And yet another weekly update...

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Oh, also remember that the bigger a civ is (# of cities), the more money said civ has to pay in order to maintain existing levels of research and culture. Again, this is the antithesis of Infinite City Sleaze, especially when you take it together with the maintainance costs of cities.
Now, what I REALLY want to know is-how does air combat work and how important is the navy going to be this time around?

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

[MarkG]

actually aussie, cities can still revolt

http://civilization4.net/3/114/138/

[yin26]

Thanks for the counter-points, guys. I'm not crying "The Sky is Falling," but those bits of information from a gameplay standpoint did give me some real meat to chew on.

[Martinus]

Originally posted by yin26




While MP games will obviously circumvent most worries about the AI, what I see up there spells SP tedium: It seems far easier to defend, the AI didn't seem to attack, and "culture bombs" / turtle building seemed to be overpowered. Hard to say without the game in front of us, of course, but I would affectionately call what I've just read:

Sandbox Civ

P.S. I do like the differentiated unit upgrades. That seems quite intuitive, strategic and fun.

It amazes me that people are able to go to such great lengths, constructive contrite and dubious hypothesis, in order to be able to ***** about something.

[LordShiva]

Road spam

[yin26]

And it amazes me at some of the Lemmings jumping off cliffs. At least I enjoy the show. You should, too.

[MarkG]

ok boys, chill

[yin26]

Just to ask, Mark: Is this not a place to discuss ideas, banter around possibilities, probe potential weakensses, etc.? It's a forum!

I suggest a separate forum for some who just want to click on the image of the game box along with a sound file popping up that plays "It's gonna rock!" Hey, if that's all you're coming here for, then don't bother the people having discussions.

To be fair, you could have the opposite forum where you click on the game box and the sound file plays "It's gonna suck!" Lots of people should stay there, too.

And depending on our moods any given day, perhaps we should banish ourselves to one forum or the other, but the comments above are based on actual gameplay elements. For people unable to process that high a level of discourse, I'll get your sound file ready...

[MarkG]

Originally posted by yin26
Is this not a place to discuss ideas, banter around possibilities, probe potential weakensses, etc.?

well you did bring up ICS from a quoted text that had no mention of anything that could actually have any point about ICS being in civ4....

so, since people care about the things they love, if you're going to be negative in a forum for civ lovers, you'd better be negative about something concrete rather than impressions of reviewers playing against soren and sid

[Atahualpa]

Nice

[Kataphraktoi]

i cant say these 2 have ever impressed me with their game playing 'skills' but at least its a look into the game

And yet another weekly update...

danke

[Fidel]

Originally posted by yin26
Thanks for the counter-points, guys. I'm not crying "The Sky is Falling," but those bits of information from a gameplay standpoint did give me some real meat to chew on.

you should apply for hungarian citizenship

[yin26]

Markos:

No dice. ICS is as evident in this setup as ever. Go read the tid bits again. Then again, denial is fine. Some players like having the opportunity to engage in repetitive tasks ad nauseum, and if "the builder is more empowered" stuff above doesn't make it clear that volume of cities is an important as ever, then what can I tell you? I guess Civ 4 is going to come on a CD as well ... but you're right, what proof do I have?

And what's all this childishness about "being negative" or "being positive"? These are simple questions about how Civ 4 might potentially play. Did I say "I know for a fact X, Y and Z?" No. It's a discussion leading to some, in my view, likely gameplay issues when it's in our hands. Nothing more. Nothing less. Fanboys and the weak-brained need not tune in to this station.

[yin26]

P.S. When I talk about ICS, I'm not talking about some mathematical abberation that makes 10 size 1 cities more productive than 1 size 10 city. I'm talking about the fact that spewing forth as many cities as you can reasonable stack upon the map (and upon each other) will still be par for the course. Firaxis says "you don't necessarily need to build a lot of cities to win."

Yeah, you don't necessarily need to build an army, either, but the quickest path to victory is clear nevertheless. In any event, if a few of my uber cities now spit out wonder units every once in a while, I guess I'll feel happpy that quality has made some blip on the quantity surface.

And just to speed this up lest anybody thinks he is about to say something new: Yes, this is the Civ formula. Tried and true. And, yes, I've played it to death and find the whole thing --a DECADE later!-- boring and predicatable ... unless, and we shall see, Firaxis actually has done something interesting that we haven't read about.

Also: If I determine that it's the same old, tired game, I won't be here whining about it. I'll get out of the way and let the people who enjoy the game post here without my carping.

[Nikolai]

yin: Builder does not neccessarily equal building lots of cities, it could mean building a few cities and improve them and the land around, via culture, religion and so on.