Originally posted by Robert Plomp
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Dance of Civilizations [Diplo Game] [Organization Thread Pt1]
Collapse
X
-
Ok peeps, I'm leaving for Rome now.
that means that if anything happens to the server I can do anything.
Russia and Byzantium: please give each other enough time to play the turns, I can't pause the game.
If needed we'll just revert back when I'm home. There are many autosaves.
I have made a score-chart-update in post 1 again. (bottom of the post 1 post)
speak to all of you on monday!Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
Comment
-
at ther risk of the usual OOC attacks that turn into in game threats..
Is this type of "War" that never occured the usual in Civ 4...
It seems from my experience that most of the wars are more of a run away and hide till someone gets more modern weoponry.
Is their ever battles using peoples Skills as tacticians and stategists or is the onyl strategy to grow big and more technologiical than your enemies.
I not saying it right or worng. but it certianly makes for me a rathe boring war when not even one blow was hit on an eneny soldier.
do wars ever last longer than one city beign attacked.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Korea (DoC) View Postat ther risk of the usual OOC attacks that turn into in game threats..
Is this type of "War" that never occured the usual in Civ 4...
It seems from my experience that most of the wars are more of a run away and hide till someone gets more modern weoponry.
Is their ever battles using peoples Skills as tacticians and stategists or is the onyl strategy to grow big and more technologiical than your enemies.
I not saying it right or worng. but it certianly makes for me a rathe boring war when not even one blow was hit on an eneny soldier.
do wars ever last longer than one city beign attacked.
But who knows the game is still far from the modern times and who knows. Maybe someone will decide to grow a pair and attack Persia India or England.The civ formerly known as The Holy Empire of Britannia/dutch
Comment
-
I'm sure if either side had an advantage in the build up an attack would have happened. It may be "boring" but it is certainly reasonable to not want to take large risks and likely defeat just to spice things up for the audience.
While no shots were fired, there was an impressive arming on both sides. If Korea wants a "real" war, then by all means you have plenty of neighbors.Captain of Team Apolyton - ISDG 2012
When I was younger I thought curfews were silly, but now as the daughter of a young woman, I appreciate them. - Rah
Comment
-
Originally posted by OzzyKP View PostI'm sure if either side had an advantage in the build up an attack would have happened. It may be "boring" but it is certainly reasonable to not want to take large risks and likely defeat just to spice things up for the audience.
While no shots were fired, there was an impressive arming on both sides. If Korea wants a "real" war, then by all means you have plenty of neighbors.
I want a strategy game..
Obviously civilisation is not a strategy game.
having played many board games over the years such as Avalon Hills collection of great masterpieces, i hav ebeen spoilt and would love to find a MP game on computer that allows the same level of thought to be put into each attack.
Comment
-
I understand the points being made about the war.
However, we do need to get the facts right. There was a real hot war between Greece and Byzantium a while back, with multiple turns of combat, stacks being destroyed, a clever Greek strategy of a two pronged attack on Byzantine cities far apart etc. It was storied.
It is also not true to say that there weren't casulties in this war. Five ships have been sunk at the latest count.
Its also not true to say that this isn't a strategy game which doesn't allow a serious level of thought being put into every attack. Exactly the opposite. Its the fact that both Russia and Byzantium put a huge level of thought into every attack that meant most of them didn't happen! It was a real 'trench warfare' - there is a 50% differential between attacking and defending once both armies are fortified - so it is quite possible to be in a position when it would be 90% chance of destruction or more for whichever side attacked. So what we had was a military stalemate, which then forced new diplomatic initiatives. Very historically accurate to lots of situations.
All that said, however, I do agree that there is a very strong in-built tendency to conservatism in the game. With 14 other players, and rules limiting what benefit can come from war (a couple of cities), looked at purely in civ strength/score terms there is good reason to worry that even if you win a war, you may find that you have in the process fallen behind your rivals. It affects us all.
Of course the 'real' scoring (voting) system for the game means that in fact being active and fighting wars does you lots of good, even if it weakens you civ in-game. This might be helped by (a) removing the scores from sight in-game, since they have a really insituous effect making people worry about where they are on that ranking ever time you log in and (b) you could remove any component of in-game score from the real score, though it is only 25% at the moment.
(And yes I hope the war will be over soon and we can go back to 11 hrs and I can play when i want. However we should be very pleased that compared to BtP there have been NO arguments about missed turns, double moves etc. This is a massive benefit.)Βασιλεύς Βασιλέων Βασιλεύων Βασιλευόντων
Comment
Comment