Did anyone...

[War4ever]

i still think poly is to blame, that manuscript was huge and basically we got what we asked for....

i remember people warning us about this waaaaaaay back in the day

[Ming]

Nahhhh... if they had really listened, they wouldn't have come up with a totally different game. Heck, they took a step backwards on the combat system. While stacked combat is better, removing fire power was a joke.

[War4ever]

i would have liked ctp attack style better...and yes removing firepower was plain dumb

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Ming
stacked combat is better

I don't like the stacked combat in civ3. You don't have to plan your attacks as well. Overall I like the system in SMAC best.

[War4ever]

smacs model was good too....i like stacked combat, but it hurts to lose your stack if you dn't have those fortresses

[Ming]

I just think the stacked combat system is more realistic. I'm not a big fan of seeing an entire army disappear just because one unit lost

[DrSpike]

True, but it does add a certain need for planning. The reason I like the SMAC system best is that when a defending unit loses the other units don't die but take collateral damage........which makes the attacking units in the stack less effective. IMO this strikes the best balance between mindless stacking and losing everything because 1 unit loses.

[War4ever]

i thought ctp did that as well, sometimes i confuse all these damm games up.....or am i thinking armies from civ3...all this posting is confusing lol

[DrSpike]

Nah in CTP multiple units attacked and defended at once. Very different.

[Ming]

I thought in CTP II, you went to a seperate screen, and the units fought in rows... with long range weapons being defended by your defensive units... more like a real war game.

[War4ever]

yes it did Ming, i knew i remembered it from somewhere......it was rows of muskets, cannons, and flanked by horsies, kinda the way risk shows it on their box, and the traditional warefare stance throughout history

[Ming]

Yeah... each unit was involved, and it really mattered what the make up of your army was.

[DrSpike]

That's what I meant by multiple units defending/attacking at once.

[War4ever]

lol were all talking about the same thing, but coming from different angles, we need a fourth for doubles

[Ming]

NObody else seems to be around. But at least this forum is amusing on a quiet saturday morning