Civilization IV: Barbarian Onslaught

Tre976

Chieftain
Joined
Apr 22, 2002
Messages
10
Granted I havent played civ III in over a year, but i do not remember the barbs being this plentiful and in an unending supply ( this without the Raging Barbarians checkmarked at start up )
once my game ( noble huge continents 10 civs ) hits 10 AD its The Revenge of The Barbarians. if I have any fog of war on my continent I am just asking for trouble!


anyone else get this feeling?
 
Yeah, i got exactly the same thing goin on. I was playing continents and landed on one on my own. All was well till i founded my third city then they just came coming one after another... I mean a rival civ wouldnt be able keep that onslaught coming on.... so i play the game with no barbarians now.
 
yes..very cool. one game, the barbarians even had 2 cities of their own.

i love using barbarians to promote my units!!
 
This reminds me of CtP, civ1 and civ2. I'm glad the barbs are back as a real threat, not just a minor nuisance.

Play with no barbs? Why not play with no enemy civ too, since these are much more a threat than barbs ;)
 
narmox said:
This reminds me of CtP, civ1 and civ2. I'm glad the barbs are back as a real threat, not just a minor nuisance.

Play with no barbs? Why not play with no enemy civ too, since these are much more a threat than barbs ;)

Actually I was just playing on a tiny pangea map as Egypt with Rome and the Aztecs. Once I got my war chariots (I was in the middle and all I had for resources were horses) I made short work of the Aztecs' three cities. Then my entire army dropped dead to 1 barbian city with two archers in it when I sent them to get some "easy" promotions before Rome turned on me.

If the barbs are going nuts I think there aren't enough civs on the map. I'd try adding one more before turning off the barbs.
 
Powerful barbarians can make the game very interesting. It is also interesting that barbarians can control their own cities once again (in Civilization 2 this could happen as well).

Can barbarians build (by settlers or other means) their own cities in Civilizaton 4 (I do not have Civilization 4 yet) or must they capture pre-existing cities?
 
For me I find the barbarians more of a nuisance. I had a game where a barb city was near one of mine, and my city was under constant attack. I don't see anyway to stop it either (ie tribute or peace treaty). I simply had to defend my city until the barb city eventually did a culture flip in my favor.

I think for a while I'll play without barbs.

EDIT: Ok, I'll play with barbs, I'll just set the level low. I didn't like having to constantly defend my city against them, nor do I like watching all my scouts get killed and having to reproduce them.
 
>Can barbarians build (by settlers or other means) their own cities in Civilizaton 4 (I do not have Civilization 4 yet) or must they capture pre-existing cities?

on my game, the 2 barbarian cities where cities of their own right. they even had unique names.

when mousing over the land, instead of seeing owned by germandy..etc..it said barbarian...and the culture border was a dark grey.
 
Barbarians seem to be in the game to slow down the mindless expansion of Civ 3. They're not hard to deal with -- they're more of a punishment for people who haven't taken the time to research archery, or bronzeworking / hooking up copper.

I've gotten used to the idea that I need to send an archer out with my settler, if not before.
 
I actually love these new Barbs. I started playing Civilization when CivIII was released, so I never experienced the Civ2 Barbs. The barbs are more like Mini-Civs, giving you an early game opponent that you can only deal with by using force. Having such pressure on you from someone you cant make deals with makes the early game much more interesting.
Dont forget that your oppenents might have to deal with the same thing. All you can do is CONQUER THE FOOLS AND MAKE THEM SUBMIT TO YOUR MIGHT! MUAHHAA! :king:
 
At first I thought it was interesting that the Barbarians were no joke (as in Civ3) but then they started TAKING MY CITIES...Now they're a little too tough for my tastes, but I guess it's just another adjustment in play style to make in the transition to Civ4.

It seems like early on, it's way more difficult to kill them 1-on-1 and it works better to just defend the city. But then you get all your improvements wrecked, which is not fun.

rockhpi
 
thats exactly why i hate them. They are too powerfull. They have like 3 or 4 units around constantly. They slow ur civ advance rate down a lot especially when ur competing with rivals on high difficulty settings!

Also has anyone noticed that going from some dificulties to others either has minimal effect or massive effects, its like an all or nothing thing.
 
Well I'm a long time player, but not an expert. I like the fact that barbarians can have their own cities, and that they are fairly tough. Like right now I'm on a big island with just another civ to the east, but with a few barbarians to the west. I didn't find the barbarians overly tough, they actually helped me promote my units. They did destroy one of my new cities. Without barbarians, I could have just defended my east side, and expanded like crazy to the west, with naked settlers and no defense, which is kinda lame.
 
Last night I played a Normal Terra map and the second continent was full of barbarians. One of their cities was up to size 12 and handily beat off my attempt to take it with Macemen and Longbows. The had done quite a bit of development around their cities as well. I ended up taking all four cities I found and adding them to the Egyptian Empire.
 
I like the barbarians...they keep my pacifistic old hide honest by forcing me to keep up with the jonses militarily (no last-minute catching up); they force me to garrison cities well and also to form search and destroy columns to go out and deal with these little barbarian cities...pretty realistic, if you as me. As a bonus, I get to have a few new cities after I've dealt with the (so far) meager defense of 2 or 3 archers. I suspect the problem might diminish if one could get as many goody huts as early as possible and try to keep much of the map under observation (since barbarians seem to spawn out of sight.) Another great touch to a great game!
 
i feel no shame saying I turned them off 11 barb units on my visible map is just insane
 
I like them in this version, they will keep you on your toes. I like how they will seek out the weaker cities and pillage your improvements to make you come out and fight them instead of launching themselves at your cities that are defended by archers.

They're a nice pain in the rear, I like it!
 
I like them. Stops me from using my minimalistic defence approach.

I find the best way to deal with them is to send an Axeman or two in any direction barbs come from, find the city, and destroy it while it's small. Also, keep a unit over any nearby sources of copper or iron; axemen/swordsmen are considerably more nasty than archers and warriors.
 
Seems the people who are having the hardest time with barbarians are the people who are used to Civ 3 -- don't build any defenders at all, and keep all your units inside your cities at all times. I'm guilty of this one too.

Barbarians are easy to kill. You just can't sleep on building some archers or axes. In fact, if you're smart enough to find the right opportunity, you can take barbarian cities instead of building your own. And waiting on the barbarians is awful -- then their cities become stronger, and they can even build up enough to take an undefended colony of yours!

You need to be able to move a few units to meet the onslaught at your borders, instead of waiting for them to pillage you. Roads are helpful.
 
Top Bottom