Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by 2K Greg, Sep 8, 2010.
Oh god, not this nonsense again.
Is it available in higher quality? 720p or something?
Anything he posts for me is td;dr
Gamespot is going to have a live stream also... check them out and see if they are any better.
Gamespot Live Thread
But taht would also imply that if you conquer a city you also get those costs which brings several problems of their own:
1. The looser still pays for all the roads that are connecting conquered cities if they lie outside cultural borders of conquered cities (and judging by the video there WILL be spacing between cities even "inside" a single nation
2. Inheriting the costs of conquered roads also implies that there is a way for you to trim/pillage overzealous road networks without destroying the improvements. As far as I can see thre is no selective pilaging. This will espaciall be a problem for MP games and noobs building roads like in civ4
That would be a break from the old routine which I doubt will happen. DLCs will be mostly non-mechanical related things you can plug in to any Civ5 configuration (maps, civs, scenarios, etc) for some optional cash, but Civ has so far (ever since Civ2) had two expansions each bringing concrete changes in many areas from game mechanic to AI, actually replacing the executables of the game. And you had to pay for them, thus all the accusations for "unethical" behavior.
I too wouldn't say main Civs are 1/3rd of "final" game (its definitely more than 2/3s), but I also do not consider Civ final until both expansion packs are out. Thats just how they roll regardless of what their marketing ppl say. And I will gladly pay for them all just as I did before, as will probably all of you. So why replace a winning combo with just some cheapo DLC stuff?
I read that post with a combination of confusion and disbelief. Then I saw who posted it and all became clear. Well done evrett, another top-class contribution.
This is the only meaningful question from this whole thread, I know that Starcraft memes and geek clothing styles are fun, but this is important, and was eating me as well.
Where's this whole "naval combat improvement" we were informed about? How come that Immortal AI was sooo bloody stupid to not embark/disembark around the chokepoint and finish 2kGreg?
I smell botched-up AI programming, I really do...
Well to be fair to the AI, it did win in the end... And we know it was fighting on multiple fronts because it took Siam's capital. Now if they went naval with a dual strike in the Med & the Gulf, they would have still had to keep an army at the landfront or else Greg, not realising he would need his troops to defend his own lands soon, would have marched forward and taken French cities. So that's 4 spread out armies at the very least & we don't know if Napoleon was at war with any other unmet nations.
We didn't see the whole picture. We also know a characteristic of Napoleon is that he favours land battles. Still, I'll admit it's a concern at the very least. I'm looking forward to seeing what the AI can do over the seas when I get the game... If they suck, back to Pangea maps I guess. Which is a good thing about Civ. In Napoleon: Total War, you're stuck with one map & Britain being an impenatable fortess for the AI.
Go back a few pages. There was a big disscusion on it and it was explained why the AI didnt do it. No botched AI here.
Yeah, well, I've found this:
I agree that I haven't seen the whole picture. Luckily, there's only a week of wait now (less if you count the demo) so I'll be able to see for myself
And then moan if necessary xPPP
The three-pronged invasion you propose would only work if Napoleon could afford to bring significant units to bear on the other fronts while having enough on the land front to fend off any potential attack from Greg. Napoleon may just not have had enough units to do it effectively, considering he was tied up in wars elsewhere. In that light, his refraining from a potentially disastrous multi-front attack with too-few units is a sign of better AI, IMO. How often did I win easy wars even on the harder difficulty levels of Civ 4 because the AI stupidly deployed weak forces against me on multiple fronts...
you only saw a handful of turns, maybe napoleon already had 15 troops going around the globe for a devastating flanking attack.
Ok, it might as well be as you say, however, during the video Napoleon lost quite a few units trying to pass the canal, with no avail. Also keep in mind that France was gaining an upper hand mostly because we convinced him he should show us city combat so he broke his strategy, I am certain that even though France had cannons Greg would hold his line for a long time. If flanking was a no-no then France should have offered a peace treaty to Greg and then restarted the conflict upon superior tech arrival. Under no circumstances should feeding units to trebs be considered a valid tactical strategy
First of all, I really enjoyed the gameplay, and think Greg & The Gang did a very good job. In fact, I enjoyed it so much I watched it twice
I would like to second the request made by other posters, that we could get a chance to play the save ourselves, or some more info about the game, for instance how the map looked when totally revealed, etc. It would also be nice with some pictures/updates if Greg continued to play, either from where he left off, or where he initially started the game. As one of the international buyers, I'd love anything that helps the countdown to Friday go faster....
Say, like a demo?
One thing I noticed towards the end is that his Treb was heavily damaged when he retreated. That was because the Artillery (which was out of range), was bombing it. That would have happened regardless of our pushing Greg to advance and indicated that Napoleon knew what the problem was and was trying to counter it.
But, yeah, aside from that, he did feed a decent amount of units to Greg's trebuchet and that wasn't a good strategy.
Separate names with a comma.