Apolyton Civ4 PREVIEW (By Solver) - Part 1 online

[MarkG]

air units can attack both cities and units

[Boris Godunov]

So how do they work differently from Civ3? Or can that be revealed just yet?

[Willem]

Originally posted by notyoueither


I dabbled with large maps on a P4 2.4 (or so) with a Radeon 9600 and 1G of RAM. It performed OK for the most part.

So how large is large? I've read that the maps are smaller now, what are the new sizes? I'd be especially interested in the largest size.

[Willem]

Originally posted by GeoModder
Guess it's single-unit graphics for poor us, Imran.

I prefer that anyway. I'm glad we'll have the option since I find the multi-unit graphics kind of cluttering. I felt the same way about multi-units in Civ 3, though alot of people loved them.

[Solver]

The exact details on air units aren't for the public just yet .

[ajbera]

Do air units have a precision-strike capability, a la Civ3? Does any unit have the ability to target city improvements? Does bombardment have *any* effect on city improvements?

[conmcb25]

And Solver more of a global question:

What do you think is going to take the biggest shift in thinking from CIV 3 to CIV 4?

The whole religion aspect of the game?

Or the revamped combat?

Thanks

[Solver]

That's a good one!

Religion is an entirely new aspect, I don't think it will exactly cause a great shift in thinking per se.

I have two possibilities.

1) Expansion. If you're not doing too well, build less cities! That can be a valid tip for Civ4, and generally, expansion really has to be reconsidered.

2) Combat. It's simply very, very much unlike previous games.

And then, there's also the new diplomatic system, but more in that in the remainder of my review .

[conmcb25]

Thanks!

Im looking forward to mondays version, keep up the good work

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Willem


So how large is large? I've read that the maps are smaller now, what are the new sizes? I'd be especially interested in the largest size.

I'm not sure of the tile counts, but they 'felt' plenty big for the important aspects of the game (unit movement, space between continents and ship speed, etc).

Tile counts might be misleading if you focus only on those, as the mechanics of the game could make a 'small' map large or a 'huge' map tiny. Does that make sense?

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by notyoueither


I'm not sure of the tile counts, but they 'felt' plenty big for the important aspects of the game (unit movement, space between continents and ship speed, etc).

Tile counts might be misleading if you focus only on those, as the mechanics of the game could make a 'small' map large or a 'huge' map tiny. Does that make sense?

No NYE but I trust you

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by notyoueither
..., as the mechanics of the game could make a 'small' map large or a 'huge' map tiny. Does that make sense?

No, it does NOT!!
But what DOES make sense is that it will be DIFFERENT.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Hmmmm, maybe I am simply missing something important-but I do feel vagualy underwhelmed by siege weapons in Civ4. I think their ability to soften up the defense bonus of cities (and, I hope, the defensive bonus of units fortified OUTSIDE of a city). I don't see why a siege weapon needs to be sacrificed in order to deliver collateral damage (unless the player sends them into direct combat, of course).
The difficulty I am having, I think, is that historically siege/artillery units are left far behind the fray of battle (particularly artillery and cannons). This is what leads me to believe that the primary role of these units-beyond the defensive 'softening' we all know about-is for them to have a 'first-strike/collateral' damage attack if they are part of a defending or attacking stack.
For example-lets say a stack of 2 cavalry, 2 pikemen and 1 cannon attack a stack of 3 knights and 2 macemen. In my preferred system, the cannon would get an initial 'first strike' attack-against the stack-and deliver collateral damage if successful. Then normal combat would proceed between the strongest attack and strongest defender of each stack-with the cannon only being killed if it is part of the overall casualties of that stack.
The same situation would occur if the former stack were attacked by an enemy stack. To me, this would adequately represent the 'support role' of artillery of softening up a target before the 'main game' begins.
I take it though, that this is NOT how siege weapons work in the game-which is why they leave me underwhelmed.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

[ajbera]

^^^

My feelings exactly. I'm sure I would get used to the existing Civ4 game mechanics re siege, but it would never quite feel right.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by The_Aussie_Lurker
I take it though, that this is NOT how siege weapons work in the game-which is why they leave me underwhelmed.

Wait til you get your hands on them. They are anything but underwhelming.