Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Sid Meier's Civilization V Announced

2K Games announces Sid Meier's Civilization V is now in development at Firaxis Game Studio, saying the turn-based strategy sequel is expected for release this fall, in addition to the previously announced Civilization Network for Facebook. A preliminary Civilization V Website is online with information and screenshots from the game, promising the launch of the complete website "soon." The game will use an all-new engine and introduce some gameplay changes; here's a bit:

Civilization V takes this definitive strategy game series in new directions with the introduction of hexagon tiles allowing for deeper strategy, more realistic gameplay and stunning organic landscapes for players to explore as they expand their empire. The brand new engine orchestrates a spectacular visual experience that brings players closer to the Civ experience than ever, featuring fully animated leaders interacting with players from a screen-filling diplomatic scene and speaking in their native language for the first time. Wars between empires feel massive as armies dominate the landscape, and combat is more exciting and intense than ever before. The addition of ranged bombardment allows players to fire weapons from behind the front lines, challenging players to develop clever new strategies to guarantee victory on the battlefield. In addition to the new gameplay features debuting in Civilization V, an extensive suite of community, modding and multiplayer elements will also make an appearance.

Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at the bottom of the form.

49. Re: Sid Meier's Civilization V Announced Feb 18, 2010, 21:33 Quboid
 
JohnnyRotten wrote on Feb 18, 2010, 21:00:
I think you're missing the point - that the hasty generalization originally presented was so entirely one sided as to invalidate the premise.

I tried to present this by simply reversing the objects of the arguments presented (Apaches for spear men), which in my opinion makes the new argument just as ridiculous or just as plausible as the original statement.

It was making the case that a spearman unit could beat an Apache unit. I acknowledged that it's very unlikely and a large amount of lucky breaks would be required. That's not being one-sided, I'd made it clear that this would be an exceptional case.

My case made sense (at least you haven't directly pointed out any logic errors). Reversing it does not make sense because as Yifes said, it's not a 1:1 ratio. An Apache unit wouldn't even be a dozen. There could (again, in an exceptional case) be a warrior:helicopter ratio of 10000:1 and even in a best-case scenario I'd say 100:1. The Apaches could run out of ammo first!

Also reversing it doesn't make sense as I didn't say one weapon, I was responding to your phrase one button.

Finally, fighting on whose terms. Well, again, I stated that this would be an exception case so the fight would be on the spearmen's terms. If I was saying it was fine for spearmen to regularly beat helicopters then that would be one-sided, but I'm not so it's not. From my experience, it's a minority - a small minority - of the time that this sort of underdog victory happens. Plus it tends to happen more when the spearmen are defending as they get the defensive/fortified bonuses which is pretty much because that means the battle is more likely to be on their terms. In any event, I don't think it is a toss up whose terms it is fought on. If the spearmen disperse and shelter with civilians, the helicopters can't just blast the hell out of them. I can't think of a way the helicopters can regain the initiative - and apparently, neither can Bush/Blair/Brown/Obama because the same thing (albeit with a much smaller tech gap) is playing out in Iraq and Afghanistan.

My argument holds up. Your reversal fails on numerous accounts. So no, I don't see how that works at all.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
Subject
Comment
     
 
      ;)   ;)   :(   :(   :o   :o   %)   %)   :)   :)   :|   :|   ;P   ;P   X|   X|   :D   :D   More
 
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you have a signature set up, it will be automatically appended to your comment.
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.
 
          Email me when this topic is updated.
 

Special Codes

  • b[bold text]b
  • i[italic text]i
  • u[underline text]u
  • -[strikethrough text]-
  • c[code text]c
  • +[bullet point]+
  • q[quote text (indented)]q
  • [quote="Author"]quote text (indented)[/quote]
  • [url=Link]text[/url]
  • r{red text}r
  • g{green text}g
  • b{blue text}b
  • m{maroon text}m
  • s{secret text (shows in the background colour)}s

Forum Rules

  1. Disagree all you want but attacks of a personal nature will not be tolerated.
  2. Ethnic slurs and homophobic language will not be tolerated.
  3. Do not post spam, links to warez sites, or instructions on how to obtain pirated software.
  4. Abusing the forums in any manner that could be construed as 'griefing' will not be tolerated.


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo