Destruction of Cities

[Rasputin]

very bad man

[Vince278]

Thats my good side.

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


They added that in C3C.

Great, sounds like there´s a good chance then that it´s in Civ IV, too

Maybe I should also buy C3C and PtW before Civ IV comes out if I can find it for a low price.

[Vince278]

Check out Call to Power 2 while you're at it.

[Kuciwalker]

Don't. Not only is the game bad, but it's cripplingly buggy IME.

[leunames]

Originally posted by Alexander01


Well, they could always eliminate the redudnancies among civs... though that way the Romans would have no Londinium. The Byzantines would have Constantinople, but the Greeks, Romans, and Turks couldn't, unless they conquered it...

Hmm... maybe just in a scenario...

Of course, the slight problem, in Constantinople's case, is that the Greeks founded the city, while Constantine transformed the city and transferred the Roman Empire's capital from Rome to Constantinople. Thus in civ 3 i believe the Romans had Byzantium, the Byzantines possessed Constantinople, and the Ottomans ruled Istanbul.

Originally posted by Alexander01


Well, Istanbul is simply Constantinople in Turkish. It's a Turkish "I" prefix plus the main consonantal trunk of the word.

Examples:

Constantinople --> Istanbul (I + Stan + Ple)
Smyrna --> Izmir (I + Smyr)

I have always understood it to be simply a Turkish adaptation of the Greek eis ten polin, which means in the city, or to the city (I don't know Greek, sorry). To the Greeks, and probably the Turks, Constantinople was THE city. Therefore Istanbul is just the phonetic result of the Turks picking up on the Greek colloquialism.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Don't. Not only is the game bad, but it's cripplingly buggy IME.

True, but its better with the AoM mod that just appeared on Apolyton.

[Paddy]

patches - smatches....

buggy programmes way way to many of them

[Vince278]

Almost all of them.

Of course, nobody has had me as a player tester. I excelled at finding bugs for the government. I already found three issues with the new AoM mod for CtP2.

[Paddy]

good man

/me sends word to Sid

"Sid, ring Vince NOW!!!"

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by Vince278
Check out Call to Power 2 while you're at it.

No need to,
I already have it since it came out

And yes, this game rocks
(well, it really would if it were combined with certain things from Civ 3)

[Addled Platypus]

would this be a good or bad idea:

Include selling the city to another civ?, maybe even to the enemy civ, if there is one

yea or nay

[Paddy]

good

certainly add an interesting curve to diplomacy in pbem games

[Proteus_MST]

Should be easy to implement within the Civ - Diplomacy System we know (assuming it hasn´t changed too much from Civ III to IV ).

Just "I give You" [name of the City] and "I want" [Gold/Ress whatever]

And yes, it wouldn´t be a bad idea.

[ZargonX]

Don't know if this has been mentioned elsewhere, but I would like to see the razing of cities be tied to their size. Ok, I can understand wiping out a size 1 or 2 city in the span of a turn (it's basically just a big village), but erasing all evidence of a size 20 city in one fell swoop? Not only is this unrealistic in general, but it also gives rise to some terrible tactics. There is often no incentive to keep your opponents cities in most cases later in the game; you just raze them instantly and move on. This eliminates any chance for them to retake them, and cuts out a lot of strategic options. And should there not be consequences for wiping out the great cities of the world? I would say eliminating a couple of million people would probably have an effect greater than just leaving a pile of rubble behind...