What do you like about Civ 4 - Page 2

Shabbaman · 03-11-2005, 12:36

Because longbowmen are BROKEN

Kemal · 03-11-2005, 12:44

Well, it still has only one strength, whether it is 7.2/8 or 1.0/8. And it does matter, since the amount of damage a unit does to the other unit is also dependant of the strength value it has.

Furthermore, the amount of damage the unit can take also directly depends on the unit strength. So whereas in civ3, a warrior would only need to get lucky 4 times to defeat a sword. However, in civ4, this is next to impossible, since a warrior would not only need to get lucky to win a round vs the sword, but the amount of damage it deals would be much smaller compared to the amount of damage a sword does if it wins the round, because the warrior's strength value is so much lower.
Adding to this, because the sword also has a higher strength to start with, it can also take much more damage compared to the warrior, meaning the warrior needs to win even more rounds to come out on top.

However, since this all compares to the current strength value of the unit, a wounded sword will have much more problems fighting warriors, since it is not fighting at full strength anymore.

Since experience boni directly affect strength in most cases, they do influence the outcome of a fight considerably! For example in Shabba's longbowmen case, with the correct promotions and a moderately cultural developed city it is defending, the longbowmen might be even more potent than an infantry in defense, making his losses much more logical, especially since the longbowmen has first strike capability as well, which sees it take much less damage in battles than regular units.

Shabbaman · 03-11-2005, 13:06

The first strike is very potent indeed. I like the unit promotions, but unfortunately the "v.s. archery" bonus has only showed up once so far (in my limited playtime, since I'm extremily busy atm. I even have to do, yuck, overtime tomorrow...).

Socrates · 03-11-2005, 14:55

Haven't bought the game yet, but I already find the combat system to be the best of the series !

Don't tell me about longbowmen or stuff, just the concept behind the combat system. Kemal said it all, so I can only repeat. Wounded units will be a greater handicap than in the past (fairer and it makes sense). A feeble unit is less likely to win and less likely to do some great damage. But the more damage you do to a unit, the more feeble it gets and the more damage you'll probably do thereafter on top of it. It seems to be somewhat "exponential" (ok, I should say "cumulative" (as opposed to "additive" if I got it right)). No more attack and defense values is a very good choice, that didn't make sense at all, and I think that the system of promotions and unit classes largely make up for it. The stupid example of the past was Civ3's longbowmen, that intelligent humans would NEVER build (damn that 1-defense value). The old attack and defense values were mixing the strategical level and the tactical levels and that didn't work very well.

Matrix · 03-11-2005, 16:38

Kemal, let me sum you up to see whether I got it right.

A swordsman had value 6, a warrior 2. Does this mean a swordsman does thrice as much damage as well as that it has 6 hitpoints and a warrior just 2?

Kemal · 03-11-2005, 17:05

The exact formula is a bit more complex, but in general, my assumption is that this is more or less correct yes. Btw, once more modern units appear, you can start seeing the weaker units' health bars scale down to reflect their weakness on the battlefield at that time, iirc.

ProPain · 04-11-2005, 00:54

I like quite a few things, but there's one thing I thoroughly hate: the 3 graphics.

Complete waste of comp resources making the game slow and restricting the overview. Zooming out to 2d view doesnt help: you get to see all units on the head making it very difficult to distinguish them.

Why on earth did someone think 3D was a good thing for TBS. This is no FPS, this is a strategy game, I want decent overview, 3D is just annoying. And 2d would have allowed for more detailed graphs as well.

No 3d would have saved Firaxis the embarresment not testing the game with most common graphic cards and their most recent drivers as well.

IDIOTS!

Rik Meleet · 04-11-2005, 01:24

I like that the Economics tech picture looks like a woman with a dildo up her arse ....

4.78KB

Matrix · 04-11-2005, 15:08

I don't see it, Rik.

But I've made a poll about some major new elements in Civ4, where you can say whether you like it or not.

Another poll of mine is about the tech tree being translated...

ERIKK · 04-11-2005, 15:24

I see it!

03-11-2005, 12:36	#11
Shabbaman Administrator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Costa La Haya Posts: 8,493	Because longbowmen are BROKEN __________________ "Our spam is backed with COMETS!"

03-11-2005, 12:44	#12
Kemal Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Netherlands. Posts: 3,108	Well, it still has only one strength, whether it is 7.2/8 or 1.0/8. And it does matter, since the amount of damage a unit does to the other unit is also dependant of the strength value it has. Furthermore, the amount of damage the unit can take also directly depends on the unit strength. So whereas in civ3, a warrior would only need to get lucky 4 times to defeat a sword. However, in civ4, this is next to impossible, since a warrior would not only need to get lucky to win a round vs the sword, but the amount of damage it deals would be much smaller compared to the amount of damage a sword does if it wins the round, because the warrior's strength value is so much lower. Adding to this, because the sword also has a higher strength to start with, it can also take much more damage compared to the warrior, meaning the warrior needs to win even more rounds to come out on top. However, since this all compares to the current strength value of the unit, a wounded sword will have much more problems fighting warriors, since it is not fighting at full strength anymore. Since experience boni directly affect strength in most cases, they do influence the outcome of a fight considerably! For example in Shabba's longbowmen case, with the correct promotions and a moderately cultural developed city it is defending, the longbowmen might be even more potent than an infantry in defense, making his losses much more logical, especially since the longbowmen has first strike capability as well, which sees it take much less damage in battles than regular units. __________________ <b>\"In the Game of Thrones, you win or you die\" </b>

03-11-2005, 13:06	#13
Shabbaman Administrator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Costa La Haya Posts: 8,493	The first strike is very potent indeed. I like the unit promotions, but unfortunately the "v.s. archery" bonus has only showed up once so far (in my limited playtime, since I'm extremily busy atm. I even have to do, yuck, overtime tomorrow...). __________________ "Our spam is backed with COMETS!"

03-11-2005, 14:55	#14
Socrates Emperor Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 3,946	Haven't bought the game yet, but I already find the combat system to be the best of the series ! Don't tell me about longbowmen or stuff, just the concept behind the combat system. Kemal said it all, so I can only repeat. Wounded units will be a greater handicap than in the past (fairer and it makes sense). A feeble unit is less likely to win and less likely to do some great damage. But the more damage you do to a unit, the more feeble it gets and the more damage you'll probably do thereafter on top of it. It seems to be somewhat "exponential" (ok, I should say "cumulative" (as opposed to "additive" if I got it right)). No more attack and defense values is a very good choice, that didn't make sense at all, and I think that the system of promotions and unit classes largely make up for it. The stupid example of the past was Civ3's longbowmen, that intelligent humans would NEVER build (damn that 1-defense value). The old attack and defense values were mixing the strategical level and the tactical levels and that didn't work very well. __________________ Sent from my Debian

03-11-2005, 16:38	#15
Matrix Administrator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Tampere, Finland Posts: 4,828	Kemal, let me sum you up to see whether I got it right. A swordsman had value 6, a warrior 2. Does this mean a swordsman does thrice as much damage as well as that it has 6 hitpoints and a warrior just 2? __________________

03-11-2005, 17:05	#16
Kemal Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Netherlands. Posts: 3,108	The exact formula is a bit more complex, but in general, my assumption is that this is more or less correct yes. Btw, once more modern units appear, you can start seeing the weaker units' health bars scale down to reflect their weakness on the battlefield at that time, iirc. __________________ <b>\"In the Game of Thrones, you win or you die\" </b>

04-11-2005, 00:54	#17
ProPain Customized Admin :) Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: sailing the seas of cheese. Posts: 5,852	I like quite a few things, but there's one thing I thoroughly hate: the 3 graphics. Complete waste of comp resources making the game slow and restricting the overview. Zooming out to 2d view doesnt help: you get to see all units on the head making it very difficult to distinguish them. Why on earth did someone think 3D was a good thing for TBS. This is no FPS, this is a strategy game, I want decent overview, 3D is just annoying. And 2d would have allowed for more detailed graphs as well. No 3d would have saved Firaxis the embarresment not testing the game with most common graphic cards and their most recent drivers as well. IDIOTS! __________________ I fed my Dog the American Dream Well, he rolled over and he started to scream He said, I dig the taste of salt but it don't keep me alive yeah, yeah

04-11-2005, 01:24	#18
Rik Meleet Moderator Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Nijmegen, Netherlands. Posts: 2,502	I like that the Economics tech picture looks like a woman with a dildo up her arse .... 4.78KB __________________ Social life ? Sounds like fun !! Where can I download that ?

04-11-2005, 15:08	#19
Matrix Administrator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Tampere, Finland Posts: 4,828	I don't see it, Rik. But I've made a poll about some major new elements in Civ4, where you can say whether you like it or not. Another poll of mine is about the tech tree being translated... __________________

04-11-2005, 15:24	#20
ERIKK Moderator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Netherlands!. Posts: 2,636	I see it!