Anyone Want Civ 2.5?

[DrSpike]

In civ2 micro is making tweaks to your cities, and moving non-combat units around. I think people who complain there is too much micro need to play a different game.

[alva]

Originally posted by cyclotron7


Why would I be interested in de-evolution? Civ3 is a big step up from Civ2, IMO.

Nope, you certainly not alone

I must say I wouldn't mind a public works either..

What micromanagement?

Caravans, diplomats, spies

[RGBVideo]

Civ3 is a big step up from Civ2, IMO.

I agree. It was a great leap backwards.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Tuomerehu
I agree. It was a great leap backwards.

How can a step up be a leap backwards?

Methinks you're trying a bit hard to be witty...

[Dauphin]

Civ3 improved a few things, but on the whole it cut out and reduced too much of the game.


I really don't like how the tech tree works.

[DrSpike]

Tech caps blow.....that is for sure. Strangely I came around to the way the tech leader is penalised though.......for SP at least.

[War4ever]

anyone but infogames and activiision can give it a whirl

[Centauri18]

They should bring back farms, even though they seem have to integrated the supermarket into the Marketplace. And the civs need more unique units. And certain civilizations had female military leaders, like the ancient Britons.
Also, we could use another age, perhaps? CTP and Test of Time got it almost right. Technology should not just stop all of a sudden ith the last techs Civ 3 had. And we have those kinds of capabilities and we aren't even close to building a colony ship, or even a mission to Mars.
And that's another thing. Going to the moon doesn't mean you're pretty much immediately ready to go to and colonize another planet. The Mars Project ought to be a Wonder right at the beginning of a Future Era. This new Era would bring technology to get rid of most of the leftover pollution
I know I'm not talking about Civ2.5, but perhaps about Civ4.
I wasn't sure people would respond to this as a new thread. But if you want me to, I'll put in in a new thread.
Just thought I'd put a couple of my opinions out there.

[Centauri18]

And I happen to enjoy steamrolling the AI, but to each his own. I happen to enjoy conquering the world in Civ games.

[RGBVideo]

Methinks you're trying a bit hard to be witty...

Ooops. So it seems. Sorry.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by DrSpike
Tech caps blow.....that is for sure. Strangely I came around to the way the tech leader is penalised though.......for SP at least.

I haven't payed much attention to that. How does it work?

[DrSpike]

Well you cannot research an advance in any less than 4 turns, now matter how many beakers you produce.

Also, the leader is penalised through the amount of beakers needed to research a new tech being higher than what the second person to research it will experience and so on......rather than fixed beaker costs as in other civ games.

[Gatekeeper]

Hmm ... I think I might prefer fixed beaker costs over the tech leader being penalized for being *too* good. Sounds politically correct to me.

Gatekeeper

[DrSpike]

Well for MP the case for it is bad.......but although I didn't like it at first for SP it works quite well.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Gatekeeper
Hmm ... I think I might prefer fixed beaker costs over the tech leader being penalized for being *too* good. Sounds politically correct to me.

Gatekeeper

Its true in reality.

The first nation to discover a technology often does it by trial and error, whereas the second and third (etc..) nations know it is possible and roughly how to acheive it. A technology that has been around for ages is very easy to emulate.

I would prefer to see the ability to steal and trade technology removed from the game, and replaced with "assistance" and "technology spies", which reduce the cost of developing a technology. Its more realistic - its not like you can walk into a nation and steal the technological secrets. Normally you would steal plans or working models from which you glean how to build your own version of the technology.