Civ IV Reviewed On IGN!!! (you Will Be Very Happy! :) :) :)
- Thread starter vertigofm
- Start date
PriestOfDiscord said:So how exactly is that helicopter getting killed? Is the Knight throwing his sword at it?
Actually that is possible. Considering knight unit has many more men (1000+ perhaps) that helicopters. If thousands of heavy swords are thrown at low flying helicopter, it very easily can break down
Also that model of helicopter is only armed with some hellfire missiles (anti-tank) , so it often runs out of ammo while trying to kill hundreds of knights. Every fight is to death in civilization, so helicopter crews morale won't allow them to run away and they land to ground and get into hand to hand combat with knights => Knights will kill the crew and bash helicopters to pieces with their swords
Techical failure is other possibility or pilot error. There you got your realistic explanations, whiners
darkdude
Warlord
Great, solid review; sounds objective too. So, bring it on
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
As I said, from a gameplay standpoint, if that gunship was almost on its deathbed, then he DESERVED to lose it (it broke down/forced to land and the knights overran the gunship(s) and killed the pilots whilst they were on the ground).
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
Raggamuffin
Warlord
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2003
- Messages
- 244
Great addition of an ingame alarm clock! For me that's the best new feature. 
Jecrell
Ruled: Civ3 - Civ5
Mrdie said:Haha, I laughed at that too. The review was damned good!
I absolutely died laughing... oh my god... so funny!!
That's the only possible way to make the game difficult. You can't make the AI smarter than the player is.
As for the whole spearman defeats tank issue, the reviewer was merely stating that it was possible for a spearman to beat a tank. Whether the odds are one in a trillion or not it doesn't matter. Whether the tank is half health and the spear is full health and fully promoted and on good defensive terrain, doesn't matter. The people who hated spearman defeating tanks think tanks should automatically win without taking any damage. Same thing with the new knight vs helicopter issues. Personally, I don't care at all. I don't look for perfect realism in games. I prefer solid gameplay, and allowing spearman to stand up to tanks and knights to stand up to helicopters improves the gameplay.
Roland Johansen
Deity
Krikkitone said:
I hope this is not the way Civ4 combatresults are calculated because it would be very difficult to kill a strength 15 unit with a bunch of strength 10 units. In this way the strength score doesn't really represent the units strength. I guess, I'll have to wait to see how it works.
SpaghettiShaq
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 2
These are the same guys that gave Civilization 3 a score of 9.3
http://pc.ign.com/articles/162/162062p1.html
http://pc.ign.com/articles/162/162062p1.html
Grohan
Bug-hunter
*Bad joke alert*
Here is the latest theory about how knight can destroy gunship
:
http://img478.imageshack.us/my.php?image=newform3uw.png
Here is the latest theory about how knight can destroy gunship
:http://img478.imageshack.us/my.php?image=newform3uw.png
darkdude
Warlord
True, you can't make the AI smarter, but there's another option: you could dumb the AI down on lower levels (or maybe that's the case already? I'm not sure). Apparently they decided not to do that and I think rightly so. I think it would destroy the game feel too much; e.g. it's easy to get the AI to mishandle workers, this will weaken it considerably. It would be a nice challenge to make a mod to make the AI weaker by not changing AI and player bonuses. But someone else than myself will have to do that; that's not a mod I'm interested inShillen said:
Another option for lower levels, now that I'm thinking about it, is used in the latest Fritz chess engines. There's a handicap mode, where somewhere in the opening stage, the AI will do something silly on purpose, losing say, a pawn to the player if he sees the combination to do so. After that, the AI plays on full strength again and the player has the satisfaction of bringing home the point against the AI at full strength. At a still even lower level, the AI e.g. will 'oversee' the loss of two pawns.
This took quite some time to balance, but this works well now; the computer keeps a history of the results over several games and ultimately you wind up at a level where your odds to beat the computer are at 50%. If you're stronger than the AI in Civ4 you're still stuck with adapting bonuses here of course.
So it might be interesting to see if implementing likewise behavior is feasible for Civ4. Maybe COTM style giving the player an extra settler and tech at the start would be a possible implementation there, although that maybe gives too much of an exploitive feel to it. Maybe in the first trade sessions the AI could be more generous than usual to give the player an edge.
darkdude
Warlord
According to Solver's preview, yes.Smidlee said:
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
Well, if it was only THEM telling us how brilliant the game is, then I admit that their past scoring would leave me dubious. However, all this score really does is reinforce the BRILLIANT hands-on previews given by Solver, Civrules etc-civilization fanatics whose opinions I REALLY trust
!Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
Well, this quote from MarkG over at Apolyton (one of the beta testers for the game) pretty much says it all. He has studied the video VERY carefully, and has confirmed what I was beginning to suspect very strongly-namely that the guy was attacking a full strength unit (fortified on a HILL no less) with an already damaged unit. You couldn't get a greater confluence of 'strategic no-nos' if you tried and, quite frankly, deserved to be defeated (if you wanna get 'realistic about it' just consider that, whilst trying to make a tricky maneuver in order to take down some of these knights, his already badly damaged engine finally conked out and forced him to crash-land-possibly taking out another of any remaining gunships, in the formation, whilst he was at it). I think this guy was being awfully cheeky trying to pass off his own strategic foolishness as a design flaw?!?!
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
Mercade
the Counsellor
Absolutely love the video that goes with it, too.
darkdude
Warlord
Wow, it took some THREE hours to download that video. But well worth itMercade said:Absolutely love the video that goes with it, too.
I want those workers! I mean, just keeping on working during a nuclear explosion, you have to give 'em credit for that
tcjsavannah
Wow, it's been a while...
Great video, and yes, the alarm clock had me laughing. They know us too well, don't they?
And I agree with Aussie_Lurker. If you expect a damaged tank to run roughshod all over medieval units, you is nuts. You should still have to use strategy to win with your technologically superior units, not just pump out a ton of them and blaze a trail of mass destruction across your map.
And I agree with Aussie_Lurker. If you expect a damaged tank to run roughshod all over medieval units, you is nuts. You should still have to use strategy to win with your technologically superior units, not just pump out a ton of them and blaze a trail of mass destruction across your map.
Similar threads
- Locked
