Fighting battles?

[LLXerxes]

Well, we could do something here to make it like RTW.

Erm, we should be able to fight battles. Once 2 armies fight on the battlefeild, you should be able to fight out the battle. Take command of the troops you have and actuallyu fight. Have your military advisor and all that.
And for those who don't want to fight, theyauto resolve and fight the batle lke Civ3.
Anybody like the idea? (probablynot )

 

[warpstorm]

This is brought up approximately once a week. I'll repeat my answer. NO!

Why not? First, I'd like CIV to remain strategic, not tactical. Second, it would slow down the game a lot. Third, autoresolve is not really an option. In all important battles you'll take manual control rather than trusting the dice, therefore it is really an option. Fourth, I'd rather they don't split their efforts on the two sub games, concentrate oin one and do it great.

(Note: I like RTW a lot, but I don't want CIV to be a clone of it. I'd recommend it to most Civ fans.)

 

[dh_epic]

I think Civ needs to focus on its strengths. And if it thinks one of its strengths is "fast action", it'll end up being a pale imitation of some other RTSs like AOE or RTW. Why be a pale imitation when you can focus on what makes you good?

I think people who love Civ love it in SPITE of its lack of action, as if they like the attention to detail and the building aspects enough to forego a war-sim.