What do we miss from earlier Civ games?

[badams52]

Originally posted by Master Zen
Civ2:

- I think the way HP and FP was handled in the Civ2 combat system was better than in Civ3.

Probably the biggest thing lacking from Civ 3 combat.

- Ability to give units (trade wouldve been great)

OTHER

- The combat system of Panzer General

Trading (giving) units would be a great way to give the smaller civ a chance in war.

Combat system of Panzer General eh? Now that might be a little hard to do. This is a history sim, not a war sim.

The SMAC style unit creation could be easily used for a Civ game. For example, you would start with a basic "foot soldier". For armament you could have different subtipes like arrows (Bow, Longbow, Crossbow), spears (Spears, Pike, Lance), later firearms (Musket, Rifle, Assault Rifle). Then you would also select armor, and engine (this would be say, Horse, Car, Truck)
etc etc etc

actually it just might be able to work well. And for the UUs, you have something special like the Romans get a special type of shield which gives them a greater defense in the ancient era. At first I thought the unit workshop would take away from the overall idea behind civ, but I think the way you describe it MZ would allow it to work and make it even more enjoyable.

[Gramphos]

Most missing feature: The news headlines of Civ1 (as yuo state in the first post)

[Panag]

hi ,

random events , floods , fires , etc , ....

have a nice day

[Mr. President]

Random events were good. Call to Power II had those momentous events, like being the first to circumnavigate the world - nice touch! And Alpha Centauri's depth.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by badams52
Trading (giving) units would be a great way to give the smaller civ a chance in war.

If you could sell advanced weaponry without giving the associated technology it would be extremely useful. You could deliberately becomes an arms trader to technologically weaker civs. It serves as a protection, they won't bite the hand that feeds them.

[Panag]

Originally posted by Big Crunch


If you could sell advanced weaponry without giving the associated technology it would be extremely useful. You could deliberately becomes an arms trader to technologically weaker civs. It serves as a protection, they won't bite the hand that feeds them.

hi ,

wanna bet the AI civ's shall be stupid enough to do so at some point , ......

we have been asking for a long time for unit trading , who knows , maybe in the next XP , .....

have a nice day

[CapTVK]

Originally posted by Big Crunch


If you could sell advanced weaponry without giving the associated technology it would be extremely useful. You could deliberately becomes an arms trader to technologically weaker civs. It serves as a protection, they won't bite the hand that feeds them.

That ain't new, you can do that already in Civ2MP.

[DrSpike]

Yeah unit gifting has been around for a long time........though BC probably wants to attach some strings.

[Dauphin]

I meant that I want it in Civ3.

[DrSpike]

Didn't your mum ever tell you "I wants, don't get"

[Dauphin]

I lived in the US at a young age, my phraseology is forever scared with childish rudeness.

[Inverse Icarus]

in one game of civ2 i gave babylon (an AI) some tanks, and it said "your gift has inspired babylonian scientisits!" then "Babylonians discover Automobile!" or whatever.

interesting.

[badams52]

And that is why I never gave weapons as gifts in Civ 2

[Panag]

hi ,

a "cheat" would be nice , great for creating scenarios , when play testing your scen you can make the needed adjustments at ones

have a nice day

[Sirotnikov]

I think that the land improvements should be both unit wise and public works.

For instance, you can only use workers up to a certain age (or technology) and then you get public works - but it only works inside your borders, and your workers become military engineers.