Could merging be good?

[Blaupanzer]

AI research is not far enough advanced to represent any but squad level competition for a human opponent. I like the idea of corporations (at least until I see it). I would prefer Firaxis focus on this kind of research rather than invent a whole additional game for tactical combat.

[Cyrus The Mike]

Will someone kill this thread

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Brutus66
I for one would favor RTS battle resolution. At least I wouldn't be losing so many battles at +90% odds....

An RTS battle where you launch a nuke would look pretty cool.

As would the battle where you have armoured tanks and they have spearmen.

[The diplomat]

Since civ battles often involve units from different eras, the battles would probably look really weird. Imagine 50 archers, 50 musketeers, 100 warriors, 50 pikeman and 100 rifleman fighting 40 pikeman, 100 knights, 150 warriors and 10 catapults.

[ghostcat]

anyone ever played Age of Wonders?

AoW2-style turn based combat might be a viable option to add depth to Civ-Battles!

I agree that this would heavily favor human players over AI but there is always the option to auto-resolve battles...

I really enjoyed AoW's mix of building and fighting but am not convincend that I would want to see this become an integral part of Civ...

as a mod it could definately provide some interesting additions to traditional Civ though.

[LDiCesare]

AoW and before that Master of Magic and Master of Orion featured TBS tactical combat.
It waas interesting when your units had special abilities worth using, but made combats slow and very unbalanced in favor of the player. I'm quite against wasting development time on such a thing.

[siron]

Yes, the tactical combat AI in Moo and Moo2 was rather weak.

I work currently on a mod to improve the ship design of the AI and Antarans though. It will also be more aggressive but it skills in moving ships in combat are of course still limited.

[Bonzootoo]

I do like big games - the more complicated the better. The more historically believable the better. I prefer a game that at least takes 3 or 4 weeks at four hours a night to complete. I want an epic to look forward too. I want strategy and tactics and roleplaying all to be elements. I wish companies would dump the wast of time graphics and make massive games with great AI. Oh well I have been in the minority before.

[meriadoc]

I agree. If I want to play an RTS game, I'll fire up WarCraft. But I suck at RTS games, which is why I love Civ. so much.

That said, the combat engine in Civ IV, while far better than the engines in the previous version, does leave to be desired. I mean, it would be far more interesting if we could have real stacked combat, a la Call to Power.

Admittedly, CTP's AI sucked, but if we could merge the Civ IV AI with the CTP combat engine, we might have a very interesting result.

[Jvstin]

Originally posted by LDiCesare
AoW and before that Master of Magic and Master of Orion featured TBS tactical combat.
It waas interesting when your units had special abilities worth using, but made combats slow and very unbalanced in favor of the player. I'm quite against wasting development time on such a thing.

Indeed, it would make the entire game far too slow, and it would be heavily imbalanced in favor of the player.