New IGN Preview...

[ThERat]

Except that there are all the other modifers. Some units are better on some terrains or against other units. Just saying that they are as good on offense as defense is simplifying it a bit, unless everything I've read is wrong,

yes, you can modify units AFTER victorious battles, but not the vanilla units. So, tanks start equally good as defenders and offensive units. And, as I stated before, a unit that has been modified 10 times is so valuable you might never want to risk losing it.
I actually absolutely loved the SMAC system of customizing your own units and yes, it had defense and attack values that varied.

 

[warpstorm]

I'm certain I read that certain units always had bonuses and could get further bonuses throiugh experience i.e pikeman against cavalry.

edit: found it

"For example, the PC Zone preview said spearman has 100% bonus against mounted units. So even if the strength value of spearman is only 5, it's good enough to defeat a horse unit that has strength of 8. You are better off attacking the spearman with another unit, perhaps the swordsman, that's not vulnerable to spearman." -- TF

 

[ThERat]

ok, I forgot about that, it is realistic, but it will make more difficult to play since you now have to remember those rules.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Actually, TheRat, in a Stack Attack situation it has been stated that all units attack automatically (though we don't know if this is simultaneous or not yet) and that each unit automatically selects the unit-in the opposing stack-that it has the best chance of defeating (and vice versa). This means that all the player really needs to remember is to make sure he has a well balanced stack of units when he goes into battle!
That said, though, I hope a strength 10 unit won't ALWAYS defeat a Strength 8 unit-as I still feel there should be some chance involved (though not as much as in Civ2 and Civ3 !)

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[ThERat]

his means that all the player really needs to remember is to make sure he has a well balanced stack of units when he goes into battle!

I agree this would encourage a balanced stack for defense purpose, I don't think for attack you simply select the whole stack.

But, but, but, they want us NOT to use SoD's (read gamespot) and enhanced the arty effects in order to force you to spread your units. Well, both concepts don't go well hand in hand

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I think the key will be for the player to strike a balance between a well mixed stack and a smaller sized stack-a calculated risk rather than just taking a dozen or more tanks and wiping out all-comers.
Also, from what I have heard, you WILL be able to send an entire stack in to attack at once-it may still be one-to-one though, as a simultaneous attack/defense schema has not been mentioned yet.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[mitsho]

What? Weren't Mecca and Medina the original citys of Arabia. I think they have precedence, what with Kyoto being built before Tokyo, to have the original cities built first.

The first city of the US was also Jamestown or Boston, and neither is the capital. The first cities of Spain were Leon and others, and they're neither capitals.

Imho opinion, the capital should be the biggest, most famous and most important city, in the case of the Arabs Baghdad, Damascus or Cairo (or even Cordoba), which were capitals of big empires for a much longer time than Mecca or Medina. Baghdad was even founded by them to be the capital. It deserves much more to be the capital, the biggest and most important city of the empire!

Mecca has always been a pilgrimage and/or merchant place, not the seat of great political empires. Even today, ar-Ryad is the capital of Saudi-Arabia, and not the so-great Mecca...

mfG mitsho

 

[Raggamuffin]

Notice how the units doesn't look all that big when zoomed out a little bit as most people play it. It's only when zoomed in to its extreme that they get this huge bigfoot look. So I'm not too worried about anymore. But, the catapults and ships look rediculously small compared to the standard units. Fix fix! ;-)

Graphics are very important to get the best possible atmosphere in a game.

 

[mdm]

PC.IGN article quoted and commented.Very bad news which of course we already knew. Every civ should have two choices for leaders. Period.
I have hard time believing people in Firaxis didn't come up with two leaders for many of the civilizations. Back to the books, one might say.

Gotta make reasons for people to buy the expansions, of course. And I'd be surprised if I've played with all the leaders by the time the first expansion is out.

 

[blueatheart]

You can d/l what I believe is the intro song at amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00005RYKE/102-3358750-6461761?v=glance

Not sure if this supports html tags, so I avoided them...if anyone can tell me if this is the same music as was posted on Christopher Tin's site for a super-short time, I'd appreciate it...seems an interesting choice for intro music.

 

[Thunderfall]

...if anyone can tell me if this is the same music as was posted on Christopher Tin's site for a super-short time, I'd appreciate it...seems an interesting choice for intro music.

It's a different one.

You can download it here:
(Right click and select "save target/link as")
http://www.civfanatics.net/downloads/civ4/music/BabaYetu.mp3

 

[Urederra]

The first city of the US was also Jamestown or Boston, and neither is the capital. The first cities of Spain were Leon and others, and they're neither capitals.

Imho opinion, the capital should be the biggest, most famous and most important city, in the case of the Arabs Baghdad, Damascus or Cairo (or even Cordoba), which were capitals of big empires for a much longer time than Mecca or Medina. Baghdad was even founded by them to be the capital. It deserves much more to be the capital, the biggest and most important city of the empire!

Mecca has always been a pilgrimage and/or merchant place, not the seat of great political empires. Even today, ar-Ryad is the capital of Saudi-Arabia, and not the so-great Mecca...

mfG mitsho

The first city in the USA was St. Agustine, not Jamestown or Boston. Another case of English biased history. (I don't blame you, I just blame the mass media) I concur with your opinion, though.

Here is the link:

http://www.oldcity.com/his2.html

And as far as the arab cities; Which Cordoba are you talking about? I have seen a City called Cordoba in one of the screenshots, but I think that belongs to Spain. The only Cordoba I am aware of is the one in southern Spain, and I think that in the game it belongs to Spain.

Yes, I know that Cordoba was a very important arab city in the middle ages and it might have been founded by the moslems (I have to look my history books). But, If you change the ownership of that city, you might have to reconsider many others. Many of the european big cities were founded by the romans, including London (Londinium), Zaragoza (Cesar Augusta, guess who founded it), Seville (Hispalis) and many others I am not aware of (Paris?).

On the other hand, europeans founded cities that belong to other civs (New York, New Amsterdam), San Francisco, Los Angeles, New Orleans...

Well, my point is that it can be a total mess if you take into account who founded the cities that now belong to the nowadays countries.

Regards.

 

[Sickman]

On the other hand, europeans founded cities that belong to other civs (New York, New Amsterdam), San Francisco, Los Angeles, New Orleans...

Well it depends how you define "europeans".

And Cordoba was in my memory found by Carthagenians (could be wrong).

 

[mitsho]

nitpicking about the american cities, he? no, it's ok

cordoba: that's why I put it into brackets, it would better belong to a whole other civ, the 'Cordobans' or Moors, but not the Arabs ...

But it's a good city for the Spaniards too ...

mfG mitsho

 

[Urederra]

Well it depends how you define "europeans".

And Cordoba was in my memory found by Carthagenians (could be wrong).

Well, New York (New Amsterdam) was founded by the Duch, Los Angeles, San Francisco, by the Spanish, New Orleans by the French. I think they are Europeans.

Cordoba might have been founded by the carthagenians, that sounds wright to me. You are wright. Cartagena, which is close to Cordoba, was founded by the carthagenians , that is for sure, Its old name was carthago nova (new carthago, it seems that naming cities with the names of the old metropolis is not a new thing) New York, New Orleans...

Well, that is my point. Sometimes it is difficult to asign cities to civilizations. Specially around the mediterranean sea. There are cases where the city appears twice in the game, one with the civ that founded it, and another with the actual civ that belongs to now. E. g. Hispalis was founded by the romans, but now is called Seville. I think I have seen more examples, but at this moment I only remember that one.

 

[Evie]

There's the obvious one, of course : Byzantium, Constantinople, Istanbul.

 

[Urederra]

You got it right, oda.