New XP announced

[brianshapiro]

jog, for scenarios ... so if you play WWII germans you dont start off by declaring peace

[Panag]

NEW SCREENSHOTS

hi ,

all the screenshots in this thread > http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...20#post2004424

have a nice day

[The Templar]

Originally posted by player1


It's probably an editor feature.

Needed to make scenarios such as Axis vs Allies.

Nah, all you need for scenarios like Axis and Allies are two civs - one named 'axis' and one named 'allies'. You can use the remainer civs to add in neutrals and bit players.

Sort of like cold war can have two civs - NATO and Warsaw Pact. Then toss in Peoples' Republic of China for fun.

Locked alliances just isn't that big of a deal. In fact, if you wanted to do something with all of the allies instead of just a single Allies civ, half the fun would be the Soviets turning on the Allies. A locked alliance would preclude all of those exciting counterfactual histories.

[CrONoS]

Dominae:
You think the same thing than me.
But, I'm sure I'll be the first to buy this expansion.

See ya

[Panag]

Originally posted by The Templar


Nah, all you need for scenarios like Axis and Allies are two civs - one named 'axis' and one named 'allies'. You can use the remainer civs to add in neutrals and bit players.

Sort of like cold war can have two civs - NATO and Warsaw Pact. Then toss in Peoples' Republic of China for fun.

Locked alliances just isn't that big of a deal. In fact, if you wanted to do something with all of the allies instead of just a single Allies civ, half the fun would be the Soviets turning on the Allies. A locked alliance would preclude all of those exciting counterfactual histories.

hi ,

now that would be to easy would it not , ....

the axis was made up of several nations , so where the allies , ...

the same in the cold war , ....

at last we shall be able to make a real scenario with up to 32 civs

have a nice day

[Dominae]

Originally posted by cronos_qc
Dominae:
You think the same thing than me.

No, you think the same thing as me!

But, I'm sure I'll be the first to buy this expansion.

Sadly, this may happen to me too. I'm a weak weak person.


Dominae

[Quasar1011]

Originally posted by Admiral PJ

I hope some improvements or units reduce the problems of disasters, like granaries stopping famines, weather satellites stopping hurricanes/tornados (interesting idea)

A weather satellite wouldn't stop a hurricane or tornado. But for game purposes, building a "National Weather Service Small Wonder" could lessen the effects of these storms (blizzards & floods too).

It would be cool to see some weather effects on the maps. Anybody play Europa Universalis , and see the northern provinces turn white from snow in the winter months?

Of course, back in Civ 2 you could add 11 technologies. I usually added "Weather Control", making it the tech you needed to get in order to build spaceship modules.
And somebody had made a cool lightning bolt, so I made it a unit, like a missile, available with the tech.

[kring]

Originally posted by cronos_qc
MadMannixx :
they refused to put fondamentalism because of 09/11/2001 and Fascism for the "same" reason I think...

The reason Fundamentalism was left out is simple. It was too good; this according to Firaxis when questioned about why no Fundamentalism. They may have tweaked it so that it isn't so great.

[Quasar1011]

In Civ 2, Fundamentalism was THE government to be once you'd researched all the techs you needed. The main reason was that there was absolutely no unhappiness. But in the real world, I think this is not the case. Perhaps a Fundie government would stamp out corruption, but not unhappiness, from a game-play point of view. Thoughts?

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Quasar1011

And somebody had made a cool lightning bolt, so I made it a unit, like a missile, available with the tech.

Hmm, that's not a bad idea at all.

Here's hoping for improved editor functions and scripting so that all sorts of variations can be introduced.

As for fundamentalism, I'm not sure how different it could be under the current method for defining governments. Also under the heading of improved editor, it would be nice to have actual control over certain numeric values in the governments section - like corruption and a way to set what a tile bonus is (number and resource type).

[Jon Shafer]

Government parameters are too restrictive. Why have Communism when you can have Democracy? Why have Monarchy when you have Republic?

Certain things need to be added to help balance out the government types as they exist right now. I'm hoping they'll make them more detailed and thus, give the new government(s) more usefulness, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Jaybe]

With a Fundie government you have no expressed unhappiness, similar to how war weariness is handled now in Civ3. The real unhappiness level is not revealed to you until you've got real problems, even while you are still in the Fundie government.

Elegant, but I don't believe it will be implemented due to playability concerns. People just don't appreciate unpleasant surprises!

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Trip
Government parameters are too restrictive. Why have Communism when you can have Democracy? Why have Monarchy when you have Republic?

Certain things need to be added to help balance out the government types as they exist right now. I'm hoping they'll make them more detailed and thus, give the new government(s) more usefulness, but I'm not holding my breath.

I don't know about monarchy, but if you have a religious civ, communism is great for those long modern era wars where weariness takes its toll even if you have police in every city, women's sufferage, all 8 luxuries, etc. If you're not religious these other governments are of marginal usefulness given the periods of anarchy.

What we have now are really two governments: wartime (low war weariness/martial law) and peacetime (tile bonus). Each type has 2 levels. My mod adds a third peacetime government (to offset despotism): Neoliberalism - which has tile bonus and communal corruption but lacks all the bonuses of democracy (work rate, immune to propaganda).

What I would like (but you're right in saying not to hold my breath) is the ability to say offset the communal corruption benefit of neoliberalism by upping the overall level of corruption and the empire-wide amount of unrest. Now that could lead to some interesting government choices. However, I would guess that the reason the governments are so close to each other is to make AI choice more rational. Who knows if the AI could deal as effectively with interesting government choices? (Well, I guess Soren does)

[Panag]

Originally posted by Trip
Government parameters are too restrictive. Why have Communism when you can have Democracy? Why have Monarchy when you have Republic?

Certain things need to be added to help balance out the government types as they exist right now. I'm hoping they'll make them more detailed and thus, give the new government(s) more usefulness, but I'm not holding my breath.

hi ,

it would be nice for scenarios and overall gameplay if certain civ could only have this or that type of governement and nothing else , ....

have a nice day

[Aias]

Thanks Sid! Just when I was starting to get burnt out on PTW! More time down the drain!

I want more units and more governments! And a 'Non-Aggression Pact" in diplomacy would be nice!

Hopefully all of these new civs can be used with the older ones!