GamePro Preview

Chalks · Mar 4, 2010

Thorburne said:
I just don't get how this will work. How do you defend a city with one unit. Having all of your units on the map in there own tile will make the map tomorrow. Now when you create units, you will have to move them out to someplace on the map and clutter it up? What were they thinking with this decision? Is this really making it past testing?

The same way you defend your king in chess.

A city has a single primary defensive tile, but also 6 surrounding tiles that can be populated by defensive units. Intelligent distribution of ranged units and anti flanking tactics in the defensive formation could provide a very well defended city.

It will be different - but it would seem to be a difference that requires more thought and tactics which can only be a good thing.

Lucky The Fox · Mar 4, 2010

I'm just going to say that I will be really disappointed if multiple leaders per civ are out. It was one of my favourite improvements in IV and the leader selections, for the most part, were perfect.

eireksten · Mar 4, 2010

Chalks said:
The same way you defend your king in chess.

A city has a single primary defensive tile, but also 6 surrounding tiles that can be populated by defensive units. Intelligent distribution of ranged units and anti flanking tactics in the defensive formation could provide a very well defended city.

Precisely

It could also potentially make naval warfare a lot more important, as you'll need to worry about someone sneaking past your land based defense by sea.

Looking more and more forward to this game every day now!

edit: The one thing that dissappoints me, is the fact that they seem to use only one leader pr civ, and that the indian one will be Gandhi... I'd pick Asoka over Gandhi any day!

Chalks · Mar 4, 2010

eireksten said:
Precisely It could also potentially make naval warfare a lot more important, as you'll need to worry about someone sneaking past your land based defense by sea.

Looking more and more forward to this game every day now!

edit: The one thing that dissappoints me, is the fact that they seem to use only one leader pr civ, and that the indian one will be Gandhi... I'd pick Asoka over Gandhi any day!

Yeah, the one leader per civ thing seems like a very odd cutback. Perhaps the new awesome leaders that they're banging on about really are quite awesome, and therefore costly to produce so they can't easily double up the work?

Very unfortunate certainly.

Danielos · Mar 4, 2010

I think they should make an exception when it comes to stacking military units of different themes though. You should be able to stack one land unit, one naval unit and one air unit in a city. I mean, should we have to have all naval units out in the sea because no city would have room for them. That is just silly...

fandamage · Mar 4, 2010

Chalks said:
Yeah, the one leader per civ thing seems like a very odd cutback. Perhaps the new awesome leaders that they're banging on about really are quite awesome, and therefore costly to produce so they can't easily double up the work?

It probably has more to do with the fact that they're eliminating generic mix/match bonuses (Financial/Expansive/Creative/etc) and giving each leader/civ unique abilities. Even if there's just 2 unique attributes per civ, it's a big challenge to come up with 36 interesting and unique bonuses - then there's the testing and balancing, too.

I'd much rather have a smaller number of interesting/balanced civs than a larger number of more generic civs.

Dachs · Mar 4, 2010

Shiggs713 said:
I don't get it. What stops you from tactical strategy in civ4?

I got this far, then I started laughing uncontrollably and couldn't continue. Tactical strategy? :rotfl:

the Falcon · Mar 4, 2010

Reims_empire · Mar 4, 2010

I'm really displeased with the leaders I hope it's a joke for me the leaders should be:

Germany:Bismark/Frederik
England: Victoria/Elisabeth/ Henri VIII
France: Louis XIV/Napoléon/ Jeanne of Arc
USA: Washington/ Lincoln/ Roosvelt
Japan: Tokugawa/Hirohito
Arabian:Saladin
India:Ashoka/Gandhi/ Akbar
China: Mao/ Qin Shi Huangdi/ Taizong
...

say1988 · Mar 4, 2010

I think they should make an exception when it comes to stacking military units of different themes though. You should be able to stack one land unit, one naval unit and one air unit in a city. I mean, should we have to have all naval units out in the sea because no city would have room for them. That is just silly...

Obviously some naval and land/air units can stack (transports/carriers), and it would only be logical that air units can stack, to a limited degree (as in BTS).

Thalassicus · Mar 4, 2010

At the very least, it'd be nice to have multiple leaders for a purely visual aesthetic, even if they don't change how the civ itself is played.

Chalks · Mar 4, 2010

the Falcon said:
I don't think it's a bad thing at all. All leaders lived only a couple of Civ turns in real life anyway. They've only been in the game from the start so you can put a face on each civilization. As each leader is merely a personification of the civ it stands far, I think we can manage just fine with one leader per civ. KISS.

Yeah, I know. It's not the end of the world or anything, but you know, it was kinda nice to be able to choose between multiple leaders. I don't feel the game gains from removing it at all.

Evie · Mar 4, 2010

taillesskangaru said:
And Oda Nobunaga.

What did you just call me?

(If the French PC-Jeux report is accurate, we may add "And Stalin" to that list. And that'S a major WTF - scrap Mao for Wu Zetian, then scrap Catherine for Stalin? What gives, Firaxis?)

EDIT: Fortunately, it appears to have been a case of Le Mistaken Identity, with Bismarck concept art being mistaken as Stalin's.

say1988 · Mar 4, 2010

I don't think it's a bad thing at all. All leaders lived only a couple of Civ turns in real life anyway. They've only been in the game from the start so you can put a face on each civilization. As each leader is merely a personification of the civ it stands far, I think we can manage just fine with one leader per civ. KISS.

It adds variety without the work required to add more civs. And variety for people that like a civ. And my personal favourite, gives AI civ X multiple ways of playing without being random.

EmpireOfCats · Mar 4, 2010

Reims_empire said:
Japan: Tokugawa/Hirohito

Hirohito is considered a war criminal by a lot of people. It was always amazing they let Mao in, given what happened during the Cultural Revolution, but Hirohito would really make a lot of Americans mad. And that's still their primary market.

The_J · Mar 4, 2010

cfkane said:
Shame. It looks like the option of multiple leaders for different civs has been taken out.

They didn't say it.
It's said, that there'll only be one leader per civ, but not, that the option will not be programmed in.
Like said in the DLC thread, i see downloadable leaders coming

.

martinwgc · Mar 4, 2010

It's a bit werid to see Wu Zetian as the Chinese leader. She is famous in China, but only because she's a woman. She didn't have much of an impact as an emperor in Chinese history.

The rulers that greatly impacted China would be:
Qin Shihuang
Han Gaozu/Liu Bang
Tang Taizong/Li Shimin
Ming Taizu/Zhu Yuanzhang
Mao Zedong

The second tier would be:
Han Wudi/Liu Che
Han Guangwudi/Liu Xiu
Sui Wendi/Yang Jian
Tang Xuanzong/Li Longji
Song Gaozu/Zhao Kuangyin
Ming Chengzu/Zhu Di
Qing Shengzu/Aixinjueluo Xuanye/Kang Xi

As for Wu Zetian, at best, she can be placed in the third tier. She's better than an average Emperor, but she's not even close to Qin Shihuang or Mao Zedong, who totally changed China.

Oh btw, putting Mao together with Hitler is a huge mock to the Chinese. Mao has made a lot of mistakes, like every great person. Of couse he's hated by a lot of people, like every great person, but there is no doubt that he's ranked in top five greatest leaders in Chinese history, dramatically improving China. If you want to talk about Chinese history, it's best to put aside your western-centric PoV.

Mathalamus · Mar 4, 2010

martinwgc said:
It's a bit werid to see Wu Zetian as the Chinese leader. She is famous in China, but only because she's a woman. She didn't have much of an impact as an emperor in Chinese history.

The rulers that greatly impacted China would be:
Qin Shihuang
Han Gaozu/Liu Bang
Tang Taizong/Li Shimin
Ming Taizu/Zhu Yuanzhang
Mao Zedong

The second tier would be:
Han Wudi/Liu Che
Han Guangwudi/Liu Xiu
Sui Wendi/Yang Jian
Tang Xuanzong/Li Longji
Song Gaozu/Zhao Kuangyin
Ming Chengzu/Zhu Di
Qing Shengzu/Aixinjueluo Xuanye/Kang Xi

As for Wu Zetian, at best, she can be placed in the third tier. She's better than an average Emperor, but she's not even close to Qin Shihuang or Mao Zedong, who totally changed China.

Oh btw, putting Mao together with Hitler is a huge mock to the Chinese. Mao has made a lot of mistakes, like every great person. Of couse he's hated by a lot of people, like every great person, but there is no doubt that he's ranked in top five greatest leaders in Chinese history, dramatically improving China. If you want to talk about Chinese history, it's best to put aside your western-centric PoV.

china was and still is western oriented (barely...). so we can talk bad about Mao.

Ahriman · Mar 4, 2010

Mao has made a lot of mistakes, like every great person.

Umm...

How many "great people" have:
a) Caused devastating famines causing millions of deaths (by pulling farmers off the land, destroynig farm tools and collectivization), "Great Leap Forward"
b) Destroyed most of the cultural heritage and antiquities of their country, and allowed purges and executions of anyone with an education, "Cultural Revolution"
c) Enslaved their population, shipping vast numbers of people off to labor camps where they were worked to death

Putting Mao together with Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot is... about right.

Heck, even Mao himself didn't mind the comparison:
"This man Hitler was even more ferocious. The more ferocious the better, don't you think? The more people you kill, the more revolutionary you are."

If you want a great modern Chinese leader, take Deng, not Mao.

Thormodr · Mar 4, 2010

No Mao, Stalin, Hirohito or Hitler please. They are not needed and there are much more worthy historical figures that they can use.

Only having one leader per civ is fine. Hopefully they'll add more in the future. It'd be nice if they gave modding tools to help the modders in that direction but I'm not holding my breath.

I'd like a second leader for Mongolia myself as they are my favourite civ. I really enjoyed playing Kublai Khan in cIV.

GamePro Preview

The blue pieces

Prince

Protective/Organized

The blue pieces

Emperor

Chieftain

Hero of the Soviet Union

Chieftain

Chieftain

Deity

Bytes and Nibblers

The blue pieces

Pronounced like Eevee

Deity

Death to Giant Robots

Say No 2 Net Validations

Chieftain

Emperor of Mathalia

Tyrant

Servant of Civ

Similar threads