Sid Meier's Civilization IV Info Center

El taladro said:
I don´t know anything about CIV IV. Something that I want is to "group units".

I´m talking about take 5 workers, group them and send to clear polution "quickly".

Now I´m playing a CIV III game, year 1998, and I spend 50% of my time moving workers. Automate is not a solution. :mad:

Obviously, English isn´t my first language

I think grouping units should be possible.

And also, Firaxis is indeed trying to eliminate micromanagement tasks and other boring stuff they have identified, such as what you’ve described about pollution. Soren said that this was like "playing whack-a-mole."
 
Civrules said:
I think grouping units should be possible.

And also, Firaxis is indeed trying to eliminate micromanagement tasks and other boring stuff they have identified, such as what you’ve described about pollution. Soren said that this was like "playing whack-a-mole."
:lol: nice analogy!

In hindsight, I am sorry for being so harsh on those confused by the word "playable". Please explain how this word is confusing.
 
Correction:

the100thballoon
There's a diference between "# of playable civs" and "# of civs". That's the confusion, but since Civrules explain that is used to say "# of playable civs" the confusion is gone.
 
Civrules said:
EDITED OUT
edited out what? and why?

mhIdA said:
Correction:

the100thballoon
There's a diference between "# of playable civs" and "# of civs". That's the confusion, but since Civrules explain that is used to say "# of playable civs" the confusion is gone.
:confused: I still fail to understand why that is confusing. :confused:
 
the100thballoon said:
:confused: I still fail to understand why that is confusing. :confused:

Well, the barbarians have units and a specific colour, but are not a playable civ. It could be conceived that additional minor civs like them could be introduced in Civ4 that are not playable. I could see how someone who has reading about "minor civs" could want clarification about this number (but the term "playable" is quite appropriate).
 
I totally agree with Slax.

By putting in the word "playable", which is quite acceptable, you are perhaps suggesting there are non-playable civilizations.
 
thatinkjar said:
I totally agree with Slax.

By putting in the word "playable", which is quite acceptable, you are perhaps suggesting there are non-playable civilizations.
I guess but it seems a stretch that someone would actually be confused by this terminology.
 
I hope its More Realistic ive been playing Civ since the beginning wanted more realism though
 
V. Soma said:
Civrules, where have you seen info that Civ IV is to be released in 2006??? :(

Nowhere. What is said on the front page should be correct. :)
 
Now I'm confuse with the100thballoon confusion about others confusion. But anyway.
Its not such a confusion but more a doubt. Maybe they put minor civs as a non playable civs, who knows?.
At this stage much is more about speculation.
 
mhIdA said:
Now I'm confuse with the100thballoon confusion about others confusion. But anyway.
Its not such a confusion but more a doubt. Maybe they put minor civs as a non playable civs, who knows?.
At this stage much is more about speculation.
I dont understand why they would do that. They would get hundreds of pissed off people knockin at their door if they put some civs in the game that nobody could play as. Their games may kick ass but their biggest motive is making money. They wouldnt do that.

Iron+Cross said:
I hope its More Realistic ive been playing Civ since the beginning wanted more realism though
Sorry to advertise but....... if you want a realistic game then check out my completed modpack and if you want an even better realism experience then beta test my semi-complete modpack.
 
thx for the info m8 ! nice mod
 
EBgames are selling pre-release reservations for $50. Estimated ship date is 6/1/2005. Has any other site confirmed this?
 
Tubby Rower said:
EBgames are selling pre-release reservations for $50. Estimated ship date is 6/1/2005. Has any other site confirmed this?


No, this date is wrong. It just amazes me that EB Games has still not even considered changing it after so many emails from fans. :rolleyes:
 
1 1/2 years is imo pretty fast. I rather worry about what will be the content if the game is only 1 1/2 years in development...
Anyway, lets hope they won't sell it in small pieces again (like CIV3) :)
 
Newton said:
1 1/2 years is imo pretty fast. I rather worry about what will be the content if the game is only 1 1/2 years in development...
Anyway, lets hope they won't sell it in small pieces again (like CIV3) :)

That's when we first heard of Civ IV's development. It doesn't mean that plans were not drawn out before Dec 4th, 2003. :)

I would assume (only a guess!) that the Gamebryo engine helps them save a lot of time. :)
 
Top Bottom