What do you think of how Civ4 treats War?

[Arc]

War was never really interesting in the previous Civs except during ancient times but time was always pasing too fast to really enjoy it in my opinion.

Also developpers face a difficulty. In Civ 3 they developped a semi-RTS view of the fights that just made it pretty to look at but was quickly disabled to enjoy a faster pace for the game. But truely i always felt civ more like a building game with some rushing times rather than a real strategical game.

With Civ 4 i finally feel that the developpers found a good politics system, it's truely marvellous. Going at war is even harder which isn't that bad.

Sometimes i think players are asking for a mix between age of empires and civilization, but i feel it would ruin the "build cities" part, and games would not last 10 hours, but 100

Maybe when the computers get even more powerful we will see the civ we all dreamed of, but for the time civ 4 is a good upgrade to the series.

[LordShiva]

But I don't want my stacks to be 50% siege - that's not the way it was. By making unites fewer and more valuable, we lose the ability to create armies with more realistic infantry-range-cav-siege proportions. Also the ability to have multiple armies in the field.

[Sgt_Serge]

regarding the power of defenders....

Sun Tzu's Art of War:

Consequently, the art of using troops is this:
When ten to the enemy's one, surround him...
When five times his strength, attack him...
If double his strength, divide him...
If equally matched, you may engage him...
If weaker numerically, be capable of withdrawing...

[Krill]

I like what warfare is like in this game. The AI, IMV, preforms pretty well, not as well as a talented human, but well enough for an AI.

I just wish the AI would archer rush me, like I've done to the AI a couple of times. That would probably require alot of programming to get right though...

[Shaka II]

Originally posted by Arc
Sometimes i think players are asking for a mix between age of empires and civilization, but i feel it would ruin the "build cities" part, and games would not last 10 hours, but 100

That game exists, it's called Rome Total War, including expansion pack Barbarian Invasian, which I recommend. Its a combination of turn based Civ building, sort of Civ lite, but massive real time battles with thousands, castles, siege weapons, formations. try it.

Originally posted by Arc
Maybe when the computers get even more powerful we will see the civ we all dreamed of, but for the time civ 4 is a good upgrade to the series.

Yeah, Civ 4 seems pretty darn good.

[Dis]

I'm currently thinking about doing a warmonger mod for civ4. though I'm not sure how good my modding abilities will be. I don't plan major changes.

But I feel that perhaps civ4 went too far into the builders category, and doesn't have a balanced approach. SMAC is still the best balanced game in this regard.

What I find curious is how the AI can field such large armies on low levels. Does anyone have a good breakdown on how the AI is affected on each difficulty level? How can an AI city have 8 units defending it on warlord level? How could they build so much in such a short period of time? It seems like their production exceeds mine at warlord level.

[JakeCourtney]

It needs some work obviously.