Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Golden ages unbalanced?

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

  • #76
    To all of you who "don't want to start a war to have a golden age": I wish I had your problems. Maybe it's just me, but in Civs I + II my dear neighbours just LOVE to attack me! And taking one city after the other away from them doesn't teach them, either
    Last edited by lupusmalus; August 26, 2001, 18:45.
    Roma caput mundi

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by lupusmalus
      To all of you who "don't want to start a war to have a golden age": I wish I had your problems! Maybe it's just me, but in Civs I + II my dear neighbours just LOVE to attack me!
      So we have the problem of others Civ chosing our Golden Age: if we have for special unit a defensive one (i.e. greeks hoplites) we must at least put them in defense of cities and colonies, or fortify them into fort (if available).

      Then, while I'm not still ready to a Golden Age, a barbarian or a warmonger civ come and attack me, probably loosing (good!) but forcing my GA start (baaaad!).

      Never mind: I'll see playing the real game if this work or not, because I don't think this single point is what will ruin the game.

      In case of the worst I'll wait for a MOD or the "six months later" expansion pack to fix things a little.
      "We are reducing all the complexity of billions of people over 6000 years into a Civ box. Let me say: That's not only a PkZip effort....it's a real 'picture to Jpeg heavy loss in translation' kind of thing."
      - Admiral Naismith

      Comment


      • #78
        In a worst-case scenario, as you said, it can be switched off without having to buy anything extra.

        The civ3.com website, in the section that discusses Golden Ages, says Golden Ages are completely optional.

        It can probably be switched on and off like say Bloodlust in Civ2.

        Comment

        Working...
        X