Not to the best of my knowledge. The promotion system replaced the armies and regular/veteran/elite of Civ3. Armies would give a huge advantage to the player. In Civ3 the AI almost never used an army properly. In Civ4 you can just use stacks. Having an army would basically give you a Modern Armor in the age of Knights.
Thanks for reply. I would then have to play Civ 3 just for army. But the thing I hate very much in civ 3 in the concept of corruption. Really annoying to see newer cities producing just single production.
Thanks for reply. I would then have to play Civ 3 just for army. But the thing I hate very much in civ 3 in the concept of corruption. Really annoying to see newer cities producing just single production.
Thanks for reply. I would then have to play Civ 3 just for army. But the thing I hate very much in civ 3 in the concept of corruption. Really annoying to see newer cities producing just single production.
Corruption is a pain in C3C if it's unmodded. The new cities with large corruption you just turn into a Scientist farm. If you're going to mod out corruption you might want to mod out pollution too.
Bucepahalus mentioned the Warlord/Great General. That's another partial replacement for the Army. Admittedly nothing in Civ4 compares to the army in Civ3 but a lot of Civ4 players enjoy having a Warlord unit. With Morale you do get the extra movement point.
Besides, if kept safe and active, it can gain huge amounts of XP and then it gets to be nearly indestructible.
A Combat VI + City Raider III + Medic III + March + Blitz + Commando + Morale Swordsman/Maceman/Rifleman/Infantry is almost enough to win every war, and unlike in C3C, these units can actually be upgraded to be able to keep up with the tech tree.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.