micromanagment that ICS brings--some mm is fine but not excessive amounts. And the game model should be that more should not always = better.

...but overall I still have hope that in this Civ, a player will be able to play civs in a style like England, Switzerland and The Netherlands whilst still keeping very competitive.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

I'm for that...

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Japher
Awesome... I need a new computer

No, you don't. Civ IV would need one.
Maybe you don't really need Civ IV, neither a new PC.
The choice is still your.

[Matches10]

I am new here but I'm wondering if this debate couldn't simply be solved a bit with a modding here or there.

If I read correctly some people are a little irritated that in the beginnings of the game, if you don't expand and build cities like mad, you're at a distinct disadvantage. Might not there be a way to simply increase the negative effects things like number of cities and distance from the capitol have on the population of a city? Therefore, you make expansion over a large area of land more difficult due to more time and money spent on producing and maintaining the units needed to keep order in the farther reaches of a sprawling empire? You could expand as far as you want but certain advances and improvements (as the game moves along) make it easier for you to expand. Somehow one could effectively make it very difficult to have many cities far from the center before the development of the courthouse. You can build cities all you want but if you're lots of tiles away from your stronger cultural influences those become barely worth anything due to poor production lost to corruption/crime or whatever they're calling it now.

[Addled Platypus]

welcome aboard

with the talent in here and the mods they have done.
No doubt we will have many styles and challenges.

What made you join Apolyton?

[MarkG]

why wouldnt he join apolyton?!?!?

welcome matches

[Kataphraktoi]

ming goes around periodicly rounding up loose TBS gamers and returning them to the pen thats why

I can only agree, though for me epic doesn't mean big, it means deep and I can have that on a small map as well.