First Impressions (screenshots, etc.)

[Mace]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
[q=abenamer]Yes. Full health. There's nothing like watching a pikeman stick his pipe into the tank's turret and seeing the turret explode. [/q]

Didn't that happen in the last Indiana Jones movie, but with a rock?

Didn't Rambo do it with a bow and arrow? Oh, wait, that was a helicopter gunship...

[Sarxis]

Yin, I seem to recall that part of the 'eating' was dependant on how satisfying the combat system is in cIV.

So how is it?

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Nikolai
Yin liking Civ4 is a great sign.

Maybe a sign that someone else has stolen his Apolyton password...

[Imran Siddiqui]

Nah... remember he liked Civ3 for a few weeks before he morphed into Mr. Negative .

[Mace]

That's right...it's too early to tell...and re: ICS and cardboard, I think it's also too early to tell.

[yin26]

LOL! You guys crack me up.

As for combat, I don't have enough experience. I decided to give the tutorial a full try (for the review). No combat there. And Imran is right that I took a few weeks to get past the initial buzz, so I'm taking this more carefully. Here is a promise, though: Even if Civ 4 turns out to disappoint, I will not turn negative unless Firaxis abandons the project, which seems hard to imagine.

[yin26]

Originally posted by Mace
That's right...it's too early to tell...and re: ICS and cardboard, I think it's also too early to tell.

From my limited playing time, I think ICS in the very early game is hard to do, and this is great! I'll keep working at it, though. As for mid and late game, no idea yet. Like you say, too early.

[yang27]

let my dear yin play the game a few more times before we figure out his real impressions.

for me it seems that civ4 has incorporated some of the great features from alpha centauri and then some.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

And I still say that Civ4 appears to be what Civ3 was always SUPPOSED to be-only on steroids!!! We are only left to wonder what might have been if Firaxis hadn't lost Brian Reynolds part-way through Civ3's development (the creator of SMAC)!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

[Sirian]

Brian got to make his own game his own way on (I believe) his own terms. The result is Rise of Nations. I have not played it, so I have no comment beyond that.

For that matter, I haven't played SMAC either!

I'm sure there were lots of SMAC influences on Civ4 (the Social Engineering just for starters) but -none- of these came through me because, again, I haven't played it. I have played a wide range of other games, though.


The interesting question now on the table, at least from my point of view, is where Civ4 can go from here. What might be doable in the first expansion? We can't turn back the clock on alternate realities, but there are real possibilities out there and still the chance to influence which ones are realized!


- Sirian

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

You are 100% correct, Sirrian. I for one hope you have a major role to play in the next expansion, because I know you will push hard for an even greater emphasis on the navy ! Things like extra naval units and promotions, additional in-game concepts that emphasise the roles of navies, and scenarios which focus on periods of history where navies were particularly important. Additionally, anything which expands on domestic and foreign politics (Civics, international relations, the UN) would also be welcome!
Oh, realise this is majorly O/T, so I will shut up now

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

[Chronus9]

You know, funny thing. It was a bizarre moment: I opened the packaging on the Special Edition and said: "Hey, this outside slip cover isn't very thick at all, and there is not a lot of dark ink. Hmmm, I might survive this!"

Yin - is your avatar a picture of you eating a cardboard box? Why are you in a bunny suit? (Halloween?)

[CarnalCanaan]

**Keep in mind that this was played on the second-from-lowest strategy level**

My experience from the $1.05 worth of games I've played thus far is that ICS in the early game is more or less dead, if for no other reason than that the Settlers and Workers are quite expensive. Later, though, as your cities can produce at a high level, ICS shows a quasi-comeback since those units do not put a hit on your city population.

However, the system that puts the drag on growth (and thus ICS) is the income system. It is not necessarily easy to gain income in the early game - and thankfully, neither all that important. Later, the available size of your empire is determined by your income: mo' money, mo' cities. This means that if you wish to grow at your neighbor's expense you must have not only the military capacity but also the economic capacity.

Put another way, opposed to previous Civs, conquest will slow down your rate of technological advancement, generally, rather than facilitate it.

To me, THIS was the thing I was waiting for which I felt would kill ICS. Not a retooled algorithm for corruption, but a dynamic that would mean trading military success for scientific success.

[Lou Wigman]

This flies in the face of the "real world" where war has generally meant a boost for scientific and technological advancement.

[Metaliturtle]

Originally posted by Lou Wigman
This flies in the face of the "real world" where war has generally meant a boost for scientific and technological advancement.

Yet in the "real world" nobody decides to go to war to increase scientific and technological advancement, so it can't be exploited.