Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by Thunderfall, Jul 3, 2006.
Incidentally, you can't actually see the Great Wall from space in real life.
From near-Earth orbit it is barely visible, and only under nearly perfect conditions, and it is no more conspicuous than many other manmade objects such as highways.
I think Creative has a decisive advantage with the Great Wall considering it can expand its borders fast.
Catherine will be able to build Settlers fast (Imperialistic) and have her borders expand quickly too (Creative). When she gets the Great Wall, she will have... well, a Great Wall. It should take her a while to recover financially from the expansion, so it will be useful for her too.
That would be an interesting strategy to try. The question is whether the Great Wall will be worth it in the long run?
The Great Wall looks like an interesting way to generate Great Engineers. Otherwise, I think it's just a novelty; the effect doesn't seem likely to have much value for people who already can play the game pretty well.
My impression almost exactly. The cost is relatively high too, you lose a lot of production building it, I can't envisage many situations where you wouldn't have much better use for 250 hammers (without stone) at that stage in the game.
I think if they'd made it say 120 hammers, it might have been of more interest. Or: (and perhaps more realistic) if its effects applied not only to barbarians but to any civ you're at war with, at least up until a certain tech. Or another twist could be that enemy units have no more than - say - a 50% chance of being able to cross the wall. Endless possibilities
OTOH I do hugely admire the idea for it's degree of innovation. Conceptually far more interesting than just saying, in effect, 'this wonder generates X (or X%) gold/hammers/science/specialists' or something similar, as seems to happen for so many other wonders. I think if Firaxis had put more effort into generating more ideas as innovative as the great wall, instead of merely multiplying the numbers of civs and leaders and buildings etc., they could have added some extremely interesting twists to the game.
The one other interesting effect the GW might have is to make it slightly easier to build other early wonders: Since the AI now has the GW as an option, it's going to be marginally less likely to build other wonders. That effect should be especially marked for the pyramids and the great lighthouse since they require the same tech (masonry) - so perhaps you're less likely to be beaten to them.
Yeah, sadly I agree. I was hoping it gave something extra, thinking that it would have to compete with the Pyramids. I guess not. I still would like to try it with Catherine and see how big the Wall can get.
I personally think it should just stop all (non friendly) units period - maybe creating one gap in the wall and that is all.
Wonder if it'll stop barb galleys btw. (Though since I can't recall ever seeing a barb galley actually contain units, I guess that doesn't make too much difference either way)
Personally, I think that for the cost, it should either count as a wall for all cities on that continent OR double the effects of walls wherever they are built. Thats just IMO of course.
I had another intriguing thought about the great wall. Suppose someone builds it, than another civ attacks and razes some cities inside it. Now you have FOW inside the GW where barbs could spawn. Will the great wall stop those barbs from getting out?
On a related note, if you raze a city containing, say, the Pyramids, they will be gone forever. What happens if you raze the city that built the GW?
And the crucial question - if you install Warlords, can you still play vanilla Civ4 saves, and/or vanilla Civ4 multiplayer games?
I'm sure it will install in parallel so you can run either.
That will be an interesting test of how carefully the team behind Warlords thought things through when they designed the great wall
I'm new to the PC world (my new mac allows me to play civ4 like normal people on the PC format) and I just installed civ4 warlords. I'm having a hard time accessing the old maps and scenarios from my regular civ4. I like to play on earth maps and i can't for the life of me find them. They haven't been transferred when I installed the expansion pack. What do I do? Thanks.
p.s. anyone else underwhelmed by the scenarios, especially Alexander? I wish Sven from civ3 still made ancient middle eastern scenarios.
could someone show a pic of the military civic on the chinese unification scenario???
Some unit changes/tidbits:
Horse archers, keshiks, and numidian cavalry get -10% (yes, MINUS) city attack, but have 20% withdrawl.
Chariots and immortals have only 10% withdrawl and get +100% ATTACK vs. axemen (not defense). They no longer upgrade to Horse archers (only knights).
Cossack strength reduced from 18 to 15 (only difference from cavalry now is +50% vs. mounted)
Redocat strength reduced from 16 to 14 (only difference from rifleman now +25% vs. gunpowder)
Gallic swordsmen are identical to regular swords except for Guerilla I (which you can also get from Dun... stupid)
Impi starts with mobility (upgrading impi to gunpowder units will be NICE)
(Edit: I confused Mobility with Morale. Mobility will only be relevant for units with Morale, which requires a Warlord)
Quechua still start with Combat I (non-Agg leader)
Units with a warlord get immunity to first strikes.
Cover, Shock, and Pinch promotions are available after Drill I (puts protective into perspective)
Formation is available after Drill II.
Castles give +1 trade route until economics
Mint, Mall, Stock exchange modify GOLD, not COMMERCE.
Mall replaces supermarket, not grocer (sucks)
Keshiks always got 1 First Strike
I am pretty sure the Gaellic Warrior can upgrade to Guerilla III.
Impi getting Mobility is interesting...
Warlord getting an Immunity to First Strikes will make it more resillient. Good idea.
Could have sworn they were 2 at one point. Maybe a patch changed it?
Yeah it can. Gallic gets my vote for most useless UU... regular swordsmen were already a niche unit anyway, and this is just a stupid bonus.
Maybe if Guerilla I and II increased both hill attack and defense it would be worthwhile. (I also think Jaguar should get a bona fide free Woodsman I, but alas)
Maybe, (but I doubt it). I have made the comment here or there that maybe the Keshik should have 2 First Strikes, but I have never seen it with 2 First Strikes before.
I don't know. I am going to reserve judgement here. I get the feeling that there is some interesting strategy there. The Guerilla III really only neutrailises the hill defense because units automatically get a 25% hill defense anyway. My guess is that the Celts give a counter strategy to those who put their cities on hills.
I take it you have it?
Given the choice between either taking Guerrillas II and III or instead putting promotions into Combats, I think the choice is extremely clear. That extra 5% is in no way worth being tied to hills.
Separate names with a comma.