Tweet
What about cities that grow in tile size due to cultural expansion? You're going to get overlap there whether you like it or not. TechWins also brings up the idea that this will make it quite difficult for a civ that starts out on an island. On the world map, England and Japan will be at quite the disadvantage.
-
"Proletarier aller Länder, vereinigt euch!" -- Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels
"If you expect a kick in the balls and get a slap in the face, that's a victory." -- Irish proverb
Proud member of the Pink Knights of the Roundtable! -
Where did you read that a city's radius would grow with cultural expansion? I don't think that's going to be the case in Civ3.What about cities that grow in tile size due to cultural expansion? You're going to get overlap there whether you like it or not.However, it is difficult to believe that 2 times 2 does not equal 4; does that make it true? On the other hand, is it really so difficult simply to accept everything that one has been brought up on and that has gradually struck deep roots – what is considered truth in the circle of moreover, really comforts and elevates man? Is that more difficult than to strike new paths, fighting the habitual, experiencing the insecurity of independence and the frequent wavering of one’s feelings and even one’s conscience, proceeding often without any consolation, but ever with the eternal goal of the true, the beautiful, and the good? - F.N.Comment
-
Originally posted by Ralf
Many gamers have played Civ-2 "to the death" - meaning that the Civ-formula stands the very real risk of being a "vicime of its own success". The standard game, with its default rules/graphics, is only going last so long. This is why they must invest heavily in all kinds of scenario-, modpacks-, AI- and game Rules.txt tweak possibilities they can come up with.
I think you mean victim of its own success. I can't agree more. It is a topic that I have posted on multiple times in a year or so here on this board, that my opinion is that Civ 2 wasn't that great because I had played the original so much.
I agree with Ralf, that Firaxis must implement at least some rule flexibility so that we can change things enough to keep them interesting. Otherwise for me, its going to get old fast.About 24,000 people die every day from hunger or hunger-related causes. With a simple click daily at the Hunger Site you can provide food for those who need it.Comment
-
aight.
everyone.
GET THIS STRAIGHT.
the CITY SQUARES (workable tiles) DOES NOT GROW AT ALL.
the CIV's BORDERS grow with cultural increase.
(the rest isnt fact, i am assuming... wanna help?)
YOU CAN WORK A TILE OUT OF YOUR BORDERS (because a city starts with no borders [resource tutorial]), but you CANNOT use a special resource out of your borders... like iron."I've lived too long with pain. I won't know who I am without it. We have to leave this place, I am almost happy here."
- Ender, from Ender's Game by Orson Scott CardComment
-
Yes, exactly what Uberkrux said. I think Jellydonut likes to make things up, so he sounds cool. Just joking JD.However, it is difficult to believe that 2 times 2 does not equal 4; does that make it true? On the other hand, is it really so difficult simply to accept everything that one has been brought up on and that has gradually struck deep roots – what is considered truth in the circle of moreover, really comforts and elevates man? Is that more difficult than to strike new paths, fighting the habitual, experiencing the insecurity of independence and the frequent wavering of one’s feelings and even one’s conscience, proceeding often without any consolation, but ever with the eternal goal of the true, the beautiful, and the good? - F.N.Comment
-
Re: Limiting the Amount of City Border Overlap
I never share tiles unless I have to stop another Civs from building on my territory.Originally posted by polypheus
However, there is another model which is very simple and will also defeat ICS. In addition, it also solves many other problems as well.
This model is the "maximum number of shared tiles" model and it is a very simple model. Everytime you want to build a new city, it is allowed only if the the new city and all neighboring cities do not share more than a certain number of tiles once that new city is built.
This will force cities to be more evenly spaced apart. The number of sharable tiles could be alterable in a txt file but should be determined by playtesting to see what works best. At the most extreme, zero sharable tiles would mean no overlap is allowed at all but I think a number like 8 would be good.
If you want your cities spread out, then spread them out, no one is stopping you.
The cities are only 21 tiles. So that means you can have a city center every 5 tiles. Nothing is stopping anyone from making them 6, 7 or even 8 tiles apart.
What is going to slow thing down is the fact that you will need a city size 3 before you can build a settler and then that city rebuilt to size 2 before you can build a worker. The big question is how long to gain a population point? If it is 5 turns, maybe to fast, but if it is 10 to 20 turns, maybe to slow.
Have you guys done the math? At 5 turns per/pop point, it will take 15 turns before you can produce a settler. Plus 5 more turns to produce a worker. So 20 turns into the game you could now be building your 2nd city. But wait, you have not built any military protection, so here come anyone and bye bye city. I would use Civ 2 has a guide to how long it will take to build a warrior. Somewhere between 5 to 7 turns. So if you build 2 warriors, it will take between 10 to 14 turns (one to protect your city and one to explore) to build your warrior and if the city is at 3 pop points you can then start your first settler or worker. Civ 2 settler took between 10 to 20 turn in the early game to build. So it looks like 14 + 15/20 turns before you can build and then 5 more turns so the settler can build another city. Looks like around turn 39 before you build that new city. How many years per/turn that early in the game?Comment
-
Joeseph, that sounds very accurate to me. I hope, with it seeming to be that way, that turns in ancient times won't be every 50 years.However, it is difficult to believe that 2 times 2 does not equal 4; does that make it true? On the other hand, is it really so difficult simply to accept everything that one has been brought up on and that has gradually struck deep roots – what is considered truth in the circle of moreover, really comforts and elevates man? Is that more difficult than to strike new paths, fighting the habitual, experiencing the insecurity of independence and the frequent wavering of one’s feelings and even one’s conscience, proceeding often without any consolation, but ever with the eternal goal of the true, the beautiful, and the good? - F.N.Comment
-
It is suggested that each race will start with a worker so that may help speed things up a little. I'm still edgy about how easy it is for one nation to get an early head start if they begin next to a nice special and big river compared to another on a whale-free coast or barren plain.
The MedMod guys introduced the concept of a free militia unit per city which does help significantly. The more stuff you begin the game with as standard the less the randomness effects you. If there was a quick start option where every civ began with no tech but 2 settlers, 2 workers and 2 spearmen/free militia then I would use it almost exclusively.To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
H.PoincaréComment
-
I'm sure Firaxis has/will/is balanc(e/ing/ed) all of these out. Have a little faith in them.Comment
-
If it has not been raised as an important issue in anything except multiplayer, where a level playing field is essential to some, why would they change it? Their stated aim is to change only that which is broken and I'm not aware of them considering random start as needing a fix. Popular agreement on something like this may get them to revisiting an idea which they thought had been settled or has never been considered.Originally posted by Sabre2th
I'm sure Firaxis has/will/is balanc(e/ing/ed) all of these out. Have a little faith in them.
Warning! Mini rant coming!!
To every suggestion lately you seem to be saying "silence! trust Firaxis". On that basis, should we have made The List in the first place? Should Apolyton have made The List then switched to being off-topic only until game release? Was July the cut off point in your opinion? I completely disagree. There will be no point in waiting until the game is released and moaning "this doesn't work.." "that bit sucks.." "why didn't you do it this way.." if no-one ever gave them a clue beforehand that it needed addressing. Please stop cutting off constructive dialogue with a post suggesting we shouldn't be talking! Cutting dead irrelevant off-topic stuff is another matter entirely
To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
H.PoincaréComment
Comment