I can't believe civ-specific units are in!?!?

[Yog-Sothoth]

I'm hoping we will get some feedback from Firaxis on this issue soon, before these threads become nothing more than name calling etc.

I think there are some things that should be clearified before this duscussion can move on:

Are there gonna be 1 civ spesific units per civ, or several?

Will these units have different stats or just different art?

Are there more civ spes things, or just units?

I also think the question on number of civs has some connection with this, as that will determin how much specific art etc has to be made, so:

Do we know for sure that the game is hardcoded to 7 civs?

Do we know if there are gonna be 16 civs to choose from?

In earlier threads Firaxis has quite often replied to clearify the topics in discussion. I'm starting to wonder why we don't hear anything now, especially in light of the rather heathed discussion's we're having.

[Bereta_Eder]

quote: Originally posted by Ralf on 04-30-2001 12:52 PMWell, then whats the big deal? [This message has been edited by Ralf (edited April 30, 2001).]

Ralf please take the time and read the earlier posts.

[Bereta_Eder]

quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7 on 04-30-2001 12:08 PM Why ignore people wanting more Civs? Why ignore the many people who recognize the danger of co-called "unique" civs? Why, Firaxis? I'll tell you why: This isn't Civ3, it's SMAC 2.

Cyclotron7, I am begining to fear this too

[Cyclotron]

Zylka: I agree with you about Civ-specific stuff, but take it easy on the minority here. This discussion has gotten somewhat out of hand, let's keep it civil...

------------------
- Cyclotron7, "that supplementary resource fanatic"

[Slax]

I gotta agree. For better or worse (in my opinion worse), this is not the sequel to Civilization II.

[ajbera]

I just fired up SMAC for old times sake, and while there is no option to remove faction agendas/special characteristics, you can randomize them (Randomize Faction Leader Personality and Randomize Faction Leader Social Agendas.)

While this obviously won't mollify the civers totally opposed to civ-specific characteristics, it would at least present an element of unpredictability. Hopefully Firaxis will see fit to incorporate this option to randomize national traits, as well as an option to turn them off.

[Sirotnikov]

I'm afraid you are right. This does indeed feel more and more like SMAC 2.
And I'm very sorry but I don't like SMAC. Why is Firaxis naming this Civ anyway? Just because they can?

Look at it. They're not there to make a game we like. They're out there to make a game which will be a huge hit for a short time just like Red ALert or AoE. Because that will bring them money and a huge fanbase of zealoted empty-headed fans.

I really wonder if all the new settlers appearing here are not someone's DLs. A certain someone which just loves unique civs but can't make any points to rationally support it.

Goodbye Firaxis. Goodbye Ci... SMAC 2.

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by paiktis22 on 04-30-2001 02:52 PM Ralf please take the time and read the earlier posts.

Paiktis22, heres a word of advice:
Before you post adrupt 1-liners telling people to read earlier posts in the subject, perhaps you should try to follow your own advice a little better yourself.

I have posted at least 4 lengthy replies in the very thread that started the whole damn debate: 14 Poll: "unique benefits depending on the civilization you choose" arguing vigorously against any SMAC-style benefits/trade-offs for each civ. Yes, my viewpoint have been downtuned somewhat since then, because A: the whole thing is likely optional anyway, and B: the issue in this particular thread (civ-specific units - yes, I have read the whole thread; some few talk about the original thing, but most people are ranting about those units) seems comparably much easier to swallow, then the original bigger issue.

Click on Poll result and see for you self. This is what the whole thing originally was about: having faction-style science-, trade-, happiness-, production-, combat-benefits & trade-offs, unique for each and every civ.
This is why I am a little surprised why you guys now over-emphasize the comparably minor issue of "Civ-specific units". Why does this steer up so much fuss? Civ-2 already had AI-civ unique temperament- and management emphasize differences, and you are upset that each civ now have its own set of unique units. WHY?

Each civ-specific unit can almost certanly be tweaked back and forth any way you like it through the text-files. And you can always duplicate the graphics for one prefered civ, over to the other civ-specific folders as well. Or download modpacks.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited April 30, 2001).]

[Zylka]

Cyclotron: I think that a post of that calibre is required when someone insinuates you "can't count to 10" simply because you disagree with his/her opinions (and successfully undermine them with playful satire as well). Again, I stand by my reluctance to have cheesy attributes forced on all civ players because of the opinions of a tiny minority.

[Zylka]

quote: Originally posted by Sirotnikov on 04-30-2001 05:08 PM I really wonder if all the new settlers appearing here are not someone's DLs. A certain someone which just loves unique civs but can't make any points to rationally support it.

Hehehehehehehehe

[The diplomat]

This debate is really getting repetitive.

We have not even played the game yet. How do you folks know that unique civs is bad for the game? Aren't you all bashing unique civs purely on your stereotypical assumptions of how it will work in the game?
Firaxis is actually playing the prototype and obviously feel they have implemented unique civs in such a way that it makes the game better.

I personally trust Firaxis and look forward to how they implement unique civs. I think it sounds very promising.



------------------
No permanent enemies, no permanent friends.

[markusf]

What a bunch of whiners... I actually like the idea, if i where to impliment it i would give every civ a special unit for each "age" So maybe 5 special units per civ.

ie germans would get.
a ship that moves 2 more squares then normal
a plane that has a stronger attack
a superpikemen
a big tank
a more powerful courthouse

I would extend this idea to buildings and production as well. For instance germans would only need 50 shields to build a tank instead of 60. Or a bank increases gold by 60% instead of 50% etc etc

[Bereta_Eder]

Ralf,
Sorry! (I actually didn't read them now as well. The past... who cares?
ooops )

[yin26]

Zylka:

Actually, the two games I'm most into right now are Europa Universalis and The Operational Art of War 2, which has a difficulty rating of "Impossible" according to Gamespot. Guess you have no idea what you are talking about, again...

Let's make this clear a second. Do you think Sid made his decisions because a minority of people here wanted it? Get real. I'd venture to say the man knows just a liiiiiitle bit more about making games than you do. Could you possibly admit that a moment? And if he has found a way to make this fun, why not trust the man?

Otherwise go find some other game that lets you play 64 exact same civs and pretend this somehow gives you more realism. I really have nothing more to say to you on this since you are ignorant in so many ways about ALL of this. Take care.

[Cyclotron]

Why is it that the resounding chorus of Yin and his fellows seems to be "trust Sid"? If you guys are resigned to letting Sid do stuff for you, that's fine... but then I question why you ever came to this forum if you have decided that input isn't really necessary and you can just "trust Sid." I'm sorry, I don't share your trust or your blind faith in a game company, so I will continue to make suggestions and tell 'em what my opinions are.

------------------
- Cyclotron7, "that supplementary resource fanatic"