CIV 4 - "Where's the Beef?" a Meat and Potatoes take on the game

[zeeter]

The reason why the Civ series is so great, and so much more popular than the true wargames is that it is not complex in that regard. We don't need to think about the minutia of supply, attrition, and finances down to the penny. We don't have to worry about Hittite steel versus Egyptian steel. We don't have to consider that a transport that can hold four units can hold just as many tank units as infantry.

It's simple. It's made for people who want some strategy, but don't have the patience or time to try to learn the difference between strategic bombing and tactical bombing.

Someone is unhappy? Build a temple. Simple logic. More complex? Temple - where's the money coming from? WHo's going to build it? Do I have the resources available for it? I need nails, wood, marble, stained glass...I also need to train a priest or two. What if it's the wrong religion? I mean, it's Islam, but is it Sunni or Shiite? And if I go to a communist regime then it doesn't matter how many churches I have because they're going to be outlawed, along with most of my officer corps.

No, most Civ players just want to sit down and have a nice game where we fight a few wars, maybe even spend the whole game warring, but it's not complex. It's fun. That's what the game is all about. That's part of the problem with Civ3. A great game, but oftentimes it wasn't fun towards the end.

 

[Nuh Uh]

Thats nice. That's why it needs two versions - one so you can do whatever it is you do - and one so people can fight their wars coherently. ITS CALLED AN OPTION, at least that's "WHAT WE CIV PLAYERS THINK ABOUT IT". LOL.

 

[zeeter]

You're talking about a lot of programming for an option that most people are probably just going to turn off.

edit: seriously. I really believe that the majority of players don't want to get into these details. Again - this is why the game is so popular. I thoroughly enjoy games like HOI2. I like having to deal with supply and trying to keep the Russians from surrounding me. I like that my units in Germany have to worry about attrition in the winter time. I like that I need to keep my consumer goods way up if I'm going to make a sneak attack on Columbia and try to take all of S. America. It's neat adding certain brigades to my units and trying to figure out the best combinations for attack. I like that a unit can be at full strength, but it's organization could be low because the general for that army isn't quite that great at reorg.

Yet there's a place for that kind of thing, and it's not in the Civ series.

 

[yendorII]

How old are you? Do you read what I post? Either you are immature and just like to annoy people (me), or you aren't familiar with dialectical and critical thinking. There is very little if ANY room for "OPINIONS". So either way, you are just wasting space on this thread, and I really don't appreciate it very much. Why don't you stop it? Or is my first thought correct? Don't worry about what I think about you or what others who may read this thread think about you (or me), because NOTHING that I'm writing about has anything to do with personal opinion.

You aren't expressing your personal opinion? I thought you were but okay if you arent.

 

[yendorII]

Besides YOU opened this dialog, and YOU started the flaming of anyone who disagreed with your opinion and YOU are the newbie here, and YOU dont represent everyone so I Have the right to respond in kind.

 

[Nuh Uh]

That answers that... Thanks for sharing. Anyone out there with anything to contribute to the thread - pro or con - just so it makes sense please.

(Oh - more than half might turn it off, but the feature would clearly pay for itself. As a matter of fact it would enhance and boost sales, because it would greater cement itself as an adult and intellectual exercise)

 

[Nuh Uh]

Besides YOU opened this dialog, and YOU started the flaming of anyone who disagreed with your opinion and YOU are the newbie here, and YOU dont represent everyone so I Have the right to respond in kind.

First of all I WASN'T FLAMING (flaming now by making a flaming issue of false claims of flaming - brilliant), and secondly I'm tired of the LIP SERVICE of BLAH BLAH - I don't think SO - that's my "opinion".

You can say "I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, BUT WHATEVER IT IS - I DON'T LIKE IT" All you like, and I can say "Wow, this is a pointless discussion..."

 

[Cironir]

So are you going to be like a fly here - you just wanting to be annoying and argumentative for some strange reason?

You might want to step back for a moment and then look at your own posts in this thread.

 

[Nuh Uh]

LOL, And I can say "WOW, THIS IS A POINTLESS DISCUSSION".

 

[Ravinhood]

Afraid gonna have to classify this one as pure troll now. At first he made some significant points about supply rules in wargames. But, from the attacks on others, he's lowered himself into the ranks of pure trollism.

 

[zeeter]

That answers that... Thanks for sharing. Anyone out there with anything to contribute to the thread - pro or con - just so it makes sense please.

(Oh - more than half might turn it off, but the feature would clearly pay for itself. As a matter of fact it would enhance and boost sales, because it would greater cement itself as an adult and intellectual exercise)

I don't know. I kind of disagree with you there. One of the first things I learned in business was never to alienate your core buyers. The core buyers for the Civ series are as I mentioned. People into a cross between Sim City and Hearts of Iron.

I really think that if Firaxis tried to lean more heavily into the wargame aspect of Civ it would take something away from the build side of the game. Yes, you could turn the options off, however there's only so many dollars to do the game. Now you've got your programmers dealing with more of the wargame aspects because we're adding some advanced features, but the money and time is not there anymore for the building part of the game. That part tends to suffer. Now you've created basically the same game as before, but with more wargame options. You've suddenly lost your core market. It's not just the supply. If you're going to add one thing to make the game more complex for wargamers, you're going run the gammet.

Fun for most Civ3 players: Complex enough, but I don't need to keep charts and things in front of me or call my buddy who is an expert on the battle of Stalingrad to find out what the Germans did to survive so long and try to simulate it in the game.

 

[Nuh Uh]

Its called harassment, RAVIN like what you are doing now. Its people who focus in a particular thread and keep coming back to incite and argue, just to argue. Seen it a million times. Now you are a TROLL. Name one attack - there aren't any. But you just called me a troll. That's an attack. Now, kindly go away and find someone else to annoy, as this thread is not for little childish games, but for a clear critical analysis of the game.

 

[Ravinhood]

He seems to feel the wargaming market is something huge. Even the developers of pure wargames will tell you the "hardcore" wargamers don't keep them in business any longer. Go talk to Keith or David over at Matrixgames.com about that. Wargaming is a very niche market, probably not even 1% of the whole gaming market anymore. Sid had the right idea, put a simple non-complex wargame into an Empire Building game that just about anyone could/can/does enjoy. Turn it into a "War in the Pacific" and watch your sales plummet, not increase. I agree with that 100%. And besides all that the Civilization series has sold over 6 million games, even before CIV IV, now, tell me, why would they want to turn something that is churning in that kind of cash into some wargamers dream game at the expense of the "majority" of their consumers?

 

[Nuh Uh]

I don't know. I kind of disagree with you there. One of the first things I learned in business was never to alienate your core buyers. The core buyers for the Civ series are as I mentioned. People into a cross between Sim City and Hearts of Iron.

I really think that if Firaxis tried to lean more heavily into the wargame aspect of Civ it would take something away from the build side of the game. Yes, you could turn the options off, however there's only so many dollars to do the game. Now you've got your programmers dealing with more of the wargame aspects because we're adding some advanced features, but the money and time is not there anymore for the building part of the game. That part tends to suffer. Now you've created basically the same game as before, but with more wargame options. You've suddenly lost your core market. It's not just the supply. If you're going to add one thing to make the game more complex for wargamers, you're going run the gammet.

Fun for most Civ3 players: Complex enough, but I don't need to keep charts and things in front of me or call my buddy who is an expert on the battle of Stalingrad to find out what the Germans did to survive so long and try to simulate it in the game.

Is there something you don't understand about ADVANCED OPTIONS? Because I've said it like 4 times now, and I'm really tired of having the same conversation. Its like talking to a wall. So if you want to advertise OVER AND OVER that you HATE THIS IDEA - THEN JUST KEEP IT UP.

 

[Nuh Uh]

He seems to feel the wargaming market is something huge. Even the developers of pure wargames will tell you the "hardcore" wargamers don't keep them in business any longer. Go talk to Keith or David over at Matrixgames.com about that. Wargaming is a very niche market, probably not even 1% of the whole gaming market anymore. Sid had the right idea, put a simple non-complex wargame into an Empire Building game that just about anyone could/can/does enjoy. Turn it into a "War in the Pacific" and watch your sales plummet, not increase. I agree with that 100%. And besides all that the Civilization series has sold over 6 million games, even before CIV IV, now, tell me, why would they want to turn something that is churning in that kind of cash into some wargamers dream game at the expense of the "majority" of their consumers?

Its a huge market in terms of Video games, and board games, but it depends who's defining BIG MARKET. If its a capitalist weasel who wants to consume the world, it would be a small market. Like all games - the market is up and down, but the wargame market is probably in the hundreds of thousands.

 

[Ravinhood]

[So if you want to advertise OVER AND OVER that you HATE THIS IDEA ]

Oh it's not that it's a bad idea, it's just a waste of resources for such a niche market of people that play Civilization. Those resources could be put to better use like tweaking the AI or increasing the frame rate of the 3D graphics.

 

[Ravinhood]

[probably in the hundreds of thousands.]

Key word there is "probably" you have no documented proof of this. If a designer sold 10,000 copies of a game they felt they broke even. Board wargaming nor computer wargaming, the real mccoy wargaming has never had a huge market.

 

[yendorII]

Okay here we go.

Name one attack - there aren't any..

Now, kindly go away and find someone else to annoy, as this thread is not for little childish games,

Yes, its pretty clear, given the freezes and the bugs, that someone didn't do their homework - or was drunk or stoned too much.

So for people like yourself, who don't want supply rules for whatever bizarre reason, it should feature it as an advanced option. Then the other 10% or more of the people who play the game with wargame skills, can actually enjoy it.

Fun as a 'build' game? I guess... whatever floats your boat. Personally I'd rather do the laundry than just build stuff that you can't use past watching a few minute film at the end... la di da...

Well thanks for the 'beer and pretzel' logic, Sir Winky, who believes he speaks for 'the majority'. Can you say, obtuse?

How old are you? Do you read what I post? Either you are immature and just like to annoy people (me), or you aren't familiar with dialectical and critical thinking.

So you must use childish attacks on those with differing opinions and you call me a troll? Say I am flaming well you asked to see an attack that you made well here are some. I will not debate the issue as you are unwilling to actually listen but I didnt want to let a request go unanswered.

 

[Intruder13]

"Every general always fights the PREVIOUS war."

I don't remember who said it, but it's true in real life. Why not be true in Civ as well?

For example, the US has the Tech to make some really advanced fighters. What is the bulk of US fighters today? F-15's, which are 35-year-old technology.

I've got an even better example than that: the minigun. This weapon was developed during the end of the (American) Civil War. One of Dr. Gatling's guns was hooked up to a motor, which was so large that it had to be mounted on a train. I believe the prototype fired around 1,500 rounds per minute, and an improved version fired (I believe) up to 3,000 rounds per minute. It was never adopted because it was (1) bulky and (2) considered a waste of ammo.

But we saw two World Wars that wholly neglected its use. It was really only until the Vietnam war that miniguns were used.

 

[Nuh Uh]

Okay here we go.

So you must use childish attacks on those with differing opinions and you call me a troll? Say I am flaming well you asked to see an attack that you made well here are some. I will not debate the issue as you are unwilling to actually listen but I didnt want to let a request go unanswered.

"Here we go"???

Being pointless and annoying is a hobby of yours, huh...

Sorry PAL - I don't play that game, I have much better things to do. But I see you are on a mission to ruin the focus of this thread. Please feel free to ignore any other posts of mine.

Thank you.