IronicBuddha
Work in progress
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2008
- Messages
- 153
I guess regenerating is an option but its kind of like cheating
Things in this game that annoy you to no end
- Thread starter BARBEERIAN
- Start date
Silver Marmot
Warlord
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2005
- Messages
- 239
Probably the thing I hate most is when the AI builds a city in the one square inside my territory that isn't covered by my culture yet. It's a totally dumb move for the AI, and it's an incredible nuisance for me.
LordMachiavelli
Chieftain
I really hate how the promotion icon for "flanking" looks like the one for "sentry". You know how many ships I have that can see farther than they need to? Well, it's less than it was since so many died in battle from NOT RETREATING!
lol
LM
lol
LM
trickofthehand
Prince
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2007
- Messages
- 310
AI being able to always see through the fog of war to exactly where your aircraft carriers or weak units are and then destroying them, even if they are hidden in the middle of the ocean. Or just outright targetting them in a stack of units.
Modern naval units having same combat power as WW2 naval units.
Naval combat in general ruins the endgame for me.
Modern naval units having same combat power as WW2 naval units.
Naval combat in general ruins the endgame for me.
one2tieyourshoe
Warlord
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2008
- Messages
- 180
I hate that in the older Civ games when I research too far, I am forced to change my Cruiser build to a Missile Cruiser.
And in Civ 4, the Destroyer is changed to a Missile Destroyer and there is no Cruiser. I wish I could have a mix of all units.
And in Civ 4, the Destroyer is changed to a Missile Destroyer and there is no Cruiser. I wish I could have a mix of all units.
Eru Ilúvatar
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2006
- Messages
- 99
I have the abusive spying. It became overwhelming on BTS.
This happened to me recently. Stupid Stalin built a city deep in my territory in the very early game. As I was about to annex it (but before I had even declared war!), he offered himself to the Dutch - the one civ I could not afford a war against. He remained a vassal of Willem the entire game, so I ended up culture flipping his city in 1500 AD or so.
Eru Ilúvatar;6641700 said:
Yes. Although I like the system itself, as it feels well integrated into the game (unlike the superficial corporations), it also feels like the devs went "look how cool the new espionage system is, clearly all AI's must make it their top priority" (this is also apparent in how quickly the AI's now rush to Alphabet, which they did NOT do before). Not being able to defend tile improvements properly, even with military units, is the biggest annoyance for me.
#6: The AP "Peace between members of the same faith", and the UN equivelent. This stops wars, and are so annoying. When I have had enough of defying these motions, what should be the second motion but "Assign the city of XXX back to the noob AI who couldn't defend its cities". I don't lose cities, but I wonder if the AP will work for me? And if I could just survive without milatery power, just the AP defending me
This reminds me of another annoyance that popped up: "Stop the war against...". Against me! Only, I started the war, and had no intention of stopping it.
This is how naval warfare works as well. There are no counters for anything, just "sink a ship and lose a ship". It's all about having more units.
r_rolo1
King of myself
^^Or have destroyers vs frigates.... once you get blitz it is a complete blood bath.
But the issue of someone had forgotten the non transitional advantage system for naval combat is surely a important one, because of the contrast with the land combat ( that ,besides some examples ( like the mobile SAM + Mobile Armor issue ( technically they can be cost efficiently countered with a barrage of missiles ,but it is a very blunt aproach. And BTW why Cruises Missiles don't have a counter? ) is pretty much equilibrated ). It looks like the game designers wanted that this would be a all land game with some air and naval support.....
But the issue of someone had forgotten the non transitional advantage system for naval combat is surely a important one, because of the contrast with the land combat ( that ,besides some examples ( like the mobile SAM + Mobile Armor issue ( technically they can be cost efficiently countered with a barrage of missiles ,but it is a very blunt aproach. And BTW why Cruises Missiles don't have a counter? ) is pretty much equilibrated ). It looks like the game designers wanted that this would be a all land game with some air and naval support.....
Yes, of course, but I meant ships of roughly equal strength. There are no tactical considerations other than ending your turn on a coastal square.
r_rolo1
King of myself
They tried to adress the problem in BtS , but the lack of naval untis to choose from in a given era combined with the few naval specific naval promos ( some anti promos would be cooul, like a anti frigate or anti battleship promo... ) make the naval combat merely a blunt force issue ( and air combat is even worse )... in land atleast we can still make counter games
jeffreyac
Mostly Harmless
Someone mentioned a lack of naval unit diversity....
...
...
(waiting for Wolfshanze!)
Just teasing, of course - I like the mod. Just seemed like a natural place for a plug!
...
...
(waiting for Wolfshanze!)
Just teasing, of course - I like the mod. Just seemed like a natural place for a plug!
r_rolo1
King of myself
Yup , this was a "Wolfshanze trap" 
Seriously I agree with his aproach... Civ IV combat is too much land focused ( not only for the lack of diversity but also because of the lack of specific counter naval promos ( imagine that you would only have combat, flanking, medic and barrage promos for land units... dull , isn't it? ) ) and naval ( and air combat can be even worse ) is simply a matter of prod and ending in coastal squares...... Oh god ,I miss SMAC
Seriously I agree with his aproach... Civ IV combat is too much land focused ( not only for the lack of diversity but also because of the lack of specific counter naval promos ( imagine that you would only have combat, flanking, medic and barrage promos for land units... dull , isn't it? ) ) and naval ( and air combat can be even worse ) is simply a matter of prod and ending in coastal squares...... Oh god ,I miss SMAC
SewerStarFish
King
I think the idea behind commando is gaining a "hit and run" tactic, where they know exactly what they're supposed to do and can do it fast. Without commando, they're carefully wading through enemy territory, where even a citizen can be a threat (kind of like Iraq today).
I think its to hide/balance bad game mechanic.
