Discussion in 'CivRev - General Discussions' started by Gingerman, Oct 28, 2008.
Scout = Ranger unit = see opponent's city strength.
The correct promotion for viewing a city defender's stats is scout I believe
That works. I haven't played in awhile because I usually only play my DS when I'm out, but I've been on holidays since earlier December, so I don't go out much.
armies totally suck in this game, they should of either changed the army concept or trash it.
leo's and uprading work terribly. I went to invade the zulu with horseman armies, then I finished leo's and they all turned in to tanks. honestly, I think 99 vs. 2 was a little unfair when i took zimbabwe.
I hate how I don't get asked for production after I finish a unit. I don't want to waste my time micromanaging 10 cities each turn.
and, to top it off, how on earth does a single pikeman shoot down 2 individual fighters and an army of fighters?
mind you I like the rest of the game.
With very long pikes. Duh.
of course! how did I forget about that?
I know about the scout promotion, but I'm talking about during the fight, without scout. For example, in the XBOX 360 version, I can take a unit that doesn't have scout and attack the city. Now, I can't see the defensive stregth prior to attacking, but once the battle has started, THEN I can see what they are working with, without the scout upgrade.
In that case I prefer the DS method. It makes more gameplay sense because the 360 version makes scout almost worthless.
I play a game every night for about an hour, and i have never played the 360 or PS3 version of the game. I think civ on the DS is great, but maybe because i dont know what im missing
EDIT: I must say im glad they diddnt try to make the game 3-D. I've seen some of the games that are supposed to be 3-D on the DS and they look worse then Nintendo 64 graphics.
I play about 15 hrs a week on my DS. Maybe an hour or so a month on my son's Xbox360. I actually have more trouble on the 360....
If you have civ revolution for the ps3 should you get it for the ds
The answer is simple:
Yes, if you want to play when not being at home and when you are out of your home often
No, if you are at home most of the time or don't want to play when you are away from home.
It is the same game (with some minor differences) so don't buy it if you intend to play it at home... Unless your TV most of the time is taken by your wife/mom/sister/brother/father/kids...
I played Civ 1 (on the PC) religiously years ago. I played a little Civ 2 (also on the PC) but went back to Civ 1. I picked up the DS version a couple weeks ago and I gotta say that, overall, I'm disappointed. Civ 1 was created *years* ago yet has much more depth. If I deperately need to play Civ on the go, I may dust off my PSP and play an emulated verion (SNES or PSX version).
Here are some things that annoy me about the game.
* Not being able to customize the world (continent size, age of planet, etc.)
* No Earth option (admittedly, I haven't tried the games of the week yet)
* The tech tree seems smaller
* Enemy units can simply walk by your units
There ae other things that bug me but this is a start. What I have on the DS seems like something you'd find in a cell phone.
1) Understandable. I think the idea was that the game is somehow more accessible without excess options.
2) This annoyed me too, but the maps are so small that a country like France would be a single square, maybe two.
3) Designed to make the games shorter.
4) This aspect of Civ games was removed in Civilization 3, and it didn't make as much sense as you think. It is equivalent to an army not being able to walk in Wales because someone else is in England.
This game includes a number of features that were introduced in later Civ games than you have played. Great leaders, promotions, more than two victories.
And you don't have it so bad, just think of the people who bought it for consoles instead. They have the same game, with better graphics, but they can't take it outside. This is the first legitimate portable Civ game.
For a portable game, it's not too bad. It's nowhere near the complexity of the PC-based games, but then it shouldn't be, really. GTA and the like are also much simpler, shorter games in the portable versions. In general I don't like simplifications - Civ III was the worst in the series - but this seems to work.
What annoys me more is how badly the games is adapted to the DS - the stylus and the double screens. The city screen in particular is not designed for the stylus - tapping a button requires you to tap again, for instance, like you first selected it with the D-pad and then click it with A. The buttons are also stupidly tiny - there is no reason they couldn't be ten times the size. Also, why waste the top screen with a picture of my current unit? Give me something useful instead - a map would be great, or some economical stats etc. Maybe not that last, though - I always have loads of money, never did figure out what costs money.
What strikes me as I play it is that the game I'd really like on the DS is Master of Orion - the first one. The graphics would be improved on the DS compared to the original, and the interface is easily simple enough that it would work very well on the DS. Even MoO II would work reasonably well.
Oh now THAT is an idea I could get behind. Master of Orion was the turn-based game that started it all for me, and remains to this day an all-time favorite that I still go back to again and again.
Separate names with a comma.