Combat System

[Vince278]

I don't mind the big stacks of AI troops. It just means they aren't anywhere else.
(Besides, huge stacks are just nuke magnets in the modern age.)

[spy14]

I know a lot of people want a Total War type system; also a lot dont. Total War itself gives you the option though in campaign mode - you can choose to command personally or let the computer calculate the result, which may be an option for the Civ series to follow.

[WarpStorm]

The problem with having an 'option' for tactical combat is that it isn't an option at all. Every game that I have every played that had this option made it so that you needed to take tactical control to do okay. Hence it is not really an option.

I doubt that it would happen due to what Sid calls the "Covert Action Syndrome". This is when you try to put 2 or more different game play styles in one game. In nearly every case it is weaker than either would have been if they were made the point of an entire game. He refuses to make this mistake again.

[Vince278]

X-Com Apocolypse did alright with a dual TBS/real time tactical system. Before each combat you can choose to resolve either way. I always played TBS; real time went faster but it lacked a finer degree of precision and control.
I think a tactical board in Civ would be great for those stack vs. stack battles but I'm willing to concede it may add an element to the overall game that, for some, may detract from the overall experience of playing a game. An interesting thought though...

[Last Conformist]

The problem isn't joining TBS with RTS, but grand strategy with tactical.

[Robert]

Originally posted by vondrack
Go play Medieval: Total War then...

Seriously - that's exactly what you describe, CyberShy.

Pherhaps the battle system is. But civ is much more than just the battle system.

[MartynC]

Two Words: Nuclear Weapons Will destory at least half the units, & the blast isn't as cool as RON, but its up there!!!

[bongo]

I always loved the 'incoming nuke' sound from civ2 Real menacing.

[Robert]

Nah, I dislike using nukes.
It makes me feel like a loser.
The only purpose of nukes is scare your enemy away of using them.

[MartynC]

Originally posted by CyberShy
Nah, I dislike using nukes.
It makes me feel like a loser.
The only purpose of nukes is scare your enemy away of using them.

There's nothing better than playing as the Americans, & launchng a couple of ICBM's into the heart of Peking (Beijing)

[Antrine]

Perhaps....

the current combat possibilities using what is available in the CSC game editor is not that far off,

if... the AI was tweaked to use artillery. I have done a vast amount of building a mod model that carries much of the sentiments posted in this thread. I think Conquests expansion inadvertantly left the AI behind when they just kept 'adding' things to make CIV3 better (?) or different or just with 'more'.

They need simply to get to tweaking that AI to 'use' well, ok just better then what it is now doing with the built in possibilities. Make good Firaxis, no matter how long it takes you, for obviously it does matter us, as long as it gets addressed.

This is my three cents again,
Happy gaming and modding for those so addicted.

[Last Conformist]

The AI getting left behind is definitively an issue. One example is the flak units, which the AI doesn't seem to understand.

[spy14]

True, i've seen the AI using flak units as escorts for settlers. As they become available when everybody is getting tanks it seems to be a very loose strategy.