20-07-2005 19:45									#31
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

The stacked units seems to be worth little. How will the ai pick units? If it doesn't pick them right, then you'll revert to moving them by hand. I'd like to know what extra units do: IF I move 20 units against 1 unit, and my 3rd unit finally kills the opponent, what do the 17 other units do? Are they stuck or not?

As for wonders, Galciv has the feature where losing a wonder to someone else loses it all. I much prefer it to Civ or CtP's handling of wonders. If you have to think more before building a wonder, I think it's a good thing, but let boost wonder production (either caravan-civ2-like or through leaders a la civ3 - sigh - I liked caravans).
Incremental rush-buying in civ2 was clearly an oten-used exploit and I don't think too many people complained as it disappeared.

Now this

quote: You can still spread your influence over a broad area, but not have as many cities, necessarily.

is confusing. Is he meaning you need less cities to spread yourself out and grab territory if you decide to pump them up or what? He's still saying you can spread over a broad area, but it is the spreading, not how it's done, that is the problem.

quote: In Civ IV, rather than having to have all the prerequisites to research something, you just have to have one of the prerequisites.

This can certainly make for interesting options and mods.

	20-07-2005 23:04									#32
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

This is ware my Idea of Making all wonders buildible by All Civs just like thouse "Small" wonders. The First person to Build it gets the Full effect of the Wonder and every Subsiquint builder gets a watered down bonus. On the plus side the cost goes down for the subsequent builders.

Now combine that with a rule that each Civ can only have 1 City building a wonder at a time and things will be perfect.

	20-07-2005 23:42									#33
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Perhaps ICS will be curtailed by health. There might be some factor in a cities health that includes proximity to other cities. The closer the cities, the lower the health/production/commerce/food (For those that don't know, corruption was replaced by city health.).

	21-07-2005 00:17									#34
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Impaler[WrG] This is ware my Idea of Making all wonders buildible by All Civs just like thouse "Small" wonders. The First person to Build it gets the Full effect of the Wonder and every Subsiquint builder gets a watered down bonus. On the plus side the cost goes down for the subsequent builders.

I've liked that idea since the first time I heard it, though to add a little to what you said: To get the smaller bonus of a wonder you need to have finished at least 50% of the wonder, that way people don't just switch to the wonder in the last minute to gain the bonus

	21-07-2005 00:25									#35
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Perhaps ICS will be curtailed by health.

That's unlikely since it's said that bigger cities will have a health hit.

	21-07-2005 01:06									#36
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Yes, I know that they said that. But that does not mean that proximity to other cities is not another factor. Think about it. If cities were built one on top of another (ala ICS) where would they be getting rid of their waste? put a bunch of cities next to one another and you have a waste/health problem.

	21-07-2005 01:13									#37
	Got spare money?

People seem to be ignoring the increased maintenance costs as an ICS limiter. It's entirely possible that the cost will be so huge as to completely shut down scientific research, which would leave an ICSer open to more advanced attackers.

The only way to combat that would be larger, more powerful cities. It would force you to build your cities up before you could afford to expand

(All of this assumes the cost is prohibitive, of course)

	21-07-2005 01:55									#38
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Sabre2th People seem to be ignoring the increased maintenance costs as an ICS limiter. It's entirely possible that the cost will be so huge as to completely shut down scientific research, which would leave an ICSer open to more advanced attackers. The only way to combat that would be larger, more powerful cities. It would force you to build your cities up before you could afford to expand

Anyone here struck with the elements in civ4 that have a decidely CTP feel to them...

This is similar to the city caps in CTP - exceed the cap and ALL your cities suffer, as opposed to the corruption model in civ3 which penalized cities based on empire size to a small degree but more heavily, based on location to a palace (which ends up not really limiting ICS all that much).

Exceeding the cap in CTP does limit ICS - not perfectly - but it is a step in the right direction. CTP's problem was that the AI was weak in expansion (but we in the modding community have fixed this to a great degree - especially in AOM)

For instance, in the earliest government types in CTP, you could not simply spam the map with cities because you would run into massive happiness problems, which caused an endless round of rioting in most of your cities. You had to move to a more advanced government type to be able to get the ability to have more cities. This could be handled in the same way in civ4 with a civics slider setting that could add more cities based on tech.

The end result was that you have to choose what approach you take to getting new cities when you had the new cap in hand - - either build new ones (which might not be worthwhile because of the time required to build them up to size) or conquer them.

This requires some forethought. You may need to build a new city to get a particular good and have it work against your cap. But that's the breaks...


PLEASE NOTE_REVISED 07/21/05 =============
Using 20 cities as the base setting for an optimal empire size in the Ancient age...(Optimal is the total production/commerce/food/science of your best 20 cities with no losses - if you exceed that number of cities, you lose total production/commerce/food/science that will bring you back to your 20-city totals)

A slider adjustment could also be established so that you can choose a more bureacratic control-type setting as part of your civics - allowing you more cities (let's set this at 25), but reducing the overall production/commerce/science of your empire. This would simulate a government system that requires a lot of workers to maintain your empire, but do not really add anything beneficial to the empire (sounds familiar???)

Simply choosing the bureaucratic setting would also impose the following penalty too. Using my example above, it could drop your optimal empire size number from 20 to 15. If you have only 20 cities while in this bureaucratic setting, you will lose 25% of your total production/commerce/food/science.

The benefit is if you choose that setting and you want to have a larger empire, you can control more cities (25) and your optimal number will gradually rise back up to 20 over a period of time.

There is also a break point though - if you keep exceeding the new size (25) even more, your civ would drop back down to an optimal setting of 19...18..17 cities. Thus if you decide to go too large, you will become increasing inefficient.

Bottom line - You may have a 30-city empire, but it operates worse than an efficient 20-city empire.
===================================

You would then focus on improving the cities you have, to boost your production/gold/commerce/food strength which would be a good thing. The base is weighted against the number of cities you own instead of total population.

Rampant ICS is limited because you would end up crippling yourself if you do it heavily. You do have some wriggle room though with the sliders.

I think that the combo of what civ3 did with ICS, with settler cost as 2 workers and the high maintenance cost for large empires could just about limit and destroy ICS.

And religion appears to be similar, but greatly expanded from CTP...

	21-07-2005 03:11									#39
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by hexagonian ...

Exactly my thinking. I think the combination of the new maintenance costs and the carryover from Civ3 could go a long way toward limiting ICS.

	21-07-2005 04:13									#40
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by LDiCesare The stacked units seems to be worth little. How will the ai pick units? If it doesn't pick them right, then you'll revert to moving them by hand.

Attackers in civ3 games usually picks his strongest attackers - and by default, the defender puts up the strongest defender. It usually does not make sense to put up a weaker attacker against the strongest defender, because most likely the attacker would lose and give the defender more HPs. So this does not seem to be a problem

quote: Originally posted by LDiCesare I'd like to know what extra units do: IF I move 20 units against 1 unit, and my 3rd unit finally kills the opponent, what do the 17 other units do? Are they stuck or not?

In the field, you know what you are against (at least in civ3 you can see exactly what occupies a tile by clicking on it to get the report), so sending in units en masse would be an efficient means to fight a battle.

See twenty units on a tile - send twenty units in with a push of a button instead of the endless click-n-drag dance

I'd use this feature all the time...

In a city situation, there probably be some guesswork involved, but what I'd like to see is a combat bonus given to a player who sends forces en masse. The tradeoff - either get a combat bonus and lose movement or possibly take more losses with a true single-unit vs single-unit format but retain movement for units because you are holding them back.

Might be too late for that feature though.

	21-07-2005 13:48									#41
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Attackers in civ3 games usually picks his strongest attackers - and by default, the defender puts up the strongest defender. It usually does not make sense to put up a weaker attacker against the strongest defender, because most likely the attacker would lose and give the defender more HPs. So this does not seem to be a problem

Yes but hitpoints are gone as there are promotions instead and this wasn't relevant against elite units. Also I suppose promotions will occur in the middle of the turn when you are attacked too, but to what extent will that change the odds of the fight, and how many can you have for a single unit?
If I attack with 4 units of strengths 3,3,3,6 versus one with strength 7, I may want to soften it with one (or 2) 3-strength units before finishing with the 6-strength unit. Particularly if the opponent is an elite unit which can't increase in power.

I also think the feature is good because, most of the time, it'll probably automate what I'd do by hand, but I too would like a more CtP-like combat system where the stack acts as a whole and gives bonuses because you sent everything at the opponent.

	21-07-2005 15:26									#42
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Actually, DiCesare, HP's are still in the game-they are just handled differently. First up, the number of men in a unit 'sort of' represents the number of HP that unit has-from 1 (conscript) up to 5 (Elite). Secondly, though, each man has a certain number of points of damage that it can take before it dies (up to 20 per man-or 100 in total-if my calculations are correct). This, combined with the variable damage-based on strength-that units do when they hit, will probably make older units obsolete in combat very quickly, forcing player and AI alike to upgrade constantly and putting paid to the 'spearman vs tank' phenomenon once and for all.

As for ICS, it is probably one of those things which any fanatical player can exploit-no matter what game designers do. City maintainance, the ability to extend culture via cash investment, the greater importance of city specialisation and Great People, the variety of terrain improvements, and the new health system will all tie in together to make ICS far less of a successful strategy for achieving final victory.
Actually I find it ironic that you feel this way about ICS in Civ4, Yin, because over in Civfanatics, MeteorPunch sounds scared that these new rules will make the game feel 'less epic', and thus prevent players from building masses of cities !

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

	21-07-2005 16:30									#43
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I didn't get that there were both promotions and increase in the number of men (hp). It doesn't change the fact that in some cases you may want to override the default order and micromanage combat because this is not truly stacked combat.
As for damage dealt depending on power, that was already the case in civ2 (firepower), except here they put attack, defense and firepower in a single figure. We might mod Civ2 and check how the civ4 combat model works .

	23-07-2005 13:56									#44
	Suffering from ads?

ahhh... a yin26 free thread


the biggest adjustment for me will be no more shields !

never played Civ, did it start there ?

it has been in all the others.

Modder's are you listening?

	23-07-2005 21:21									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I would imagine that you can still switch from one wonder to another wonder in that case. (Assuming there is one left you can build.) At if the one you switch to costs the same as the one you were originally trying to build, you would be a huge favorite to complete the new choice.

quote: Originally posted by binTravkin Anyways, I'll lose something and that's no good. Imagine you've poured everything you have just to get that very important Great Library project (and you're playing MP and all the others are at least as strong as you) which will give you each tech any 2 others own and now in the very last turn someone still finishes it before you. That's it. Game over. You've lost too much time going for it and the cash refund is not gonna be generous enough. In MP games such crass loss of resources will most likely result in a defeat or serious weakening. You will have to think hard before starting any project. Anyways - I liked the trailer featuring George W. and Sid M.

	24-07-2005 07:14									#46
	Support Apolyton

Actually, from what I understand, YOU CAN'T ! Or, to be more precise, you can, but you have to start from scratch (but you get the cash payout for the hammers you have so far accumulated).
Before people complain too much just remember that:

1) It will remove a game exploit.

2) It will force players to be far more strategic in their decision making regarding tech and resource acquisitions.

3) It will force the players to take a greater interest in what their neighbours are up to before they embark on such a huge project.

All in all, I think these positives will far outweigh the one 'downside' of losing pre-builds!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

	24-07-2005 07:35									#47
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I agree with all of the above (especially #2). Lets wait and see if the AI also handles that intelligently.

	24-07-2005 08:48									#48
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I can't wait to read the 800 pages manual. And don't forget to download the 15MB patch.

	24-07-2005 08:51									#49
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Oh come on, is it just me HATING the graphics? Maps look like a kid's painting with Lego bricks all around

	24-07-2005 09:12									#50
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

It does appear like a painting (not necessarily a bad thing depending on the artist) but I must say I'm a fan of legos.

(Oh, and the inevitable patch will probably be much larger than 15MB )

	24-07-2005 09:38									#51
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Anyway if I want to see a damn painting I go to a damn museum, capice?

	24-07-2005 15:41									#52
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Or your PC (via the Internet), though its no Uffizi or Louve.

	24-07-2005 21:08									#53
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Vince278 I agree with all of the above (especially #2). Lets wait and see if the AI also handles that intelligently.

If anything, it's probably easier for the AI to handle not allowing transferring production that it is to allow transferring production. Fewer possible outcomes are easier to reason about, all else being equal.

	27-07-2005 00:06									#54
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I've said it because I've seen messages saying city "x" is building wonder "y" then stopped building then started building again. I guess AI stupidity in this regard will have to go.

Had a thought: If a spy halts production are the shields lost?

	27-07-2005 00:11									#55
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Vince278 Had a thought: If a spy halts production are the shields lost?

Obviously. What else did you think that achieved?

	27-07-2005 00:30									#56
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I had thought just a turn's delay. Guess it shows that I haven't done it that much. Thanks.

	31-07-2005 05:35									#57
	Put an end to popups!

Changing production should always lead to loss of every single shield anyway

	31-07-2005 07:34									#58
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Maybe one can research modular design to get some of those shields back.

	01-08-2005 08:00									#59
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Datajack Franit Oh come on, is it just me HATING the graphics? Maps look like a kid's painting with Lego bricks all around

No, i'm really really hating the graphics too. It looks like uhm Empire Earth!