The only thing I want from this is an upgradeable throne room/palace. That was one of my favorite parts of 1 and 2 (don't remember if it was in 3), and I always lamented the exclusion in 4.
Cherrn on
All creature will die and all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai.
They said that they're introducing some new combat mechanics. One thing I hope they put in is a feature that Hearts of Iron 3 has called "frontage". It means that only a certain number of units get to fight along one front if they're in the same province (or in this case, hex) because of limited space. This would probably get rid of the tendency to go "stack of death" altogether.
darksteel on
0
Options
L Ron HowardThe duckMinnesotaRegistered Userregular
edited February 2010
I wonder what they'll do to the multiplayer....
I wonder how multiplayer will evolve...
They said that they're introducing some new combat mechanics. One thing I hope they put in is a feature that Hearts of Iron 3 has called "frontage". It means that only a certain number of units get to fight along one front if they're in the same province (or in this case, hex) because of limited space. This would probably get rid of the tendency to go "stack of death" altogether.
Yeah, that'd make static defenses outside of cities a lot more useful.
They said that they're introducing some new combat mechanics. One thing I hope they put in is a feature that Hearts of Iron 3 has called "frontage". It means that only a certain number of units get to fight along one front if they're in the same province (or in this case, hex) because of limited space. This would probably get rid of the tendency to go "stack of death" altogether.
Yeah, that'd make static defenses outside of cities a lot more useful.
How about one unit per tile, perhaps allowing you to build military buildings in cities that increase the amount of units allowed in them?
You could even make the outside city defences hepful, by making it so that a fort will allow you to put 2 or 3 units in that square.
Also the official website mentions units that can fire more than one space. I really hope they keep the "epic scale" feel and don't make it so, say archers can fire three spaces - keep it to siege units please.
They said that they're introducing some new combat mechanics. One thing I hope they put in is a feature that Hearts of Iron 3 has called "frontage". It means that only a certain number of units get to fight along one front if they're in the same province (or in this case, hex) because of limited space. This would probably get rid of the tendency to go "stack of death" altogether.
Yeah, that'd make static defenses outside of cities a lot more useful.
Yeah. If you could build a fort and double your frontage, I might actually use them. They already have a concept like this with air units in Civ 4 (only 4 in a city, 8 (?) with an airport) and it'd be interesting if they extended this to all squares and units.
Oh dang, new Civ? I only just bought all the expansions to civ 4 this year. I should go ahead and play all I want of those.
Hexes look pretty sweet though, I've always preferred hexes in general for strategy games.
SageinaRage on
0
Options
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
edited February 2010
Of course I'm going to wait to buy this because I have so many fucking games to play now (And I like buying complete editions), but hot damn, if this has all the functionality of CIV 4 with improvements that'd be nuts!
Mixed feelings about the hexes. I know they are perhaps more aesthetically pleasing, but since you can move on diagonals they cut down mobility from 8 to 6. Plus I hate not being able to move directly in a cardinal direction.
Edit: More reactions
I hope City States turn out better than Vassal States in Civ IV.
I hope the UI improvements makes managing large armies of troops less tedious (especially if they are "bigger battles than ever")
I hope there are better non-military paths to victory / better non-military aspects in general like a more in depth religion system.
Edit 2: The Hex system may make more sense with the "frontage" system described above.
Tag on
Overwatch: TomFoolery#1388 Black Desert: Family Name: Foolery. Characters: Tome & Beerserk.
(Retired) GW2 Characters (Fort Aspenwood): Roy Gee Biv
(Retired) Let's Play: Lone Wolf
I hope they get Leonard Nimoy to narrate the game again. Otherwise this product will be inferior.
Beep...Beep...Beep.
You know, I'd be perfectly happy to have Morgan Freeman narrate this time, then somehow merge the two sets of soundfiles into pure audio sex that pours out from your speakers every time you discover a tech.
Not sure how I feel about the battles as they are, I do really wish that there was a total war-ish battle mode, because really, the two franchises are missing the thing that makes the other so great; total war campaign map is pretty goosey, while the lack of strategy (that I'm aware of) in Civ 4 battles really makes any kind of warfare unfun (also because it takes so damn long to get troops from one place to another, only to have them beaten through sheer chance. Let me fight the battle, that way I know I'm going to win, because I'm bloody Caesar.)
Asiriya on
0
Options
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
Not sure how I feel about the battles as they are, I do really wish that there was a total war-ish battle mode, because really, the two franchises are missing the thing that makes the other so great; total war campaign map is pretty goosey, while the lack of strategy (that I'm aware of) in Civ 4 battles really makes any kind of warfare unfun (also because it takes so damn long to get troops from one place to another, only to have them beaten through sheer chance. Let me fight the battle, that way I know I'm going to win, because I'm bloody Caesar.)
Naw, it'd get horribly tedious on a worldwide scale. As it is, I already simulate half the Total War battles halfway through the game (when my monarch or whoever isn't fighting.) It'd also be a break from pure turn based Civ and it would require a time scale tactical balance across 6 millenia. And the Civ warfare strategy comes down to rock paper scissor and collateral damage units.
boudica with a great general gallic warrior unit. When you finally turn him/it into mechanized infantry, he can have guerilla 3, woodsman 3, city raider 3, combat 6, medic 3, march, drill 4, garrison 3, pinch, shock, cover, flanking 2, formation, charge, morale, tactics, mobility, commando, blitz, interception 2, leadership, amphibious, march. She's aggresive so that is...
2, 3, 3, 5, 3, 1, 4, 3, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1 (march is given when you get to mech inf). You'd need a level 40 unit to get all these...
How much xp is that? Remember, Boudica is charismatic!
Hell, they need to just do away with tiles anyways, they don't really belong in a computer game anyways.
After finally playing Rome: Total War, I really wonder why tiles are still presented as an interface feature, when Total War has proven it's not necessary. Is it just tradition? Does it really improve game strategy?
Just let me click where I want a unit to be, and have the game sort out the details in the background.
xzzy on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Hell, they need to just do away with tiles anyways, they don't really belong in a computer game anyways.
After finally playing Rome: Total War, I really wonder why tiles are still presented as an interface feature, when Total War has proven it's not necessary. Is it just tradition? Does it really improve game strategy?
Just let me click where I want a unit to be, and have the game sort out the details in the background.
Hell, they need to just do away with tiles anyways, they don't really belong in a computer game anyways.
After finally playing Rome: Total War, I really wonder why tiles are still presented as an interface feature, when Total War has proven it's not necessary. Is it just tradition? Does it really improve game strategy?
Just let me click where I want a unit to be, and have the game sort out the details in the background.
Because they don't work well with keyboard controls and procedurally generated maps.
Aroduc on
0
Options
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
Hell, they need to just do away with tiles anyways, they don't really belong in a computer game anyways.
After finally playing Rome: Total War, I really wonder why tiles are still presented as an interface feature, when Total War has proven it's not necessary. Is it just tradition? Does it really improve game strategy?
Just let me click where I want a unit to be, and have the game sort out the details in the background.
Because they don't work well with keyboard controls and procedurally generated maps.
I suppose they COULD work with procedurally generated maps if a unit's movement was a function of how much distance they can traverse in one turn but that'd require a complete redesign.
Not sure how I feel about the battles as they are, I do really wish that there was a total war-ish battle mode, because really, the two franchises are missing the thing that makes the other so great; total war campaign map is pretty goosey, while the lack of strategy (that I'm aware of) in Civ 4 battles really makes any kind of warfare unfun (also because it takes so damn long to get troops from one place to another, only to have them beaten through sheer chance. Let me fight the battle, that way I know I'm going to win, because I'm bloody Caesar.)
Naw, it'd get horribly tedious on a worldwide scale. As it is, I already simulate half the Total War battles halfway through the game (when my monarch or whoever isn't fighting.) It'd also be a break from pure turn based Civ and it would require a time scale tactical balance across 6 millenia. And the Civ warfare strategy comes down to rock paper scissor and collateral damage units.
Not to mention it'd probably kill multiplayer. People get pissy about turns lasting 2 minutes, wait till they have to sit through battles between several stacks of units.
Hell, they need to just do away with tiles anyways, they don't really belong in a computer game anyways.
After finally playing Rome: Total War, I really wonder why tiles are still presented as an interface feature, when Total War has proven it's not necessary. Is it just tradition? Does it really improve game strategy?
Just let me click where I want a unit to be, and have the game sort out the details in the background.
Because they don't work well with keyboard controls and procedurally generated maps.
Tiles are all about simplifying the interface and the rules.
Posts
Heh, I'm almost sure this will be my dad's reaction when he finds out.
The Division, Warframe (XB1)
GT: Tanith 6227
Sorry mom and dad, guess I won't be coming home this Christmas.
I can't wait for these posts on CivFanatics:
"Why won't Civ 5 run on my Pentium 4 with a 945G chipset that barely ran Civ 4? Firaxis sucks!"
I like what they've done with the graphics.
I'M HEXCITED!
Can't you tell?
I wonder how multiplayer will evolve...
Yeah, that'd make static defenses outside of cities a lot more useful.
Because you don't have time to get any better, but it's still really good? I've never gone above Noble either, and I don't feel bad about it at all :P
God damn it, I can't wait.
Blue News. same content, basically.
http://www.bluesnews.com/s/107553/sid-meier_s-civilization-v-announced
How about one unit per tile, perhaps allowing you to build military buildings in cities that increase the amount of units allowed in them?
You could even make the outside city defences hepful, by making it so that a fort will allow you to put 2 or 3 units in that square.
Also the official website mentions units that can fire more than one space. I really hope they keep the "epic scale" feel and don't make it so, say archers can fire three spaces - keep it to siege units please.
Yeah. If you could build a fort and double your frontage, I might actually use them. They already have a concept like this with air units in Civ 4 (only 4 in a city, 8 (?) with an airport) and it'd be interesting if they extended this to all squares and units.
Hexes look pretty sweet though, I've always preferred hexes in general for strategy games.
Well, there goes my Fall...
Mixed feelings about the hexes. I know they are perhaps more aesthetically pleasing, but since you can move on diagonals they cut down mobility from 8 to 6. Plus I hate not being able to move directly in a cardinal direction.
Edit: More reactions
I hope City States turn out better than Vassal States in Civ IV.
I hope the UI improvements makes managing large armies of troops less tedious (especially if they are "bigger battles than ever")
I hope there are better non-military paths to victory / better non-military aspects in general like a more in depth religion system.
Edit 2: The Hex system may make more sense with the "frontage" system described above.
Black Desert: Family Name: Foolery. Characters: Tome & Beerserk.
(Retired) GW2 Characters (Fort Aspenwood): Roy Gee Biv
(Retired) Let's Play: Lone Wolf
You know, I'd be perfectly happy to have Morgan Freeman narrate this time, then somehow merge the two sets of soundfiles into pure audio sex that pours out from your speakers every time you discover a tech.
Naw, it'd get horribly tedious on a worldwide scale. As it is, I already simulate half the Total War battles halfway through the game (when my monarch or whoever isn't fighting.) It'd also be a break from pure turn based Civ and it would require a time scale tactical balance across 6 millenia. And the Civ warfare strategy comes down to rock paper scissor and collateral damage units.
2, 3, 3, 5, 3, 1, 4, 3, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1 (march is given when you get to mech inf). You'd need a level 40 unit to get all these...
How much xp is that? Remember, Boudica is charismatic!
After finally playing Rome: Total War, I really wonder why tiles are still presented as an interface feature, when Total War has proven it's not necessary. Is it just tradition? Does it really improve game strategy?
Just let me click where I want a unit to be, and have the game sort out the details in the background.
Probably more for resources than anything else.
Because they don't work well with keyboard controls and procedurally generated maps.
I suppose they COULD work with procedurally generated maps if a unit's movement was a function of how much distance they can traverse in one turn but that'd require a complete redesign.
Not to mention it'd probably kill multiplayer. People get pissy about turns lasting 2 minutes, wait till they have to sit through battles between several stacks of units.
Tiles are all about simplifying the interface and the rules.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
Fixed
Fixed
http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198006524737
When it comes to PC strategy games, Civilization is King