Make City Flipping an option

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Coracle
You all see the personal insults from the Firaxis defenders continue unhindered here. Typical.

from a few posts above

there is always the report link on each post. if you feel an action should be taken, use it

anyone hear from Libertarian in the past several months?!

he probably found some more entertaining things for him to do. follow his example...

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
Vanishing units is not good gameplay. I hope this can be changed.

I must agree.

[Cyclotron]

Units "vanish" when they are killed, too. Does it really matter whether they vanish from a bullet or from a city revolt?

[notyoueither]

Losses in combat are not the same at all. You kill some, he kills some. There is logic and flow to it.

15 or 20 units gone. Pooftah. No opportunity to react. No retreat. It's just... not good gameplay.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Losses in combat are not the same at all. You kill some, he kills some. There is logic and flow to it.

Combat works on an equation, and so does culture flipping. I fail to see how either is more "logical" than the other. As for "flow," I'll let you be the judge of that.

15 or 20 units gone. Pooftah. No opportunity to react. No retreat. It's just... not good gameplay.

I stack 50 workers on a tile with a warrior, and I get steamrolled by a tank. 51 units gone. Pooftah. No opportunity to react. No retreat. It's just... a bad decision and bad play on your part.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by cyclotron7


Combat works on an equation, and so does culture flipping. I fail to see how either is more "logical" than the other. As for "flow," I'll let you be the judge of that.



I stack 50 workers on a tile with a warrior, and I get steamrolled by a tank. 51 units gone. Pooftah. No opportunity to react. No retreat. It's just... a bad decision and bad play on your part.

If a tank comes up to you and demands that you follow him or else he'll kill you, then yeah you probably are going to go with him.

However, if your in a city with 20 other tanks and the city goes into revolt, the city doesn't 'kill' you.....you just disappear. At least that's what happens in civilization.

The workers disappearing is logical. The military units in the city disappearing is not.

[notyoueither]

Well, see cyclotron7, I don't lose cities to flips anymore. I now know how to prevent them. So what if I play the game like a cross between Ghengis Kahn and Cato. So what if 100's of millions die to maintain the power of Rome in the 'colonies'.

I don't like it. It is poor game play, in my opinion (as any such statement is a matter of taste). It's supposed to be a game about civilisation. It should not force one to use barbaric tactics to be successful.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Tassadar5000
However, if your in a city with 20 other tanks and the city goes into revolt, the city doesn't 'kill' you.....you just disappear. At least that's what happens in civilization.

Actually, the city does kill you. In fact, the only difference between a military unit dying and a flipped unit "dissapearing" is that the dying unit has a death animation. Maybe our problem would be solved if their were just animations for a flip... Firaxis?

The workers disappearing is logical. The military units in the city disappearing is not.

Care to tell me why?

[Cyclotron]

Dang, cross posting...

Originally posted by notyoueither
Well, see cyclotron7, I don't lose cities to flips anymore. I now know how to prevent them. So what if I play the game like a cross between Ghengis Kahn and Cato. So what if 100's of millions die to maintain the power of Rome in the 'colonies'.

That's about what I do.

I don't like it. It is poor game play, in my opinion (as any such statement is a matter of taste). It's supposed to be a game about civilisation. It should not force one to use barbaric tactics to be successful.

1. I understand you think it is poor gameplay, but I still don't understand why you think that.

2. I'm glad that you and I understand the difference between opinion and fact.

3. Flipping does not make you resort to use barbaric tactics. Could you please give me a single example of you being forced to do something barbaric because of a flip?

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by cyclotron7


Actually, the city does kill you. In fact, the only difference between a military unit dying and a flipped unit "dissapearing" is that the dying unit has a death animation. Maybe our problem would be solved if their were just animations for a flip... Firaxis?


Care to tell me why?

Simply because say 6 unarmed civilians (some of whom may be tax collectors, entertainers, or scientists) could not defeat 20 tanks that are ready to battle. The best that could possibly be done are to run the tanks out of the city, which for most people would probably be acceptable.

However, the most likely case in the scenario would be the tanks killing the civilians who threatened them.

Originally posted by cyclotron7

3. Flipping does not make you resort to use barbaric tactics. Could you please give me a single example of you being forced to do something barbaric because of a flip?

Well if you consider war to be barbaric, then I can give you a scenerio:

You are playing on a small map with only the spaceship victory. Well, your nearly done with the spaceship when the only city that has uranium suddenly revolts to the other side. You lose all 20 modern armour units inside the city, and your uranium.

In order to win, you would be forced to go to war with a civilization that you may not be prepared to fight in order to win the game. However, if it were optional and/or military garrisons had a larger effect, it probably would not have flipped.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by cyclotron7
Care to tell me why?

Because that's what military units do. They kill things. Sometimes they get killed. Se le guerre.

Huge armies do not normally disappear when a city rebels. They either kill the rebels, or leave. Usually. Sometimes, if there are very few of them, they may lose and be killed. After some combat of course. I would have no problem with flipping at all, if there were some interactiveness in the process. I have a very big problem with the units simply going poof.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Tassadar5000
Simply because say 6 unarmed civilians (some of whom may be tax collectors, entertainers, or scientists) could not defeat 20 tanks that are ready to battle.

I hope you don't honestly think that a size 6 city is 6 people...

The best that could possibly be done are to run the tanks out of the city, which for most people would probably be acceptable.

It might be a good idea to give mobile units a chance to escape flipping, maybe with some damage. Good point

However, the most likely case in the scenario would be the tanks killing the civilians who threatened them.

Unless there are a few hundred thousand civilians, armed, with at least a year to prepare... which is almost always the case in flips.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by cyclotron7
Flipping does not make you resort to use barbaric tactics. Could you please give me a single example of you being forced to do something barbaric because of a flip?

Flipping makes me use barbaric tactics to prevent flipping. Actually, it's the unpredictable loss of units that I seek to prevent. If they would add a bit to the system and allow retreat if desired, then I would be far less prone to have death squads follow my armies around.

[Cyclotron]

GAAH! Cross post again! That's okay, I'll be leaving in a minute anyway...

Originally posted by notyoueither
Because that's what military units do. They kill things. Sometimes they get killed. Se le guerre.

And armed civilians do the same thing. They kill. Kawaii so ni.

Huge armies do not normally disappear when a city rebels. They either kill the rebels, or leave. Usually. Sometimes, if there are very few of them, they may lose and be killed.

And sometimes the civilians will kill them. As is the case in culture flipping.

After some combat of course. I would have no problem with flipping at all, if there were some interactiveness in the process. I have a very big problem with the units simply going poof.

There is combat, you just don't see it. There is combat each turn when the chance to flip is calculated; you are in occupation. The system is not perfect and I agree that more interactiveness could only be better, but it strikes me as odd that you find a problem with units in cities "dissapearing," while units in battle dissapear just as randomly... and they both use similar equations.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by cyclotron7


I hope you don't honestly think that a size 6 city is 6 people...

Do you think that 20 tanks only represents 20 tanks? I mean, I highly doubt wars are fought with only one unit fighting each other....

It might be a good idea to give mobile units a chance to escape flipping, maybe with some damage. Good point

Yes, that is what I have been trying to say. I actually like culture flipping, although the others do have a point.

Unless there are a few hundred thousand civilians, armed, with at least a year to prepare... which is almost always the case in flips.

Yet, actually, the units aren't lose. They are reverted to the control of whom they are flipping to. That makes the scenario even more unlikely, as those troops whom probably are loyal would stay with their empire.

Also, in wars, why do civilians not arm themselves when invaders come? If they can convert twenty tanks, they surely can kill one longbowman.