Ign Reviews Civilization Iv - 9.4/10

[volcanohead]

Amazing what one finds on the web:

Here we find the following:

"Firing handguns into the air is commonplace in some parts of the world and causes injuries with a disproportionate number of fatalities. For a typical modern 7.62 millimetre calibre bullet fired vertically from a rifle, the bullet will have a velocity of about 840 metres per second as it leaves the muzzle and will reach a height of about 2400 metres in some 17 seconds. It will then take another 40 seconds or so to return to the ground, usually at a relatively low speed which approximates to the terminal velocity. This part of the bullet's trajectory will normally be flown base first since the bullet is actually more stable in rearward than in forward flight.

Even with a truly vertical launch, the bullet can move some distance sideways. It will spend about 8 seconds at between 2300 and 2400 metres and at a vertical velocity of less than 40 metres per second. In this time it is particularly susceptible to lateral movement by the wind. It will return to the ground at a speed of some 70 metres per second. This sounds quite low but, because of the predominance of cranial injuries, the proportion of deaths and serious injury as a proportion of the number of gunshot wounds is surprisingly high. It is typically some five times more than is observed in normal firing."

So it looks like firing directly up is not a risk-free occupation.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by sophist


That seems unlikely. B-52s fly pretty high. It could have happened to a lower-flying aircraft, though they'd have to have gotten lucky. Really, really, really lucky.

Yeah, I was never a great believer in a B52 being shot down in this way, but something like an intruder could certainly be taken down by massed rifle fire on occasion. I've seen films of the battalions firing into the air around Hanoi during air raids.

[sophist]

Maybe it was just a morale thing. I mean, either you have a B-52 that flies relatively slowly, but really high up, or you have a low-flying plane like an Intruder that whooshes past before you're even aware of it. Either your gun can't reach it or your feeble human targeting computer can't track it.

[Metaliturtle]

Anyone take hunter safety? Just aim in front and follow through... no sweat.

[littlechief]

Lion Mutilates 42 Midgets in Cambodian Ring-Fight

This reminds me of the theoretical discussion surrounding the midgets vs. lion scenario.

Of course the story is fake, but makes for a fun chat.

[hanZ]

i think its a difference between a knight taking down a damaged helicopter and a spearmen killing several tanks in a row (like it happened in former civ-versions).

civ is an abstaction of the world - if some knights is placed in a hill square, its not a knight on top of one single hill in the plains, its a knight (or knight squad) hiding IN THE HILLS. a helicopter trying to seek and destroy this knight squad cant fly 10000 ft high and try to figure out in which cave they may hide. they have to go down to the canyons and search. its quite possible for the knights (yeah, they are ancient but not inevitably stupid) to build up some kind of ambush. imagine: your are sitting in a gunship, killed hundreds of enemy "forces" which are wearing ancient armor and weapons - you are bored, arrogant and careless. and as far as i can see, in civ4 no spearmen will destroy entire tank battalions.

another aspect of those discussions is, that people seem to believe, that ancient armies only fought there battles on open fields. yeah, it was the most common battle strategy. but even in ancient history there are examples for very intelligent guerillia tacticts.

in the teuteburger forrest the superior roman army was succesfully ambushed by some antediluvian german tribes.

"Quintili Vare, legiones redde!" varus give the legions back - emporer augustus after varus head reached rome (historical tradition [quote?] )

battles are not always two enemy forces facing each other on plain fields - never was and never will be only this way. and no, helicopters are not always flying 1000ft high. i cant se a problem with altitude differences here.

and - as stated above - dont forget, that the problem with spearman vs tank was, that we all lost uncountable tank units to spearment in the last years (and very often several units in a row). losing one tank to a spearmen every 100000 years would have been absolutely ok in my eyes :P

[alva]

I've played my fair share of Civ3 games and have never seen the infamous Spear Vs Tank problem.

[hanZ]

it was more common in civ1+2 than civ3 mostly due to the fact, that the technologie trees were more flexible and the ai less cheating than in civ3. my civ3 games were normally decided very early or ended with close fights on the same technological level. but i remember enough situations close to loosing tanks to spearmen even in civ3

[Sirian]

I witnessed a Greek Hoplite on a mountain kill SEVERAL tanks in succession in one fight, back to back to back on the same turn. None of these were my units. This took place in RBCiv Epic 15.

I've seen spear kill tank on numerous other occasions, too, though only one at a time. Been on both sides of it.

Of course, nothing is more radical than Civ1 battleships attacking working settlers along the shores -- and losing! I only saw -that- happen two or three dozen times!


- Sirian

[Fidel]

yeeehaw

[Freddz]

Originally posted by hanZ
iciv is an abstaction of the world - if some knights is placed in a hill square, its not a knight on top of one single hill in the plains, its a knight (or knight squad) hiding IN THE HILLS. a helicopter trying to seek and destroy this knight squad cant fly 10000 ft high and try to figure out in which cave they may hide. they have to go down to the canyons and search. its quite possible for the knights (yeah, they are ancient but not inevitably stupid) to build up some kind of ambush.

I think this was Soren's thought process as he designed the game...

[Boris Godunov]

Re: spearmen vs. tank.

There's a true story from WW2 wherein a group of 4 Wehrmacht soldiers took out a convoy of many Sherman tanks without a scratch to them. As the tanks were going down a heavily-forested road in a close line, 2 of the soldiers took out the convoy leader by running across, throwing grenades inside the tank and running back into the woods. At the same time, the 2 others took out the rear tank in the same manner. That left the middle tanks stuck, unable to go anywhere. The soldiers then went up and down the line and wiped out all the tanks.

Now, granted spearmen don't have grenades, but in the unlikely event that a spearmen unit does defeat a severely damaged tank unit in Civ4, I can at least believe it's not entirely impossible. Ergo a one-in-a-trillion occurence of it is acceptable to me.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Re: spearmen vs. tank.

There's a true story from WW2 wherein a group of 4 Wehrmacht soldiers took out a convoy of many Sherman tanks without a scratch to them. As the tanks were going down a heavily-forested road in a close line, 2 of the soldiers took out the convoy leader by running across, throwing grenades inside the tank and running back into the woods. At the same time, the 2 others took out the rear tank in the same manner. That left the middle tanks stuck, unable to go anywhere. The soldiers then went up and down the line and wiped out all the tanks.

Now, granted spearmen don't have grenades, but in the unlikely event that a spearmen unit does defeat a severely damaged tank unit in Civ4, I can at least believe it's not entirely impossible. Ergo a one-in-a-trillion occurence of it is acceptable to me.

If you believe that then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell to you. Notwithstanding the folklore, smart (and very brave) footsoldiers can take out tanks under the appropriate battlefield conditions.

[Metaliturtle]

Maybe spearmen are building really deep holes with sheer vertical walls and then covering them with brush so the tanks drive into the hole and then get stuck in the hole.

[Arsonide]

Re: spearmen vs. tank.

I'm new here, but I'd like to say that games do not represent reality, if they did most of them would not be much fun at all. Imagine if technology played as big a part as it "should", whoever got flying vehicles first would certainly win, every single time.

They've already modelled technology bonuses, what more would you like? The point is a spearman in a fortified city MAY get enough of a bonus to take out that helicopter. This is due to many things, walls, citizens helping out the spearman (Culture adds to his strength, which I imagine is that), etc. I can definately imagine an entire city of people taking out a helicopter, especially a wounded one.

It's not a 100% chance, in fact it will probably be rare, unless the helicopter is attacking the capital city or something, in which case it probably wouldn't be alone, so I don't think there's anything to worry about.

EDIT: Oh, and the massive avatar probably represents more than one spearman, or Rome could have taken over the world with 200 or so guys.