Slavery, holy wars!!!

[Myrddin]

See

link

[Locutus]

Reading that info and knowing UGO as I do, I can only conclude they based that article on info posted on this forum and/or CFC and twisted it to make it look like they didn't. And in that process they made up a whole bunch of stuff and messed up some facts: "Countries can found entire religions, such as Catholicism or Hinduism", "Trying to make peace with Hitler (if he makes the final version) will have disastrous results.", "Combining various types of firepower (e.g.: ranged weapons plus cavalry) will have a cumulative effect in battle", "The tech tree will not be split into eras, so once you've invented a technology, it's yours for good." (WTF?)

I don't think we should take anything in that article too seriously...

[The diplomat]

That article is very sloppy.

The very first sentence: "Sid Meier's masterpiece Civilization is considered by many to be the granddaddy of the real-time strategy genre."

Apparently, the writer does not even know the difference between real-time strategy and turn-based strategy.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by The diplomat
The very first sentence: "Sid Meier's masterpiece Civilization is considered by many to be the granddaddy of the real-time strategy genre."

Actually, that's probably the one thing he got right. The first RTS titles were very much inspired by Civilization (in fact, Sid originally intended Civ to be a RT game ) The idea of empires placed on a map, building cities/bases, expanding their territory and waging war, and things like resource collection, the tech tree and ages, improvements and wonders, fog of war, etc... those are all thing that are now the cornerstones of RTS but were first seen on a computer in Civ. Civilization *is* indeed seen as the grandfather (not founder) of RTS. But you have to be a real old fart to know that

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Locutus


Actually, that's probably the one thing he got right. The first RTS titles were very much inspired by Civilization (in fact, Sid originally intended Civ to be a RT game ) The idea of empires placed on a map, building cities/bases, expanding their territory and waging war, and things like resource collection, the tech tree and ages, improvements and wonders, fog of war, etc... those are all thing that are now the cornerstones of RTS but were first seen on a computer in Civ. Civilization *is* indeed seen as the grandfather (not founder) of RTS. But you have to be a real old fart to know that

I am an Old Fart and well thanks fer helping me know this

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Locutus
"Trying to make peace with Hitler (if he makes the final version) will have disastrous results.",

I have to tell ya and no I dont think I have Jewish roots except through my Lord Jesus that having to put Hitler in a game is perhaps inappropriate
I know that many Generals have done attrocities but for real Adolph Hitler doesnt need to be in this game

Bruce K. Cronkite A.K.A. Grandpa Troll

[Alex]

I love the "tech tree is not split into eras" part. It just doesn't make any sense.

[Trifna]

Thanks for the article. Perfect or not, I like what I read


Grandpa Troll:
Don't worry, you're not an old fart. You're an old troll.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Alex
I love the "tech tree is not split into eras" part. It just doesn't make any sense.

Ok

as stated above I aint an Old Fart but an Old Troll

ok what is the difference that you are speaking of?

I am simply asking what is wrong splitting into eras?

I mean you couldnt make airplanes if you had discovered engines parts?

or some sort of science to allow you to possess knowlege?

or am I just so far behind in the learning curve?

Please help an old worn old Grandpa Troll understand the arguements / points / counter -points of this what you describe?

Gramps

[Wise Ass]

well, I can see it from a customizability (new word) standpoint that instead of being limited to just 4 eras you now can just put everything in one. There were always complaints that there was no way to add another era in Civ3. In addition to that now you won't have to research techs you don't want in order to advance, you're pretty much only required to research what you want/need from the way that it sounds.

[Adagio]

(...) so once you've invented a technology, it's yours for good

Ehhhmmm... yeah? In what games has it been possible to 'forget' a tech after inventing it?

[Donegeal]

Originally posted by Wise Ass
well, I can see it from a customizability (new word) standpoint that instead of being limited to just 4 eras you now can just put everything in one. There were always complaints that there was no way to add another era in Civ3. In addition to that now you won't have to research techs you don't want in order to advance, you're pretty much only required to research what you want/need from the way that it sounds.

You know you could just put the "Not required to advance to next Age" tag on almost everything and you wouldn't have ages anymore.

[Alex]

Originally posted by Grandpa Troll

Ok

as stated above I aint an Old Fart but an Old Troll

ok what is the difference that you are speaking of?

I am simply asking what is wrong splitting into eras?

I mean you couldnt make airplanes if you had discovered engines parts?

or some sort of science to allow you to possess knowlege?

or am I just so far behind in the learning curve?

Please help an old worn old Grandpa Troll understand the arguements / points / counter -points of this what you describe?

Gramps

Sorry, Grandpa. I should have quoted that full part. The text says:

"The tech tree will not be split into eras, so once you've invented a technology, it's yours for good."

This just doesn't make sense, as Locutus and Adagio have pointed out.

[Shogun Gunner]

Originally posted by Adagio

(...) so once you've invented a technology, it's yours for good

Ehhhmmm... yeah? In what games has it been possible to 'forget' a tech after inventing it?

Agreed that in games, that makes no sense.

In real life, it has happened with some civilizations... the Chinese for example, rediscovered many ideas/technologies the Europeans brought despite China inventing/discovering the very same things generations previously.

Again, bad idea for a game, I would think.

[Gen. Atkinson]

You can institute any type of government that you desire including democracy, totalitarian regime, conscription, emancipation, etc. If you're having a hard time understanding why Communism failed, give it a go in Civ IV and see for yourself.

Communism failed in Russia, not entirely in the rest of the world. The idea is still out there, and a number of countries still practice communsim.
This is silly, as I usually play as a communist state, (until I discover fascism), and it works quite well as a government system.
Emanicapation? As a government?
Conscription is not a government, just a way to increase military.
Whoever wrote this article obviously has seen(not played) the previous games, read some reviews, and these forums, and made stuff up.