Civ4 Catering to RTers?

[Janos]

I agree on some of your points Brian. However, "more fun" doesn't simply mean dumbing down the game. It means getting rid of the features which sucked (pollution and corruption are gone, for example), and replacing them with features which will make the game more enjoyable to play.

I think that Firaxis are going in the right direction. If there is something you don't like about the game, you can always mod it too - it's apparently going to be very very easy to mod.


PS - welcome!

 

[Brian Mc]

Thanks Janos.

By mod it yoursled I assume you mean I can come to Civfanatics and depend on others to mod it for me?

 

[Janos]

Thanks Janos.

By mod it yoursled I assume you mean I can come to Civfanatics and depend on others to mod it for me?

That's my plan also . Hopefully the game won't need modding at all though!

 

[Arturus]

It appears to me that the developers recognized what makes Rome Total War the greatest strategy game (in my opinion at least) ever made and are building upon its strengths but modelling it in a fashion that suits the Civilization tradition. From what I have seen so far, both in terms of graphics and in terms of the way the game will be managed, it has a Total War feel. The difference is that real-time battle engagements are replaced with wonders, technology, culture, and a greater variety of victory forms that have been introduced in the series throughout its history. By contrast, RTW does not focus as much on culture, technology and wonders. Wonders that existed at the time are on the map and seizing that region has certain benefits and technology is advanced through the growth of cities, allowing new buildings and new units. A Total War model applied to traditional Civiliation concepts I think will make a very strong, interresting, and exciting game.

On another, and most likely related note. Anyone find it interresting that Activision is releasing a very large expansion pack for RTW at the same time Civilization IV is coming out?

 

[Brian Mc]

I didn't know that. I can't play RTW (for a reason noted above, my computer sucks), but I don't believe I'll ever get tired of MTW with BkBs mod. What a beautiful series.

 

[Arturus]

I whole-heartedly agree, Total War is a beautiful series. My computer barely handles RTW (I have 448mb of RAM instead of the minimum 512), but I can turn up the graphics and unit sizes enough to create large detailed battles.

 

[Janos]

RTW would be the greatest strategy game out at the moment if the AI had been even marginally difficult to beat, and the diplomacy was even worth doing. At the moment it is simply, "Yeah... i have a cool empire, and check out these awesome units... let's go have fun and siege a city with this huge army." That's fun in itself... but there really isn't much more to it than that. If they improve the AI and diplomacy dramatically, as well as make the actual real time combat more difficult, then it would be very very good.

 

[Arturus]

I agree the diplomacy was a bit weak, I only used it to get trade rights, bribery, and to complete senate missions.

As for AI difficulty, on the hardest levels, the AI does reasonable in terms of strategy (unfortunately at the end of the day, it works on mathematical formulas and pre-programmed reactions to various situations), but its real-time battle strategy does not improve dramatically.

Ultimately, much hinges on what faction you play as. If you play a Roman faction, your experience varies among the three as you will either find yourself fighting barbarians, Greeks, or Carthagians at the start. At the end of the day, fighting barbarians is by far the easiest while far more strategy is needed to fight the other two (the Greeks more so than the Carthagians).

The one real downside of RTW and the whole TW series is that you can't play a campaign in multiplayer. While I know it would require only the fastest connections and would take enormous amounts of time, it would be fun to try to outwit human players in terms of army dispositions and tactics. I am sure I wouldn't be able to use simple lessons from the Art of War to beat humans (though in the RT battles in multiplayer, it's astounding how people don't follow some of those principals and subsequently are defeated).

It is a different experience than Civilization but I do believe Civilization can benefit from taking some of the successful features of the TS series into account.

 

[henry k c]

I am now considering buying rome total war instead of civ 4. It sounds like a cool game.

 

[Janos]

I am now considering buying rome total war instead of civ 4. It sounds like a cool game.

Seriously, if you like battles between 20,000 soldiers on your PC, then i recommend it. It's a fun game, and i still play it... all i'm saying is that Civ wipes the floor with it (even Civ3) in terms of actual strategy and diplomacy. However, don't let that put you off the very fun siege and combat system. I love sieging/being besieged in the game.

Make sure you get the latest patches and the like, however if you want a real empire-building experience i would still get CivIV if i were you. For you... RTW combat system might just be your thing. The AI isn't great - but on Very Hard it can be relatively challenging.

If the Firaxis and TotalWar team got together and made a game combining key elements from both games and a little innovation... i would start drooling now.

 

[Arturus]

And that was pretty much my original point Janos. Civilization builds upon technology, culture, wonders, and possibly to its detriment, a bit too much number crunching (which is being changed in Civ IV which pleased me immensely) while Rome Total War focuses more on military strategy (both combat and logistics in very realistic fashion). My point was that Civ appears to be building upon some of the successful features of RTW and adapting them to suit the traditional Civ models. As I said earlier, it should make it a strong game and I suspect might have partly factored into why Activision has designed a large expansion pack for RTW.