Evening Reading
- Chicago decides WiFi is for suckers
- Major Vista update in 2008
- FBI wiretapping
- Net regulation rejected
Lastly, since PC demo releases are so inconsistent in release we've decide to ditch the Demo theater thing in favor of a new feature.. Trailer park! We figure its a good opportunity to evaluate how doing lots of video works out around these parts. We'll experiment with a few ideas for HD content as well. Lets hope its awesome tomorrow.
-
Finally got around to playing Civ 4 today.
I miss some things from Civ 3!-
-
-
Also there's so many types of units! I liked Civ 3 because there was a good progression of offensive, defensive, and siege units through the eras. Each unit had distinct ratings for attack/defense/movement and some tradeoffs.
Here... it's like there are 400 units available to me in the early part of the game and it's kind of overwhelming!
-
Civ 4 is great because I can't think of anything wrong with it. I couldn't even think of anything to add to it, but Firaxis did with their expansions. So yeah, you can add things to it. You can make it better. But there is no part of the game where I find myself saying "I wish this part was different." It's just PERFECT.
-
-
-
I've tried looking through that but it doesn't give reasons why you would do certain actions, or build certain things. It doesn't even give the weaknesses for military units (I tried to figure out what would be best against a plane at one point, and nothing seemed to work).
Seriously, I'm lost when it comes to this game. I really do want to enjoy it, and I can get a hint of the awesomeness that is there, but I just feel lost when I try to do anything.-
Try these forums for help:
http://apolyton.net/forums/
http://forums.civfanatics.com/
There's a lot of good information here.
-
-
-
-
-
-
I miss being able to win the game. I dominated Civ 3 but I get wiped out on any difficulty higher than Warlord in Civ 4. I'm pretty sure it's mostly because of how they changed the expansion aspect of the game. My strategy used to be to expand as fast as I could and then fortify my cities, improve them, and build huge armies to wipe out the other civs.
Now, if I expand too fast my research goes down to zero because the cost of expansion is crippling my economy, and with research being so important especially for defensive and offensive units that's a death sentence in this game. If I don't expand the other civilizations take up all available landmass pretty quickly and steal recourses I might need later in the game and end up outproducing me because they have more cities, which also gives them a huge research bonus down the line, which gives them the chance to build wonders before I can even research them.
There's this delicate balance between research, culture and production, and I haven't found a sweetspot in Civ 4 at Noble difficulty and beyond yet, but not because I haven't tried. It's frustrating, but it's also a challange, which is probably why I'm still playing it despite having lost the last 10 or so games I played.-
Heh, I started playing Civ4 since Friday. I was panicking that I have such a loooooong losing streak since I increased the difficulty higher than Warlord. I'm glad someone is having trouble with it.
Yes, it is frustrating. There' s one time I thought I was going to win with the space victory but damn it some computer beat me to it. That close to assemble a space shuttle....so frustrating but addictive. -
-
-
-
Military actions still aren't that fun, and the stupid F*ng barbarian invasion ALWAYS shows up ALWAYS around the same time in the game. I get that it's supposed to stop you from expanding too much, but really it's just annoying, having to watch all sides for like 20 barbarian units looking to bash your civ to pieces.
-
-