Should/will players be allowed to build cities on mountain hexes?

[Adalbertus]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
So even in terms of realism there is nothing wrong with being unable to build cities "on mountain top". Just build it on the flat land nearby.

[Harovan]

I am not sure why you are winking, but my point is, that there is not always flat land nearby. Mountains tend to build large ranges. And I want large ranges of mountains to be unsettled. Just like large ranges of deserts, tundras, jungles, swamps or whatever.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Darkstar

Sava, yes. Yes you have. The hexes just happen to have been deformed into 4 sided figures commonly called squares.

actually, I think Civ would be better with hexes...


hexes > squares

[Adalbertus]

You'll need way larger homogeneous areas than in Civ3 to work like that - in Civ3, it is usally a strip of two to four tiles which you do not get under control by culture. This is not enough room for an elaborate strategy but simply annoying.

As for larger areas containing much-needed resources, I see the problem that it becomes as much a monopoly as within your borders. Have control->have resources->have better control. And AI keeping to send a steady stream to you which you can easily destroy.

[Tattila the Hun]

Originally posted by sophist

That would basically counteract the purpose of anarchy keeping you from switching civics too often. It would also ignore the reality of revolutions and governments that come into existence in order to facilitate corruption.

I've never understood anarchy when switching from Rep to Dem. I mean, things like that don't happen as revolutions. They just gradually are incorporated into laws and such...

But, how is it in Civ4? Are there still Communism, Democracy and the likes, to choose from, or does the form of your government depend on sliders and such? 78% Police state, anyone?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Tattila the Hun


But, how is it in Civ4? Are there still Communism, Democracy and the likes, to choose from, or does the form of your government depend on sliders and such? 78% Police state, anyone?

It's called civics now. The way it works is that you will have a multitude of different possible combinations of options to truly customize your own government, rather than being stuck with only four to five premade, generic government choices.

[sabrewolf]

there was a long discussion about "squares, hexes, octagons" here: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=94361

i personally also would have favoured them

(history line 1914-1918 was my favourite TBS war game)

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Sava



actually, I think Civ would be better with hexes...


hexes > squares

[Ecthy]

Hexes suck, you can only either move east-west or north-south, not both, octogons would be cool.

[Martinus]

Originally posted by Verenti
A thought on Corruption:

Every time you change (or in Civ4, Shuffle up) your gov't it should nullify corruption for X turns.

Corruption has been axed in Civ 4.

Instead, maintenance of city buildings costs more, the farther the city is from your capital/the more numerous your cities are.

[Martinus]

Originally posted by Ecthy
Hexes suck, you can only either move east-west or north-south, not both, octogons would be cool.

You do realise it's impossible to build a complete map model (with no gaps) with octagons only?

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by Ecthy
Hexes suck, you can only either move east-west or north-south, not both, octogons would be cool.

octagons cannot be implemented as a base tile form

	
	
	
   __
 /     \
|       |
|       |
 \___/

and yes, hexes are limited to 6 directions instead of 8, but the nice thing about hexes is that the distances to the next tile is always the same, while in squares/diamonds it is distance 1 to N, E, W, S and SQRT(2) for NE, NW, SW, SE

but that is irrelevant because civ4 is still square-based


edit: that thing took me so long that i cross-posted

[Adalbertus]

Martinus, I guess you can do so in a non-flat geometry.

[Ecthy]

You can fill in the gaps between octagons with mini-squares.

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by Ecthy
You can fill in the gaps between octagons with mini-squares.

hey, why not triangles?

no seriously, varying tile sizes would be

a) difficult to implement and
b) people wouldn't get it and then expect non-tile-based (like RTS) which would be baaad