bombardment, missile attacks, and air combat

Tjoepie · October 18, 2001, 05:09

I love it : some new info in this stuff from the new Gamespot interview.
I really love the fact to destroy buildings and even tileimprovements by bombarding.

This makes a strategy of destroying the enemy economy without capturing their cities with all the new "culture" problems possible.

Bombardment is not limited to targeting enemy units--players can also use it against terrain improvements (roads and the like) and cities (where it may cause a population decrease or destroy city structures). Missiles operate in a similar way, but they are expended once the attack is conducted. And air units now have a specialized range of missions, running the gamut from air superiority to recon and precision bombing. All these improvements make for a combat system full of fun choices that enhance the experience of planning and executing military campaigns.

Sarxis · October 18, 2001, 06:49

Yes, the whole combat system seems to have reached a new level of depth in CivIII.

I am looking forward to utilizing it.

Deathwalker · October 18, 2001, 06:54

I'm glad you now have the ability to bomb cities, and they don't need to have a unit in it.

Sarxis · October 18, 2001, 07:03

I had forgotten about that!

In SMAC, when I would try to Planetbuster/nuke and enemy city that didn't have any units in it: tough luck!

You couldn't even bomb a base without units in it- absurd!

But with the new bombarding/bombing system, it becomes more realistic. In actuality, most bombing since WWII is against large, immobile targets like factories, bunkers, etc. Though rarely it is used to hit enemy locations out in the open, mostly this is not so.

campmajor! · October 18, 2001, 07:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Anunikoba
Yes, the whole combat system seems to have reached a new level of depth in CivIII.

I am looking forward to utilizing it.

Yep, civ3 rules!

Typo · October 18, 2001, 09:36

The air superiority missions sound cool, I'd like to know more on what these are about??

Also glad to hear that battleships no longer can bombard multiple times per turn...

Jason Beaudoin · October 18, 2001, 11:50

My main interest about CIV III is on how Air combat will function and how it will look. I'd like to know whether it will be animated, and how smooth these animations will be.

Ming · October 18, 2001, 12:17

I could care less how it looks... as long as it functions more realistically than it did in Civ II. But then again, ANYTHING would be an improvement

Jason Beaudoin · October 18, 2001, 13:29

I CARE! It matter to me whether it is represented graphically, just like anything else in the game: from the guy swinging his sword and hearing the clashing of the steel, to the missile shooting from the submarine and slamming into a village!

Ming · October 18, 2001, 13:59

Again... function before beauty. I really have no interest in the graphics beyond playability. If I want stellar graphics, I'll go out and buy a SF DVD...

I would hate it if the game functions were ignored for the sake of graphics. I'm buying a game, and I just want it to work the way it is supposed to. And, I hope they spent some more time setting up air combat and missile attacks better.

If you can't attack a city because you can't get past a line of warriors... I don't care how nice the graphics are

Jason Beaudoin · October 18, 2001, 14:27

How about both? Why should we have to choose.

I choose both functionality and beauty!

Ming · October 18, 2001, 14:31

While it is impossible to disagree with you... and yes, both would be great... I would hate to see function suffer because of beauty. Heck, I turn most of the graphic options off when I play Civ... After the first few games, they are just distracting, and get old real quick

Jason Beaudoin · October 18, 2001, 14:43

I think I'm just a lot more demanding than you are, and I expect a lot from today's games... and I think a lot of people are in the same boat as I am. In Canada, I pay 80 bucks for a game like CIV III, so when I'm investing that kind of cash for something, I want almost everything to be right on the mark. I don't buy very many games for that very reason: because many just screw something up so badly, it's impossible to play the game.

I had that problem with SMAC. I just couldn't get past the graphics, namely, the unit graphics. If they had been done correctly, I probably would have enjoyed the game a lot more. The sound for many units were the same too, which was also really bothersome.

But, I imagine you're right. Functionality should win over beauty.

Crouchback · October 18, 2001, 15:27

Did you also notice this titbit from the last page?

Quote:

the ability of battleships to have multiple bombardments in a single turn was eliminated and the air superiority missions were added.

IMO it's the right decision, allowing battleships 4x goes at bombarding would be overkill.

David

donarumo · October 18, 2001, 15:33

In regards to bombarding, does this mean that units without a bombardment number can NOT attack improvements or can they attack them as well?

Typo · October 18, 2001, 15:59

Yes but its not targeted you may kill citizens or destroy an improvement or kill/damage a unit in a city. You can target more in modern times after researching something..