Good mods for civilization 4? Thoughts on civilization 5?

[Samuel]

On the topic of mods, how do you get the ones that are in rar files to work? I download an unzipper programer and that works, but they since they don't autoinstal I don't know where to go from there.

They fail to see that change for the sake of change is not good.

Actually it is. You can either change a game, expand it, refine it or rebalance it. The last three can be easily done by modders- the first is almost entirely in the hands of the publisher.

I hope the new civ5 combat is more time period realistic. It drove me nuts when pikemen could somehow drive off my cannons.

How is that unrealistic? Can't they just charge into stabby range and butcher the gunners?

[Oskuro]

Just use a point displacement system. Being easier to draw is rrelevant to a machine.

I am talking about tabletop d20 games. The machine making the maps is my hand.

[Enigma]

I hope the new civ5 combat is more time period realistic. It drove me nuts when pikemen could somehow drive off my cannons.

I'd love it if they make sure that an archer (or several) has no chance whatsoever against a tank. For example, if to successfully damage a tank the attacking unit would need to reach the minimum attack value to affect the tank. Lets say to attack a tank you'll need an attack value of 20. If your attacking unit is less than 20 then you do no damage whatsoever. Stacking inferior units would not help since individually they would not have the required attack value and combined will not help either.

You get the picture? I hope I didn't make it too confusing. At least this way, no inferior attacking unit can prevail against a superior unit.

[Stark]

Just use a point displacement system. Being easier to draw is rrelevant to a machine.

I am talking about tabletop d20 games. The machine making the maps is my hand.

Uh... yeah. That's why I said use point displacement (otherwise known as 'measuring') because you don't need a grid at all. Like d20 needs a grid anyway.

Hexes are a pain to draw and number but computers don't care.

[Stark]

There is only one way to win- overthrowing the king. To do they you need to beat his military which scales up with your economy. This means the best time to fight a war is at the start of the game when you get gold from goody huts and use it to buy yourself a military.

You mean, just like the old one?

It always struck me as massively limited and America-centric to make 'independence' the victory condition, but I didn't think anyone else cared.

[Oskuro]

Uh... yeah. That's why I said use point displacement (otherwise known as 'measuring') because you don't need a grid at all. Like d20 needs a grid anyway.

Oh, I see. I was actually going to mention that way of doing tabletop gaming (the same Warhammer uses), but it has its share of headaches too (mainly, it is slooooooooooow).

And d20 (D&D) has a heavy wargame component based on a square grid, wich we use (mainly because our rulebooks are like the game's bible, we have a high rules-lawyer density wich fucks over the use of house rules, and makes not using a grid a nightmare when players suddenly manage to teleport around or coincidentally be in the right place at the right time). Admittedly, D&D's Unearthed Arcana had rules for hex grids, but as I said, rules lawyering has made it hard to deviate from the core books in my group.

[Losonti Tokash]

Wouldn't you typically defeat rules lawyering by pointing out you're the GM and they can go choke on a dick?

[Oskuro]

Typically, yes, but this group has elements that will flat out state that they want to defeat the GM, and thus the GM cannot bend the rules, even if means the rest of the group are not having fun. So the choice is to either use rules lawyering aganist them so they have little wiggle room and accept it when things don't go their way, or simply not play at all.

And on that note, by speaking in present tense I've been a bit misleading, because I eventually chose the later (at least as a GM).

[Purple]

On the topic of mods, how do you get the ones that are in rar files to work? I download an unzipper programer and that works, but they since they don't autoinstal I don't know where to go from there.

Check the thing you get when you unzip it (it will be a folder with a .ini file inside)/
Copy the entire folder, not just the contents into your ...\Civlisation4\BeyondTheSword\Mods directory and play.

Actually it is. You can either change a game, expand it, refine it or rebalance it. The last three can be easily done by modders- the first is almost entirely in the hands of the publisher.

And that is the point.
The ideal CIV5 would be a carbon copy of CIV4 just modified to fit with modern hardware. Ideally, compatible with existing mods.

[Stark]

What the fuck? You just want them to make the same game again?

It's amazing they ever realised the Civ formula was complete shit, but it's good that they're finally changing.

[Purple]

The CIV franchise (including SMAC) is the best thing ever released in the history of gaming.
And, excluding SMAC CIV4 was the best of the franchise.

The formula is perfect.

[Stark]

LOL Sorry I thought you were a real person. Carry on.

[Gramzamber]

Not that I agree with Mr. I Hate Civ here, but seriously you want them to clone Civ IV? I like Civ IV, but the important part of sequels of this nature is change. New mechanics, new ways of playing the game.
You're hardly making a Civ sequel to continue the storyline after all.

[phongn]

The ideal CIV5 would be a carbon copy of CIV4 just modified to fit with modern hardware.

The CIV franchise (including SMAC) is the best thing ever released in the history of gaming.
And, excluding SMAC CIV4 was the best of the franchise.

The formula is perfect.

Why? Defend your assertation.

[Vendetta]

The ideal CIV5 would be a carbon copy of CIV4 just modified to fit with modern hardware. Ideally, compatible with existing mods.

If you want Civ 4, go play Civ 4 again and stop bothering people who live in the present.

[Temujin]

Not that I agree with Mr. I Hate Civ here, but seriously you want them to clone Civ IV? I like Civ IV, but the important part of sequels of this nature is change. New mechanics, new ways of playing the game.
You're hardly making a Civ sequel to continue the storyline after all.

One of the problems with the Civ franchise since Civ 2 is that for every improvement they make to the game play (assuming it is executed in a fashion that doesn't suck), is that they also either eliminate or change for the worse aspects of the game that worked fine.

Civ 4 does have some nice features, but I find that some of them do not to live up to the hype, and some of the things they eliminated/changed really make the game worse.

I've always wished I had the money to produce my own Civ game, taking the best ideas from the various Civ, Alpha Centauri, and Call To Power games.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Yeah. Seriously, getting rid of Civ 1 & 2's zone of control system was brain damaged. In Civ 2 you could defend a narrow entrance into your territory with a fort and a stack of units. In 3 and 4, an attacking stack can just snake around your fort through forest tiles and march right up to your city, razing shit the whole way, and you can't attack them unless you have a bigger stack handy because they immediately get +50% defense from the forest and jungle tiles the first turn they move into them. How anyone can insist that this is a perfect combat system that shouldn't be changed is incomprehensible to me. This is also, by the way, one of those things mods can't fix.

[PeZook]

Not to mention the usual shit that still happens after what, 15 years? Like bowmen being able to inflict casualties on gunships (think about it. GUNSHIPS) or riflemen somehow unable to perform well on the attack against pikemen, or wooden frigates sinking submarines. They've had three games to solve those issues, yet they fail consistently.

[Purple]

Er no, moding can change just about everything.
They released the dll source for civ4 moders can change a lot. I am pretty certain that someone has already made zones of control and I know they made ranged attacks. Hell there is even a mod that adds magic spells.

And the balance issues are easily solved. The only real isue with the defense is the base strenth.


And besides, if a gunship is down to 1% HP than even I could kill it empty handed. Since 1% would transfer to it being shot down, grounded and burning. But the crew still shooting their sidearms at you.

[Temujin]

Er no, moding can change just about everything.

Actually no it can't, especially if your not that adept with the some of the programing languages, which is especially a problem with Civ 4. In both Call to Power (which IIRC was based on a lot of Civ 2's programming) and in Civ 3's editor, I could get a pretty good modification of unit stats so that 100 pikeman could get mowed down by one rifleman, let alone a tank. The way they set up Civ 4, after talking about how great the modding capabilities would be, I can't do jack shit. Don't claim your product is even more mod friendly if the layman can barely modify anything compared to what they could do in the previous edition.

[Stofsk]

That whole 'pikemen sink the battleship' thing is fucking embarrassing. It's totally unbelievable that Firaxis hasn't fixed that in any iteration of Civ.

[RedImperator]

They had it pretty well fixed in Civ 2. It was still mathmatically possible, but the chances were remote (and it was trivial to mod units so it never happened). I still have no idea why Firaxis abandoned the firepower stat.

[Oskuro]

I remember some internet post somewhere where they expained that the rationale for such ludicrous situations as pikemen killing tanks was purely game-balanced based, to avoid the first player to build a tank plowing through the opponent's armies.

I always rationalized it as there being transitional troops mixed in, instead of units magically changing from pikemen to marines, so those musketeers might actually carry around a few AT grenades to help them take on the tank or something.

Of course that doesn't help when my awesome plasma hover supersdestroyer is shot down by a black powder cannon, but oh well.

[Samuel]

Well, having such disparities in the game would make things different to accomedate. Being on the bleeding edge of technological progress shoud give you an advantage (although having more unit ranks should stop it from being game ending). They'd have to make it so that the civilizations lagging behind can catch up easily (like making open borders increase the ease of researching technology your trading partner has already discovered, with the more ahead of you, the faster you catch up).

[adam_grif]

I played some Civ 4 again in light of this thread, and the thing that bothers me the most about it is the one city builds one thing mentality. Like, for 75 years, all my captial city did was build a fucking market. Really? It'd be way cool if they implemented a system inspired by SoaSE where you don't build specific improvements, you focus efforts in specific areas, i.e. civilian infrastructure, logistics and so on.

The other thing I hate is how if you don't go around and make sure every unit is upgraded to your latest tech, they'll just sit around being pikemen into the 21st century. Some sort of organic transition where units would upgrade automatically, phasing out the old and bringing in the new over several turns even without prompting it.

Hmm. Also, I know the time-compressed early years are necessary to make te game have a bearable pace, but it's always bothered me that it would take 800 years for my swordsmen to march from my country to my neighbour and siege one of their cities. That's some fucking dedication.