Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Blaze of Glory!!

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Rhothaerill

    They won't backstab each other. By the tone of the posts in the main forum I can practically guarantee it. MZ may be many things but I believe he is a man of his word and he expressed abhorrence to the thought of breaking it to betray the alliance they had with ND.
    I agree - it would seem the only two options left are the shared victory or Vox at the UN.

    And now that have slept on it - I am more than convinced that we stay peace loving to the end. There clearly seems to be a collective will to carry Vox Controli into the next game. Vox's reputation was damaged earlier on for some of the stuff we did - most notably the attack on GS and the huge kerfuffle after that.

    Heading into the next game, I think it would be good if people remembered Vox as that peaceful little builder and scientific civ, as opposed to a back-stabbing gang of immortals.
    Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war .... aw, forget that nonsense. Beer, please.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Beta
      Wow = what a dilemma. Winning by the UN vote is almost hypocritical after I have been so vocal against the 'shared victory' scenario. But to be honest - a UN victory for Vox is better for demo game evolution than a 'shared victory' by GoW and ND.

      Or at least I think it is. To be honest - it has been a long and hot day - and I just finished a bottle of wine. But I sort of agree with Jon - war was never our strong point.
      I still dont understand the fierce opposition to a shared victory. Ya sure there is only one "winner" via the in game victory conditions but the point of Demo games is to play against humans. When playing SP against an AI I agree 100%. But if you make an early ally and the two of you carry it thru the game, are loyal to one another and pop out on top why the hell not declare a joinbt victory. The US did that with all of our allies in WWII, why not in CIV?

      I think it just leads to more backstabbing and distrust which leads to a lot of the bullshiit some of us have seen lately in the C3C intersite game.

      CIV Iv is going to include a "cooperative mode" where you can enter a "locked alliance" with an ally and share each others wonder benefits, and other stuff, I cant remember right.

      Cooperative play is in the game engine!

      Think this over because I just don't get it, and I dont really want Vox to have a non shared victory agenda, its just not Voxian to me.
      Last edited by conmcb25; October 13, 2005, 11:23.
      *"Winning is still the goal, and we cannot win if we lose (gawd, that was brilliant - you can quote me on that if you want. And con - I don't want to see that in your sig."- Beta

      Comment

      Working...
      X