Civ 4 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 02:59:06 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Forum Community
  Election and History Games (Moderator: Dereich)
  Civ 4 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Civ 4  (Read 8223 times)
Tyrion The Unbanned
Ogis24
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 426
United States


« on: December 31, 2008, 04:44:33 PM »

What is your opinion of this game? Mine is highly positive.
Logged
Tyrion The Unbanned
Ogis24
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 426
United States


« Reply #1 on: December 31, 2008, 04:47:48 PM »

no, pollution i believe is still part of the game, unless i am mistaken
i havent played in a while, so i might not be remembering correctly
i also believe that they added nuclear fallout, which is interesting
Logged
Tyrion The Unbanned
Ogis24
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 426
United States


« Reply #2 on: December 31, 2008, 05:12:33 PM »

i actually enjoy complexity, that is why i play civ 4 on harder difficulties
Logged
Tyrion The Unbanned
Ogis24
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 426
United States


« Reply #3 on: January 01, 2009, 03:50:22 PM »

i have the beyond the sword expansion and it really makes gameplay more fun
Logged
Tyrion The Unbanned
Ogis24
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 426
United States


« Reply #4 on: January 01, 2009, 11:44:10 PM »

i turn off scientific and diplomatic victories because I like longer games that don't end abruptly
Logged
Tyrion The Unbanned
Ogis24
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 426
United States


« Reply #5 on: January 02, 2009, 12:41:19 AM »

I really like Civ 4.  Used to play it more, enough for a really fun game of being the Buddhist Holy Roman Empire and taking over half the world at Prince difficulty level.  So when I tried again after a few month hiatus I didn't fare very well, but alas Wink

Most, if not quite all, of my victories are either Scientific or Diplomatic.
Yay! Another non-war monger! I find it all but impossible to do without it being a deul on a small map. I cannot stop the urge to build.....so many buildings.....and by the time you have a theatre, stonehenge, obelisk, and a great artist, well hell, you might as well just try and go for the 'ol culture kill. Smiley And that my friends is the story of just about every game of Civ I have ever played lol.

The one thing that is really interesting about civ 4 is the ridiculous culture rates you can get up to
Logged
Tyrion The Unbanned
Ogis24
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 426
United States


« Reply #6 on: January 02, 2009, 02:19:38 PM »

How do you respond when you share borders with your enemy? You mentioned naval, but what about ground?
Logged
Tyrion The Unbanned
Ogis24
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 426
United States


« Reply #7 on: January 02, 2009, 10:01:56 PM »

I also attack their strategic resources as quickly as possible, either with bombing runs, or nukes.

I don't usually use nukes to target cities, because simply beating up one or two cities really isn't going to do much to an enemy.  50% population reduction does not justify the effort and negative press, in my mind, so I use them to take out oil fields, iron and aluminum mines... other things that are going to prevent the enemy from building good units for several turns.  That has a far greater impact on the over-all strategic situation.

That is a good strategy. I tend to spend turns lining up troops right along my borders and attack when I feel like it. The bad thing is that these guys are prone to making alliances, and that makes me weak on the backside (I only do this in early times when mobility is an issue).
Logged
Tyrion The Unbanned
Ogis24
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 426
United States


« Reply #8 on: January 02, 2009, 10:42:18 PM »



I also attack their strategic resources as quickly as possible, either with bombing runs, or nukes.

I don't usually use nukes to target cities, because simply beating up one or two cities really isn't going to do much to an enemy.  50% population reduction does not justify the effort and negative press, in my mind, so I use them to take out oil fields, iron and aluminum mines... other things that are going to prevent the enemy from building good units for several turns.  That has a far greater impact on the over-all strategic situation.

That is a good strategy. I tend to spend turns lining up troops right along my borders and attack when I feel like it. The bad thing is that these guys are prone to making alliances, and that makes me weak on the backside (I only do this in early times when mobility is an issue).

I only get caught off guard if attacked early in the game.  By the industrial era, I usually know who I ought to suspect, and have developed some plan for almost every possible wartime scenario.  There is no such thing as a losing war if you make a plan ahead of time.  And there is no reason you cannot position your forces to react to multiple attacks, or even take on multiple opponents at once.  You just need to plan ahead.

My navy usually dominates the seas, by the modern era (navies are too expensive and ineffective prior developing destroyers, so I don't do much with them before hand), and I can react to literally any situation, anywhere in the world with in a couple turns, even if my response is just a solid blockade and bombing runs.

True. Blockading is an important tactic that gets glossed over a bit sometimes. I tend to concentrate more upon the ground though, as opposed to my navy. I tend to stack all my new units upon lines of attack, so I end up with a weak backside regardless. I only do this in the early stages, however.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.033 seconds with 11 queries.