Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I consider Diplo guiding past forts a cheat

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    <center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
    <img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
    </font><font size=1>Originally posted by Alexander's Horse on 07-24-2000 12:13 AM</font>

    The whole point of fortifications, even in ancient times, was that they provided a point from which defenders could dominate the surrounding terrain in relative safety, particularly preventing movement.

    <img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

    But they didn't always succeed, that's the whole point.



    ------------------
    finbar
    Mono Rules!
    #33984591
    " ... and the following morning I should see the Boks wallop the Wallabies again?" - Havak
    "The only thing worse than being quoted in someone's sig is not being quoted in someone's sig." - finbar, with apologies to Oscar Wilde.

    Comment


    • #32
      No, they didn't always succeed. Of course those who use diplos, including me now, always succeed in getting past

      <font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Alexander's Horse (edited July 24, 2000).]</font>

      Comment


      • #33
        AH, thanks for explaining diplo-guiding. It never occurred to me to leave a dip planted on a square. He must be using the well-known "cloak of invisibility".

        Can the opponent see the dip, at least? Does it work with explorers too?

        As to the logic of it, I don't see it. Not to try and force too much reality on a game, but diplomats and spies *are* historically different. Diplomats operate more in the open and in cities. Spies are covert by nature and stealth is natural to them.

        Still, as long as it seems to be acceptable in game play, I will try it out sometime.

        ------------------
        Proud participant in GameLeague...

        Proud Warrior of the O.W.L. Alliance...
        Civ2 Demo Game #1 City-Planner, President, Historian
        Civ2 Demo Game #2 Minister of War,President, Minister of Trade, Vice President, City-Planner
        Civ2 Demo Game #3 President, Minister of War, President
        Civ2 Demo Game #4 Despot, City-Planner, Consul

        Comment


        • #34
          I have no problems with this.
          Just for the record,I don't consider it as a cheat.

          My life, my rules

          Comment


          • #35
            Just for the record, i consider this on par with building cities on Mountains.

            RAH
            It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
            RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O

            Comment


            • #36
              Come clean guys. You know its absurd. The only reason you allow it is because you like to use it.

              On the the other hand, there is the famous case of the German army which slipped through the Maginot line in the dead of night instead of going around it through Belgium and Luxembourg.....wait a minute!

              Comment


              • #37
                <center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
                <img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
                </font><font size=1>Originally posted by cavebear on 07-24-2000 01:03 PM</font>

                Can the opponent see the dip, at least?

                <img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

                Units can only "see" one square around them. Diplos can "see" two squares.



                ------------------
                finbar
                Mono Rules!
                #33984591
                " ... and the following morning I should see the Boks wallop the Wallabies again?" - Havak
                "The only thing worse than being quoted in someone's sig is not being quoted in someone's sig." - finbar, with apologies to Oscar Wilde.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Finbar, so units in fortress can only see to their limits of Zone Control when they scout around to back it up. That seems reasonable.

                  ------------------
                  Proud participant in GameLeague...

                  Proud Warrior of the O.W.L. Alliance...
                  Civ2 Demo Game #1 City-Planner, President, Historian
                  Civ2 Demo Game #2 Minister of War,President, Minister of Trade, Vice President, City-Planner
                  Civ2 Demo Game #3 President, Minister of War, President
                  Civ2 Demo Game #4 Despot, City-Planner, Consul

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    See the whole problem with ZOC is that it doesn't allow you to make movements that would allow you to be surrounded etc.....

                    That's because there's no attack power bonuses in Civ2 for flanking, or surrounding your enemy or attacking from 2 or 3 sides at once.

                    Anicent fortifications rarely attempted to wall off everything......theres only a few exceptions like the GW, but what they did do is put apporaching enenmies between a rock and a hard place. They either had to attack the fort, or approach at an angle that would allow them to be attacked from two sides or more at once, or go through a narrow passage etc.....

                    Thus the whole argument is flawed. The system of ZOC is messed up so why agrue about the rules of a piece of early 90s software?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      <center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
                      <img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
                      </font><font size=1>Originally posted by Alexander's Horse on 07-24-2000 08:14 PM</font>
                      Come clean guys. You know its absurd. The only reason you allow it is because you like to use it.

                      <img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

                      Well, I use it because it works... plus, people do it to me. If you want to stop this kind of thing, just build solid lines of defense instead of isolated forts

                      And just because it is absurd is no reason to diss it. Many things in Civ that we take for granted are absurd. Hmmmm, I just built the lighthouse in one of my costal cities, but a ship half way around the world won't get lost at sea because of it. That's one bright light
                      Keep on Civin'
                      RIP rah, Tony Bogey & Baron O

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Ming, as you say, I can do it too so it doesn't bother me that much. But I have about 30 years experience in wargaming and this is the kind of thing that really stuffs up a contest.

                        Reminds of the time when a friend and I agreed that units could advance after combat through ZOC in a board game (but then exert a ZOC when they got there ). It was fun while it lasted but we soon realised that it was distorting gameplay (making every battle an encirclement).

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Gee... that rule would really change your typical war game that uses ZOC's

                          One thing I have learned over the years with war games is that you have to take advantage of the rules of the specific game you are playing. Common sense or traditional rules have no place in it.
                          Keep on Civin'
                          RIP rah, Tony Bogey & Baron O

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            <center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
                            <img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
                            </font><font size=1>Originally posted by rah on 07-24-2000 03:40 PM</font>
                            Just for the record, i consider this on par with building cities on Mountains.

                            RAH
                            <img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

                            Except I know for a fact that AH is serious about this one but was joking us along about the mountain cities... but it does give him a way out



                            ------------------
                            *THE DEITY*
                            #8388924

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Man... I hope he was joking about the mountains city thing! That is a non issue.

                              I'm not a big fan of the fact that you can use a diplo or other units to move a full army past a zone of control... but it is allowed, and is an intergral part of the game. But, I can understand his wanting to discuss it. Mountain Cities... HA HA HA HA!
                              Keep on Civin'
                              RIP rah, Tony Bogey & Baron O

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Well my capital in the game with makeo, "Almighty" , is built on a mountain. I built it, so draw your own conclusions.

                                But I think you guys have a real blind spot on this guiding issue.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X