civilization4+total war= good idea?

kristopherb

kristopherb

Protective/Charismatic
Joined
May 23, 2006
Messages
2,220
Location
British Empire Soul:Tesco
well i got rome total war the other day and i the way you command the armys on the field.if they did merge the two games whould it it be a good idea?

my op
yes because it add more realism.
 
Nah. I know it adds more realism and I know that way I won't be screaming at my computer when my unit lost at 98% odds, but it would destroy the classic Civ experience. To Civilization worshipping tribes of Alpha Centauri merging the games would be like committing sacrilege! (ok I'm overreacting).

And how long would a game take? Let's say it's a 500 turns game. Let's say you'll be at war for 200 of those turns, and for each of the turn you're at war you'll conduct 1 battle. Each battle takes, say 10 minutes. Add that to the time you spent doing playing normally, say, 1 minute per turn that comes to...200x10+500 = 2500 minutes = 42 hours.
 
Time aspect aside, I think this would take away most of the fun of combat in Civilization. At the moment, you need to think which units to build, which to attack with, which to defend with, what promotions to use and where to station your units. Combining the Total War battle engine will completley remove the need of this aspect from the game as how good a commander you are will become much more important.

Both games work for what they are. I see no need to include Total Wars battle engine as although it would make Civilization more realistic, it would detract from the fun.
 
what if it implimented in civ5?
 
taillesskangaru said:
42 hours.
Click to expand...

I've already got games which took over 100 hours ;)

I think the main problem is the fact the game would just be so rediculously complicated. I recently got MTW2, and the game is broken to the point where it's almost unplayable. If the only development company that makes total war games can't do a decent job of one era, I really can't see anybody else doing any better.
 
I love the Total War series of games. However, Civilization is much faster to play than a campaign of Total War, because the battles take a long time in Total War. Also, different eras of warfare use very different tactics and so on. To emulate WW2 battles, for instance, the Total War engine would be wholly inadequate. You have to use something akin to Squad Assault or Close Combat, both good games but made for a highly specific market.

I just don't think it would work well.
 
if it was implimented it whould be a all era thing in theory you chould commend archers to wipe out tanks.
I think the main problem is the fact the game would just be so rediculously complicated. I recently got MTW2, and the game is broken to the point where it's almost unplayable. If the only development company that makes total war games can't do a decent job of one era, I really can't see anybody else doing any better.
Click to expand...
well theres no harm in triying
 
jimbob27 said:
I've already got games which took over 100 hours ;)

I think the main problem is the fact the game would just be so rediculously complicated. I recently got MTW2, and the game is broken to the point where it's almost unplayable. If the only development company that makes total war games can't do a decent job of one era, I really can't see anybody else doing any better.
Click to expand...

Ya, i got MTW2 also and i even waited till patch 1.1 came out to play it. Start a game with battle set on hard, go into battle screen, ordered my archers to rain down arrows on my foes and what did my foes do? they just stood there thats it, fast forward till my archers run out ammo, they still didn't move an inch. And the sad thing is the enemy is actually slightly outnumber my troops. After the battle ended. i quite the game and never played it since.
 
kristopherb said:
well i got rome total war the other day and i the way you command the armys on the field.if they did merge the two games whould it it be a good idea?

my op
yes because it add more realism.
Click to expand...

As much as I'm a fan of the Total War franchise, I think it only works with units roughly equal in technology and tactics. Even then, I've had some battles in Total War take hours to resolve, between the setting up of battle-lines and trying to micromanage thousands of troops. On more than one occasion, I've hit the "resolve automatically" button because of the sheer number of troops involved.

RTS games are fun, but can also be nightmares of micromanagement, especially if you want to use sophisticated tactics. Total War is a good mix of RTS and TBS games... but sometimes abstract combat can be much more fun, allowing you to concentrate on other aspects of the game.

Right now, I'm having nightmares picturing Napoleonic era riflemen, lined up in a row, slugging it out with modern infantry with automatic rifles who are scattered about, and are firing from behind trees, rocks, and foxholes, and tanks approaching the cavalry protecting the riflemen's flanks...
 
I don't want a battle every time my warrior kills a lion! The game would need ways of deciding that total war format should be skipped and it should simply revert to the old way of deciding battles.
 
I think that if it was implemented properly, it could be a good idea, for example: your swordman attacks an archer. It will ask you if you wish to resolve it automatically (old Civ4 way) or if you want to command the troops yourself (Total War way). I also think that if you just stuck Total War in it as is, it would probably suck. They don't really work together in their current state. However if the Total War battles were modified slightly before being stuck in Civ, it could make the game even more robust.

Here's an example of how it might work.
Maceman vs. Longbowman; you are asked how to resolve it (automatically or manually) then you go into a battlefield, like Total War and there are a few units of guys, several of longbowmen and several of macemen (Civ units aren't really supposed to represent an army I think, just a large group of those type of guys). Then you would duke it out with your units, and it would involve more strategy than the current Civ system and wouldn't leave it all up to fate.

I like the idea, maybe it could be an extra thing that you can enable only if you want to.
 
Actually, the total war idea would be better if several of your units attacked several of their units at the same time in one big battle.
 
True a more intricate combat system, would be cool, but it would also drag the game out.

I loved the battles in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms series.

That is a massive game, thats consumed months of my life. LoL.
From creating your own characters, to ultimately reuniting China one submenu at a time.
 
anyone play star wars rebellion? it had a turn based outer shell, but battles would take you into real time action where you had the option of having the computer simulate and fight for you or actually fight yourself. it can work, i guess. rebellion was a really good game imo.
 
No, I don't think it's a good idea. M2TW takes 7,5 gigs of space, and it "only" covers 450 years of history. I'm a fan of total war series, and in M2TW war feels like war when you see all those people die because of your ambitions:devil:. War in Civ4 feels like... rolling the dice (32752365728 times). Civ4 is good, especially the diplomacy is better than in M2TW, but I prefer M2TW and I think I'll just stick with it.

But maybe someone could try to mod Civ4 as strategic map into M2TW or something?
 
As long as combat remains turn-based, I'm not against tactical combat in Civ. However, Civ is first and foremost a strategy game, not a tactical game, and I like it this way. I wouldn't want to see one of my favourite strategy games going down the "click faster and you'll win" drain.
 
what i im thinking,all the the feutures stay the same but when you lay seige to a town you can do the tw way or when attacking a stack of units you can do it the civ or tw way it will up to you.

if someone so wished they chould mod it in but it whould be extremly complex.i cant even add units.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
New to Civilization 4
Replies
5
Views
1K
f1rpo
f1rpo
T
America vs England vs France vs Russia
Replies
3
Views
535
Genghis the Barbarian
G
Shirotora Kenshin
Total War 25th Anniversary Sale
Replies
0
Views
347
Shirotora Kenshin
Shirotora Kenshin
F
How i provoked AIs to declare wars (via some very weird but working method)
Replies
13
Views
2K
drewisfat
drewisfat
T
AI Survivor - Alternate Histories AI Ranking
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
8K
Thrasybulos
T
Back
Top Bottom