this combat system has to **GO**

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by WarpStorm
I'll have to agree with Tiberius on this one. Resources are my favorite addition to Civ. The give a reason and justification for the wars to happen.

Only on this one?

My favourite addition is the culture system, but resources are in my top 3. They added more strategic depth to almost every apect of civ: diplomacy, trade, wars, etc.

[Gunter]

I have understood from my experience and from your posts that the AI to fill the gap between human skill and its skills is forced to cheat sometimes.

Well,soren said battles are not cheated,and I trust him,but I believe AI has developed an own skill ,independent from programmers,that teached it to use some cheat,in battles too.

Gunter

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by Gunter
... but I believe AI has developed an own skill ,independent from programmers,that teached it to use some cheat,in battles too.

Gunter

It's all in how we perceive it!

Now the AI has genuinely achieved artificial intelligence. It is quite gracious of it to allow us to win, but give us grief about it.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Sir Og
The only thing Firaxis had to do was to add armies (like in CTP) and work on the solutions for making the game harder to win like adding increasing unit support, making it harder to keep conquered cities etc.

Nothing here does anything to make the game more difficult. Armies don't change anything about difficulty, and making cities harder to take (which, incidentally, Firaxis did by culture flip) doesn't count for jack when the AI might as well have cardboard units if it is a few techs behind. You have addressed nothing that actually changes the ease with which the game is beaten. In Civ2, the only reason the AI was so handiy beaten was because it essentially became a joke if it fell a few techs behind... Civ3 fixed this.

[Sir Og]

Originally posted by cyclotron7


Nothing here does anything to make the game more difficult. Armies don't change anything about difficulty, and making cities harder to take (which, incidentally, Firaxis did by culture flip) doesn't count for jack when the AI might as well have cardboard units if it is a few techs behind. You have addressed nothing that actually changes the ease with which the game is beaten.

I didn’t say that armies would make the game more difficult, I just said that that’s what was missing in civ2 combat system.
In every civ game so far the support for units was the same no matter if they are in your cities or 10 000 km away. But if you have to pay more to support your armies/units that you have sent to war it will be a lot harder to wage constant war. If it’s also harder to keep captured winning by military conquest becomes a lot harder.

In Civ2, the only reason the AI was so handiy beaten was because it essentially became a joke if it fell a few techs behind... Civ3 fixed this.

An advantage of few techs was not enough to easily beat the AI. But if the AI was a whole age behind than it deserved to be annihilated.

[Sir Og]

Originally posted by Tiberius

What's your problem with the resource system? It is one of the best addition to the Civ series.

I don’t like the idea that you need resources to produce your units. In the real world resources are abundant. Even the smallest countries have almost all the resources they need and the ones they don’t have they can easily acquire by trade.
I think that resources should be in the game and they should be worth fighting for but not by being a prerequisite for unit production. They should only change the “price” of the units. That is if a civ has a lot of resources it will have higher productivity and will produce more units than a country with fewer resources.

[DanaLea]

my thoughts - about 50 cents worth....

first a disclaimer: I did not read all 10 pages of this thread. I read the first two and a half and the last - hope I'm not repeating anything already in this thread.

here's my idea on how to re-do the combat system. you know, for that make-believe world where Fraxis comes to me and asks me how to make it better. keep the A/D as it is, but add one element. give each unit a number. the low warrior would be one, spearmen two, and so on, so no number is duplicated and each unit's number corresponds (roughly) with where it is in the progression of weak to strong. now, when two units face each other, their numbers are compared. if they are within a given range (say plus or minus 4) then combat ensues as normal. if the numbers are outside the range, then the unit with the small number is simply destroyed. perhaps with a small chance of the unit surrendering and being captured. this will prevent a spearmen from beating a tank, but won't affect a pikeman/tank battle (assuming their numbers are close enough)

what do y'all think of this?

-dana

why isn't there a spell checker in these forums?!?

[Messer Niccolò]

Re: Re: this combat system has to **GO**

Originally posted by Ethelred


Why not? Those are single shot rifles. Come out of the woods from behind and you have dead rifleman. The odds are a bit unrealistic though.

I'm not ranting about the combat system but, come on, if you have cavalry you put it into the woods???
Never heard of mobility?

[aaglo]

Nice Idea, DanaLea. It could work, on civ4.

And about your final statement. Yes there is a spell checker in these forums. You'll just have to post via the 'post reply' button - not via the 'post quick reply' window in the bottom of the thread.

in the post reply form there is a spell check button. use that. (I don't know if it works though - I've never used it)

[aaglo]

Messer Niccolo

between grasslands and plains there can be forests. And moving between these open areas, you have to enter these forests...

[DanaLea]

Originally posted by aaglo
And about your final statement. Yes there is a spell checker in these forums. You'll just have to post via the 'post reply' button - not via the 'post quick reply' window in the bottom of the thread.

I've looked and looked. either it's not there, or is right in front of my face. either way I can't see it.


btw, I've always used the post button, never saw the quick reply area until a few minutes ago. too cool.

-dana

[Messer Niccolò]

Originally posted by aaglo
Messer Niccolo

between grasslands and plains there can be forests. And moving between these open areas, you have to enter these forests...

Of course but should you be a commander of a cavalry squad, would you accept combat in woods against infantry?

[aaglo]

In the lower area there are four buttons:
Submit Reply
Submit Reply (return to forum)
Prewiev Reply
Spell Check

I see it fine

[aaglo]

Messer

You could be hiding in there, waiting for the right moment to attack the riflemen...

[DanaLea]

Originally posted by aaglo
In the lower area there are four buttons:
[snip]
I see it fine

ok, Mr. Smartie Pants. here's a screenshot of what I see...

http://dbeads.net/spellcheck.jpg

I don't get no spellcheck.

-dana