Tweet
Dis, from a Civ point of view, fresh water should be trivial at aqueduct tech. Some of our ancient civs did a great job aqueducting water vast distances.
-
-Darkstar
(Knight Errant Of Spam) -
Dis: I like the game. Maybe I was expecting to hate it, so when I actually liked it, perhaps the feeling was magnified. Still, you have to have an open mind about gaming to enjoy that sort of thing. Civ it's not!I've been on these boards for a long time and I still don't know what to think when it comes to you -- FrantzX, December 21, 2001
"Yin": Your friendly, neighborhood negative cosmic force.Comment
-
some of us like micomanaging workers...Originally posted by Odin
My worst fears:
1. too much micromanagement (like having to move aroung 100 workers individually becaise the auto-worker AI is idiotic)
2. ICS
3. the AI civs marching through MY territory again, and again, and again
4. not enough diplomatic options
though a system like in ctp2 wouldn't be too bad. I just felt it was poorly implemented in ctp2. I can't explain what was wrong exactly. But I just didn't like it.Comment
-
it was fun for a little while, I just have no motivation to play it after the first time.Originally posted by yin26
Dis: I like the game. Maybe I was expecting to hate it, so when I actually liked it, perhaps the feeling was magnified. Still, you have to have an open mind about gaming to enjoy that sort of thing. Civ it's not!Comment
-
My worst fear for CivIV is the game crashes all the time
It was an ok game, but it did have some bugs (well, some peoeple called them features) that made the game annoying at some parts of the gameOriginally posted by Alex
come on, simgolf is not a game THAT bad... it is mildly fun and entertaining for a while... i'd say for five minutes... or ten.
The game could have survived a longer time if they had included MP of some sort. Hot seat would be perfectly fine where you could start a tournament with a couple of buddies, or just a one on one...This space is empty... or is it?Comment
-
In Civ4, a player should not HAVE to make 10-15 cities on a standard-sized map just to win the game on a decent difficulty level.
Ya ought to be able to win with Venice, and a few far-flung colonies like Rodos, Candia, and Corfu...now that would really be neat.Let Them Eat CakeComment
-
Originally posted by Mace
In Civ4, a player should not HAVE to make 10-15 cities on a standard-sized map just to win the game on a decent difficulty level.
Ya ought to be able to win with Venice, and a few far-flung colonies like Rodos, Candia, and Corfu...now that would really be neat.
Comment
-
Hoping for extensive modding possibilities
My worst fear is that Civ 4's modding capabilities don't go far enough to enable the removal of whatever worst fears there are out there.
I hope for a modding flexibility that (after getting used to the tools) lets experienced modders even change the gameplay or add depth to features like combat or diplomacy to any demanded extent.
I don't believe Firaxis or any other game company can release a game with such a complex topic to the satisfaction of all the aficionados right out of the box.
So the modding issue is by far the most important to me.
My ultimate dream is the possibility of modular or plug-in modding. So that you could customize your gameplay by including or excluding features.
For example choosing between several different economy models of different depth and impact or even different mechanics.
Or crime plug-ins for fighting the enemies of the state within your civ not only foreign countries's armies.Comment
-
Suggest a mechanism that can be added to the game by which this can be made at all possible. Its a bit of a ridiculous wish in my opinion. 10-15 cities isn't even ICS.Originally posted by Mace
In Civ4, a player should not HAVE to make 10-15 cities on a standard-sized map just to win the game on a decent difficulty level.
Ya ought to be able to win with Venice, and a few far-flung colonies like Rodos, Candia, and Corfu...now that would really be neat.Comment
-
As if Venice alone could win a world war
I will never understand why some people on Apolyton find you so clever. You're predictable, mundane, and a google-whore and the most observant of us all know this. Your battles of "wits" rely on obscurity and whenever you fail to find something sufficiently obscure, like this, you just act like a 5 year old. Congratulations, molly.
Asher on molly bloomComment
-
As if people never win 1CCs or 5CCs (not that I have ever tried such a thing).Comment
-
Originally posted by Datajack Franit
As if Venice alone could win a world war
A courtesan or culture war. Or a shoplifting war- they could give back all that Byzantine loot.
Still I think it would make for a good scenario- Venice, the Hanseatic League, the Low Countries, Florence, Byzantium, the Fatimids and oh, .....Mali.
Vive la liberte. Noor Inayat Khan, Dachau.
...patriotism is not enough. I must have no hatred or bitterness towards anyone. Edith Cavell, 1915Comment
-
That's not the point, IMHO. The target of Civ should be to let you build a Civilization in a way that's credible enough.Originally posted by Jaybe
As if people never win 1CCs or 5CCs (not that I have ever tried such a thing).
There are Science Fiction books about mutant with powerful mind that take control of the whole world. That could be an interesting scenario in extreme modding, but it's not Civ in its historical root.
It's funny, but not realistic, that a single empire can conquer all the world. Maybe today a nuclear powered country as USA can try to military conquer all the globe, but I don't think they can win, or at least win in a way not so bloody to put USA back a couple of centuries about life status, health, culture, etc.
They can influence the world (again, I'm using USA only as an example, please don't start flame wars pro/against USA, China and so on) on many levels: language, pop culture, scientific research, etc. and if Civ try to model this "alternative weapons" that's fine for me. Still would be nice to se in a Civ game that building a Switzerland civ or an European Union is possible without a Chinese o USA or ____ (put any Civ empire here) ____ feel the urge to burn them to the ground as the more efficient path to the victory.
Well, well, let's wait and see what Civ IV can bring to us for strategy.
"We are reducing all the complexity of billions of people over 6000 years into a Civ box. Let me say: That's not only a PkZip effort....it's a real 'picture to Jpeg heavy loss in translation' kind of thing."
- Admiral NaismithComment
-
World unification will probably happen one day, but it will likely happen as things have happened in the EU. That could be part of the "conquest" victory in Civ: uniting the world in a federation of nations (substantially under your influence, naturally).Tutto nel mondo è burlaComment
-
I cannot suggest any un-fun mechanism to allow this. Perhaps there is no solution other than to simply go for a cultural win in games where you have but , say, 1-5 cities.Originally posted by Senethro
Suggest a mechanism that can be added to the game by which this can be made at all possible. Its a bit of a ridiculous wish in my opinion. 10-15 cities isn't even ICS.
And what in the world do you mean by, "ridiculous" wish? That is what every Civ player has wanted from the beginning of Civ. A Civ game that is as FLEXIBLE as it is fun. To focus on building a civilization, NOT necessarily an empire. Big distinction there.
If you want an empire, by all means do it. But it should not be a gameplay necessity for a non-cultural victory.Let Them Eat CakeComment
Comment