Civ IV Warlords.

[Lorenzo_H]

I love Civilization IV and I am of the opinion the Civilization is the best game series of all time. If you like Total War, and haven't played Civilization, then I can heartily recommend you consider buying it.

Has anyone got Civ IV Warlords? I haven't got it, but I plan to buy it when I have some money over the next few months. I have recently come back to playing Civ after about a years' break to play Rome Total War and more recently Medieval 2 Total War. I now realise how much I love it again. Has anyone got anything to say about getting Warlords? If not, then this can be a general Civ IV discussion thread.

[Tricky Lady]

I have played Civ IV, and its Warlords expansion to be precise, quite a lot over the past months, which was the main reason why I haven't touched RTW that long (or didn't buy M2TW): I don't have that much time.

The fact that I stuck onto Civ IV for a few months meant that I indeed liked the game a lot.
I must add that I downloaded the ViSA mod, because I liked the way how they added many nations, world wonders, and new functions. In general I also found that the mod spiced up the difficulty level, even though I never left the second level.

The Warlord/Great General is a nice add-on, but was not really necessary in my opinion. Perhaps I used those great generals a bit too rashly but I thought they got killed rather easily.
In my opinion, just the compatibility of this ViSA mod with Warlords justified buying the expansion; I never went back to "vanilla". Having said that, I think that maybe buying the expansion only to play the "vanilla" game is not really worth the money. Don't know...

Should you be interested in that mod, then you should click the link below immediately (thanks to econ21 for directing me to that site a couple of months ago), if you hadn't find that site on your own yet...

Civfanatics forum (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=188624)

[Lorenzo_H]

Yeah I have been a member of Civfanatics for more than a year now.

I don't really download mods unless they are official... I like the game as it is fine.

[econ21]

Tricky_Lady - get thee behind me, Satan! You are tempting me to go back to Civ4. It is a superbly made game, addictive as crack cocaine, devouring any free time with "one more turn". But ultimately it tends to leave me feeling rather empty and dirty when I've finished it, like a junky.

And diablodelmar - you are also tempting me. Ten pound for the expansion... makes you think... I always liked the idea of great generals, although I am sure mine would all die horribly - if I could ever get any (I tend to turtle and not start wars, although my cheapskate pacific style makes me tend to fall victim to them).

I wonder what else the expansion adds to the core game? I'm not that keen scenarios or special campaigns. A few more civs and leaders, I recall?

Any other views?

Must resist... :sweatdrop:

[Yun Dog]

Get the warlords expansion dude - get it NOW

It adds heaps to vanilla - I was soooo bored with vanilla and was thinking - why get the expansion - one word - VASSALS

and its got some cool bedowin music in the menu screens

dont wait another second - your depriving yourself

[econ21]

OK, you persuaded me - I've ordered it. It's out of stock, but I'm in no hurry (lots of great games recently out already). It will be nice to give Civ4 another run around - it was a beautifully crafted piece of work (I especially liked founding religions and spawning great persons; even the combat was fun with its promotions and RPS system - a first for Civ IMO).

[TB666]

Warlords was sweet.
I like the new civs and some of the wonders, the great wall looks sweet on the map.
The viking invasion scenario was funny IMO.
Attacking England with a huge army of berserkers and watch them just take over everything is awesome:2thumbsup:

[Tricky Lady]

econ21, sorry didn't mean to tempt you back to CivIV :devil:

I also always rushed for the Great Wall, and always tried to stretch it around as many cities as possible (I think the most cities that got protected by the GW ever was four, which is not that impressive :shame: ).

Founding religions was a very nice feature as well. Even though I often found myself chasing as many religions as possible because I didn't want to fight out those nasty religious wars. On the lower levels this was pretty easy to accomplish, I read that it's a tad more difficult on the higher levels.

[Lorenzo_H]

OK, you persuaded me - I've ordered it. It's out of stock, but I'm in no hurry (lots of great games recently out already). It will be nice to give Civ4 another run around - it was a beautifully crafted piece of work (I especially liked founding religions and spawning great persons; even the combat was fun with its promotions and RPS system - a first for Civ IMO).
You did a good job at avoiding temptation! Satan just got you to turn the stones to bread...

Did I mention that Warlords was availible for a tenner? you must have seen the Play.com sale...

I would buy Warlords in an instant from Play.com, but for the fact that I am going to France snowboarding in 5 hours or less, and I don't want to spend any money just yet in case I need it!

[edyzmedieval]

I've received for Christmas the Civilisation Chronicles, which bumped me into Civ IV. Never got the hang of it, but it's kinda addictive. One more turn = 20-30 more turns.

[Lorenzo_H]

I've received for Christmas the Civilisation Chronicles, which bumped me into Civ IV. Never got the hang of it, but it's kinda addictive. One more turn = 20-30 more turns.
How is the card game that comes with it?

[edyzmedieval]

Very nice. You receive 2 stacks of card games, and 2 other mini stacks with the "mana" for the game. It's really nice.

Also, the bonuses are really nice too. Plus, you have every Civ game except for the Warlords expansion.

[AntiochusIII]

Right, so I'm a bad person and is derailing the topic with my not-so-related question about Civ IV, but I don't want to revive the old discussion thread; and I'm having this trouble, you see...

Is there a way to disable a victory condition from working? I usually waaaaay overbuild and get a cultural victory because I'm turtling while gathering the force to conquer the world. I'm quite tired of it and want to win the game the old-fashioned blood-stained way. I googled and looked through some FAQs for a while now but couldn't find anything related to it anywhere. Moreover, the space base things are bothersome when I have no intention of building any of them. Gah! Civ III HAD that function!

Edit: ignore that. I can't believe I've missed the Custom Game option for, what, weeks! How about that for being airheaded.

[Lorenzo_H]

I also just ordered Warlords, having come back from my snowboarding...

[econ21]

I am having a lot of fun with Warlords. I'm just playing the standard campaign. It's not noticeably different with warlords, but it is still excellent. The diplomacy is SO much better than in TW, as is the building side obviously. However, it's curious that both the opening movies to Civ4 and Warlords resemble Total War battles. I start them up and then get a hankering to start playing Total War...

[Lorenzo_H]

Yeah Civ has great Diplomacy!

[econ21]

The other thing Civ has that TW could really learn from is AI challenge. It's not fancy, but it is brutally effective. (Someone is thinking of programming the AI to behave like a human and create killer stacks with lots catapults - at that point, I think I'll have to give up.) I just spent a heart stopping couple of hours fighting a medieval war with the Romans that turned into a contemporaneous one with Saladin, then Isabella and the Vikings. :sweatdrop:

It really is scarey how a far away AI turns up out of nowhere on your doorstep with multiple big stacks of war elephants etc. I managed to get peace from the Romans, then lost my great general, my army and was about to lose my key barracks city. Luckily I suddenly realised Saladin was now merely annoyed, not "refusing to talk". With Isabella and just her Viking vassals, it's a more even struggle.

I confess this realisation made me go back to an older save where Saladin was still ready to settle and my precious great general was still alive[1]. It's going to be payback time for my dear neighbour Isabella tomorrow.

But the kind of nail biting experience I just had is sadly not too common with Total War. Well, maybe Shogun was the exception - I can still recall attempting to keep Shinano against all comers; it was also exhausting and a real uphill struggle.

[1]No idea how I am going to conserve him until West Point. I copied an idea from Civfanatics - he's a Medic 2 horse unit and has 25/26 experience. One more point and I'll be qualified to get West Point. If I can keep him alive.

[Lorenzo_H]

Can you upgrade the Great General's unit?

[econ21]

Yes, it upgrades free. Generally, I don't think 20 XP is the best use of a general's unit. But you need a level 6 unit to get West Point, so it is a straightforward way of meeting that requirement.

I really wanted to use the general to found a military academy, but you need Education first. It turned out I could have waited, as I was only a tech or two away from Education when I got my first Great General.

Next time, I may save the first general for the academy and rely on getting a second for the level 6 unit. I'll see how long I have to wait for the second - I am not a warfighter by choice in Civ, although often have to battle defensively.

[Yun Dog]

Yes, it upgrades free. Generally, I don't think 20 XP is the best use of a general's unit. But you need a level 6 unit to get West Point, so it is a straightforward way of meeting that requirement.

I really wanted to use the general to found a military academy, but you need Education first. It turned out I could have waited, as I was only a tech or two away from Education when I got my first Great General.

Next time, I may save the first general for the academy and rely on getting a second for the level 6 unit. I'll see how long I have to wait for the second - I am not a warfighter by choice in Civ, although often have to battle defensively.

sounds like your going through a bit of a civ4 revival there. :2thumbsup:

Yeah the strat side of the game is pretty good, but like tw I think its fairly hard to stop the AI stabbing you in the back when your suffering and down after being at war with another AI nation, then it just king hits you with another nation on your weak side.

the battles are uncomparable though, even with it limitations of the AI the TW battles are what separates it, and in my view makes it superior..

I know dudes rave about the AI in civ, but I dunno ... I find most games end up running out much the same - the ol swordsman rush v1.3 (in place of swordsmen put any number of units) - rush to a tech - crank out men - take out weak neighbours - rush to space

and how does the AI pay for those stacks of men, If I have a huge standing army my tech is at like 10%

and they trade techs non stop with each other

Most games - the Ai will gang bang you at some point, 1 Ai nation usually always does nothing but tech up - and win space race - the others will vary from warring with you or their neighbours non stop, or culture drown you

just feels to me like - a recipe, tech to x, build y, rush till golden brown

dunno just feels like a sameness to alot of the civ games I play - and one turn you stone age - by the time youve made an army of axemen and marched to a city - the AI is flying spaceships and your army is completely redundant

Have you noticed that the middle ages and renaisance have seemingly disappeared to about 2 turns in the game, dunno just some impressions

[Lorenzo_H]

By clever means of diplomacy the above can be avoided. If you are friends with enough people, maybe get a few alliances, then you're in the business.

[econ21]

just feels to me like - a recipe, tech to x, build y, rush till golden brown

dunno just feels like a sameness to alot of the civ games I play - and one turn you stone age - by the time youve made an army of axemen and marched to a city - the AI is flying spaceships and your army is completely redundant


I play huge maps at epic pace, so time and technology progresses at a nice steady pace for me. The default settings just seem too small and fast.

I never rush the AI in Civ (or TW). It seems that's about the only way to win Civ at high difficulty levels, but it just does not seem fun. Especially in Civ because the combat is painfully slow (you can click through turns in peace, but in war, its laborious moving all your units one square at a time...). For me, Civ shines in all the fun non-combat stuff: the wonders, the great people, religions, diplomacy, tech race, city management etc. If I want to play a conquest game, I'd play TW. If I wanted to conquering by rushing, I'd play a conventional RTS (having a lot of fun with Dark Crusade co-op MP with my son right now).

In Civ (and TW), I like to build peacefully and let the AI attack me. That works brilliantly in Civ, because the AI is no slouch at building either - so you are not guaranteed to get a head (at prince+). And it also mercilessly attacks the militarily weak but technologically advanced human. Fighting a defensive war in Civ is one of the most thrilling computer game experiences, IMO. The TW AI provides no where near the same kind of remorseless threat - I still recall the early thrill of bumping into a Mongol/Zulu/Viking in the Civ2 early game. You know things are going to get hairy sooner or later. In Civ4, my pacific style means I get through the ancient period fairly peacable, but invariably find myself in desperate defensive wars around the middle ages. Then I get redcoats and its payback time.

I got hurt last night though - I thought I was doing well beating off Isabella, Ragnar and Saladdin (who seems a psycho in Warlords now) from my key military town of Nottingham (heroic epic + military academy). But then when the dust settled, I noticed their depradations had shrunk the once great city of Nottingham to a miserly 5 population. For some reason, I thought when you had run out of food reserves, you would lose one population but go back to slowly eating down food reserves again. Not continually lose one population per turn. Ouch.

[Lorenzo_H]

Econ21, to solve the "painfully slow" problem you can do one or more of the following:

1. Join units of the same movement value in the same stack providing;
a) they are going to the same place and
b) look out for arty and be prepared to spread out if they do have any catapults...
2. Go to the options screen and uncheck "Show movements."

Never really been a problem for me.

I take it you are playing as Churchill? Nice... he seems to be quite good Charismatic is a trait I could have some fun with, and protective makes a great pair.

How is the new special building feature? I am really looking forward to that aspect of play when my copy arrives (should be any day now!). Check out the Spanish Citadel! I only wish there was a Spanish leader who was protective now...because then he would be overpowered and I could extend my multiplayer lead against my bro who I am curenntly beating 4 games to Zero.

[econ21]

I take it you are playing as Churchill?

No - I am being boring and still playing Elizabeth. I love getting Great People and her traits probably suit my pacific/economic focussed play style. I'll look carefully at Churchill next time. (I tend to play England because I remember my country's city names more easily; plus redcoats are sweet.)

The unique buildings are a nice touch, although I have not got my stock markets yet.

Incidentally, the Medic III use of a Great General is working out very nicely. Seems to heal adjacent units pretty fast - very useful for defending a city from a strong invasion. The second GG came along pretty quickly after (thanks to the major war I am in), so now I also have the military academy I wanted. Only Nottingham is too depopulated to make much use of it. :skull: I guess I will use future GGs as specialists in Nottingham. 20 XP for a unit and special promotions are nice, but I am afraid Civ units don't have a long enough life expectancy for me to risk it.

[Lorenzo_H]

yeah England were the first I played as. Redcoats certainly rock the boat whenever they appear on the scene - no rivals until the advent of Infantry and Tanks.

[econ21]

Reading a bit more, Redcoats have been nerfed a bit in Warlords - they have the same strength as riflemen now, just a +25% vs gunpowder units. Apparently they are now vulnerable to grenadiers.

You also inspired me to read about Churchill's traits - they do sound very nice; I'm going to try him next game as they compensate for the weakened redcoats.

[Yun Dog]

I play huge maps at epic pace, so time and technology progresses at a nice steady pace for me. The default settings just seem too small and fast.

I never rush the AI in Civ (or TW). It seems that's about the only way to win Civ at high difficulty levels, but it just does not seem fun. Especially in Civ because the combat is painfully slow (you can click through turns in peace, but in war, its laborious moving all your units one square at a time...). For me, Civ shines in all the fun non-combat stuff: the wonders, the great people, religions, diplomacy, tech race, city management etc. If I want to play a conquest game, I'd play TW. If I wanted to conquering by rushing, I'd play a conventional RTS (having a lot of fun with Dark Crusade co-op MP with my son right now).

.

mmm I agree, Civ certainly has its strengths in the wonders/citys basically well civ stuff

Yeh maybe I should mess with the settings to get a game that is more suited to my turtling

[Lorenzo_H]

Last weekend I had some real fun with Warlords! I beat my bro in a LAN game as the Vikings... He's not as aggressive enough or as expansive enough so I beat him every time!

[ChaosLord]

Since all the Org Civ4 players are coming out of hiding I suggest checking out this link: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=159157&pagenumber=1 Blake has been steadily tweaking and improving the AI for both the original Civ4 and Warlords. Well worth the download.