How much do they own, though? Could they unilaterally develop such a game without the cooperation of Firaxis or Sid Meier? I wonder if they even want to. Afterall, the Sid Meier name would be one of their biggest selling points I should think.
Civilization 4 Players Thread
- Thread starter Mr Silver
- Start date
In SP, if you have 2 warriors at some point before turn 50, keep them relatively close together... you may run into another civ with its city unguarded or with 1 warrior; smash 1 or 2 civs this way and you've got wide open space to grow for hundreds of turns.
Also look for stone and plant a city there... makes building the all-important pyramids easier.
Also look for stone and plant a city there... makes building the all-important pyramids easier.
I don't know how these things work, but I'd imagine it would be hard to release the game with Sid's name in the title if he's not involved with it. Maybe they're considering releasing Alpha Centauri: Call to Power, or something.
If they're making a new Alpha Centauri game then it might not even be a true sequel, it might be some shooter set in the SMAC universe, sort of like the new X-COM.
I don't know how these things work, but I'd imagine it would be hard to release the game with Sid's name in the title if he's not involved with it. Maybe they're considering releasing Alpha Centauri: Call to Power, or something.
If they're making a new Alpha Centauri game then it might not even be a true sequel, it might be some shooter set in the SMAC universe, sort of like the new X-COM.
Now we're getting into even more spiritual sequel territory, so perhaps it should be called: Bioshock: Alpha Centari II: Call to Power: UFO Defence? We can throw on a Dark Forces VII, too, if there aren't enough subtitles.
Hmm, I think it needs an 'Armageddon' in there somewhere.
I installed SMAC last night and downloaded some patches to make it work with Win7. Other than its clunky interface and the fact that it doesn't support widescreen resolutions, the game seems to hold up quite well. I had no idea just how complex the game was when I originally played it. I mean, you can raise mountains to impact wind-direction and cause droughts in other civs. That's an amazing level of depth.
I installed SMAC last night and downloaded some patches to make it work with Win7. Other than its clunky interface and the fact that it doesn't support widescreen resolutions, the game seems to hold up quite well. I had no idea just how complex the game was when I originally played it. I mean, you can raise mountains to impact wind-direction and cause droughts in other civs. That's an amazing level of depth.
Yeah, there's a lot of great things. All it really needed was a better AI and it might have been absolutely perfect.
I almost always play as the University faction and trounce everyone else with my mad superior tech. 
And I'm not above some nerve stapling to put down the proles.
And I'm not above some nerve stapling to put down the proles.
Yeah, the AI isn't the best. Playing as the University faction, I'm the most advanced and have the largest army, but everyone demands tribute and declares war on me when I refuse. It's especially galling when the Peacekeeper faction does it.
I've run into an issue while playing the game, or maybe it's just due to me missing something, but I've researched machine guns, and the latest in terms of the technology tree that I've researched has been the SAMs units. Now I know SAMs is only for protecting against flying units, but for some odd reason, I'm not able to make any machinegun units. They're not obsoleted, are they? Am I missing a technology that I haven't researched that would allow me an offensive unit?
Did you have it set to "randomize personalities"?
SMAC's AI is actually programmed to have all the factions gang up on you if you get way ahead in tech/army/score. If they're all doing it at once, that's probably why.
Also, the AI factions are programmed to be naturally either peaceful, erratic, or aggressive, and the Peacekeepers are erratic, not peaceful. (Of the original SMAC factions, the Gaians and Morganites are pacifists, Peacekeepers, Spartans, University erratic, Hive and Believers aggressive.) It always kind of bugged me that the Peacekeepers weren't more peaceful.
No, just standard rules, and he declared war on me twice. Ironically, he was the last guy left standing at the end of the game when I bought a transcendence victory. It's a fun game with a lot of great concepts, but I don't feel it has the same replayability as the Civilization games.
Yeah, everyone kept declaring war on me. It must have been because I was ahead in tech because my military wasn't anything special until the latter portion of the game and I was tied with the Gaians on score until I built the Cloning Vats and my population sky-rocketed, practically doubling my score in about 20 turns.
I hate when games do that though, it feels like the computer is cheating somehow. CivRev was the worst offender, the moment you launched your spaceship or began work on one of the victory wonders every other civ would declare war on you in a last-dash attempt to take you down.
Yeah, Machineguns upgrade to SAM Infantry. They're not offensive units anyway - they can't attack.
But you have a couple options. Marines (Industrialism and Rifling), Mechanized Infantry (Robotics, Rifling), or good old fashioned Tanks and Modern Armor. Plus, I think you can attack with SAM Inf (18 strength, not quite as good as Infantry with 20).
^ Yeah, you can definitely attack with SAM Infantry. I've had brief periods in games where they've actually been my most powerful units.
The Europa Universalis series is one of the worst for this. You accumulate "bad boy" points when you do things like declare war (especially if you don't have a good reason) and when you capture territory (and more if it's done so aggressively and is a valuable province). When you hit the limit, suddenly everyone will declare war on you. And unless you're an absolutely massive superpower, you're toast. I speak from experience on that one.
The Europa Universalis series is one of the worst for this. You accumulate "bad boy" points when you do things like declare war (especially if you don't have a good reason) and when you capture territory (and more if it's done so aggressively and is a valuable province). When you hit the limit, suddenly everyone will declare war on you. And unless you're an absolutely massive superpower, you're toast. I speak from experience on that one.
^ Bad boy points killed me in Victoria whenever I'd play Austria or the Ottomans, because Russia was already naturally aggressive and didn't need much BB excuse to attack you.
I sometimes think about running another Civ4 Game. The last I did was the "real world" map with max number of players, just for the hell of it. Played as England (Liz), and did pretty well. By the end all of South America was mine except west of the Andes, all of Australia, and Scandinavia/the Baltic, plus Greece. But I only ever fought one war and just went for total culture victory, though I think it was spaceship I actually won. Too bad there was no way to extend the game beyond the pre-established time limit.
I sometimes think about running another Civ4 Game. The last I did was the "real world" map with max number of players, just for the hell of it. Played as England (Liz), and did pretty well. By the end all of South America was mine except west of the Andes, all of Australia, and Scandinavia/the Baltic, plus Greece. But I only ever fought one war and just went for total culture victory, though I think it was spaceship I actually won. Too bad there was no way to extend the game beyond the pre-established time limit.
Aha, thanks. I noticed that the SAMs were quite powerful once I actually started fighting with them. I just wasn't sure initially since the description makes them seem like they're only for air defence.
I'm playing as the Incan empire and I have Japan right next to me. I'm doing a rush attack as I'm nearing the end of the game with only about 30 turns left. I just took Tokyo by force and they didn't even stand a chance as most of their units were older units from the previous era.
That doesn't bother me so much because it's not tied to your power or tech level, but to how you have played the game. If you declare war on countries for no reason, conquer their land or annex small nations then it makes sense that other powers will be wary about you and try to bring you down. But if you use diplomacy and legitimate causes to conquer territory then you can keep your reputation manageable.The Europa Universalis series is one of the worst for this. You accumulate "bad boy" points when you do things like declare war (especially if you don't have a good reason) and when you capture territory (and more if it's done so aggressively and is a valuable province). When you hit the limit, suddenly everyone will declare war on you. And unless you're an absolutely massive superpower, you're toast. I speak from experience on that one.
I admit it was annoying in the vanilla game as there was only a few casus belli to choose from, but one of the expansions (Heir to the Throne, I think) threw in dozens of new ones. Now if you want to go to war with one of your neighbours then you probably only have to wait 2 or 3 years before some random event happens giving you justification.
The problem I have with the way the AI works in Civ games is that it doesn't matter how you have played the game, if you get close to victory the AI will sometimes gang up on you. You could play as a builder that has never gone to war or conquered any territory, but if you get close to launching a spaceship then even your closest ally might turn on you.
They are best for air defense, but that's because they are the first air defense unit. Actually, they're great for attacking Helicopters (which themselves can slaughter your tanks). Still, if you don't have Marines (or Mechanized Infantry and Tanks), they can be used fairly well over all.
just out of interest will civ4 run on windows7?
sound like a good game
sound like a good game
Similar threads
