Who else is dissapointed that there'll be a culture flipping option?

[N. Machiavelli]

Why are people concerned with whether or not it will be an *option*? If you love the idea of culture flipping (I do), then by all means, leave it on. If little Jimmy wants to play a game as a total warmonger without any consequence, then let him. Why in the bloody heck would you care?

In MP, such an option is togglible, or not. If you join a game where Culture Flips are turned 'off' you can *gasp* request it be turned on, or *double gasp* not play that game.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by N. Machiavelli
Why are people concerned with whether or not it will be an *option*? If you love the idea of culture flipping (I do), then by all means, leave it on. If little Jimmy wants to play a game as a total warmonger without any consequence, then let him. Why in the bloody heck would you care?

Becuase it gives people more things to whine about, that's why.

[MarkG]

Devoted to Coracle

Bravely bold Sir Robin rode forth from Camelot.
He was not afraid to die, O brave Sir Robin.
He was not at all afraid to be killed in nasty ways,
Brave, brave, brave, brave Sir Robin!

there are currently two posts of mine in the last 3 days, in reply to Coracle, waiting for their answer....
if this continues, i'll have to print more from the above quoted....

[Jon Shafer]

Markos, you could give Coracle a 'special' CT, if you really want to. Something like "MarkG kindly requests a response".

[SABRA]

Since we can turn it Off of On , everyone should be pleased .

[statusperfect]

I would be more pleased if we got a warmonger goverment thats immune to culture flipping. This way Coracle (and other flip-haters) could play with people who like flipping. Fundamentalism maybe?

[Coracle]

Originally posted by statusperfect
I would be more pleased if we got a warmonger goverment thats immune to culture flipping. This way Coracle (and other flip-haters) could play with people who like flipping. Fundamentalism maybe?

So-called "warmongering" is more historically accurate than Flipping. A lot more. I have also asked many times for a situation where cities or towns SURRENDER (or have a chance to) upon the approach of a huge already victorious invading force. If, for instance, a stack of twenty Immortals approaches a town garrisoned by one spearman that spearman with either run or surrender. Or it should.

Not having that option unrealistically slows down an invasion, and can cost the town itself if a '1', it being destroyed.

Also, if a civ has a large military force within several turns movement no town/city would ever "Flip" - real people are not that stupid and suicidal.

But I suppose we'll have to wait for Civ 4 for such a logical way of handling invasions.

[Darkworld Ark]

I like the fact that you can turn off culture flipping, since it'll be good for senarios. Can you imagine the Germans Blitzing France, France culture flips, & the Germans loosing their intire Army? Outside of senarioes, I don't think it should be used, but if it quites Coracle, than let it be.

[Tiberius]

Speaking about historical accuracy:

Originally posted by Coracle

If, for instance, a stack of twenty Immortals approaches a town garrisoned by one spearman that spearman with either run or surrender. Or it should.
Not having that option unrealistically slows down an invasion, and can cost the town itself if a '1', it being destroyed.
Also, if a civ has a large military force within several turns movement no town/city would ever "Flip" - real people are not that stupid and suicidal.

In the autumn of 1552 a handful of "stupid and suicidal" hungarians (~1000 soldiers plus ~1000 armed peasants and women; let's say 1 spearman + 1 militia) from the town of Eger "unrealistically slowed down an invasion" of a horde of more than 70.000 turks/ottomans (presumably not all of them were soldiers, so let's say 40-50 jannisaries), resisting in the castle/fortress of Eger. After a month of siege the turks gave up and left.

In 1596, the foreign defenders (mercenaries) handed over the same castle of Eger to the turks without fight.

But of course, nationality and culture has nothing to do with history, right Mr Warmonger?

[N. Machiavelli]

But of course, nationality and culture has nothing to do with history, right Mr Warmonger?

No, military might did... in both of your examples.

In 1552 a Hungarian army (approx. 7,500 regulars under Istvan Dobo held off the Turkish siege for 38 days. Sieges back then took many months, even years until one side or another got tired and left. So the fact that the Turks gave up the siege to what, on the field, would be a small force, is nothing notible. It is certainly not a matter of 'cultural will' or because of the temple and library in Eger, but the fact that one army bested another army in a fortress outside of town.

Now, the Turks tried again successfully in 1586, not 1596. They made surrender demands to the mercenary guards within the fortress to surrender. Figuring that they weren't paid enough to die for another country, the mercenaries surrendered the fort to the vastly superior-numbered Turks. This isn't an example of 'superior culture' either. It's a matter of a foreign civ defending a fort of yours with 1 or two spearmen and saying "Bugger this" when an enemy force of 15 Knights arrives. That isn't culture, that's intellegence of the defender in the shadow of a military might.

BTW, the Turks held Eger for the next 100 years. In enemy territory, in a great cultural center. It never 'flipped'. It was surrendered back to the Hungarians in 1686 when the Hungarians defeated the Turks at Buda and drove the bulk of the Turkish force out of the country.

Warmongering won this town, not nationality or culture.

*EDIT* Fixed Quote tag

[Admiral PJ]

Flipping invisible culture

It would be nice for culture flipped cities to lose some population when they flip just automatically.. maybe a third of the pop(depending on its racial makeup) could leave as workers/refugees units or just vanish/ be killed in the civil war. These would be people that wanted to stay with the old civ .

I'd also like to know how much culture the previous civs had had in the city to tell if it would flip..

And stick in guerilla rebel units too, which can do propoganda on a city, then vanish.. and fight with units.

[Tiberius]

Dear Machiavelli,

First of all, please check your sources.

In 1552 there were between 2000 and 2100 defenders in the castle, including women and children (and NOT 7500). And yes, the commander was István Dobó, at least you weren't wrong here. They resisted more than a month in front of a 70 - 80 thousand turkish army, who finally gave up and left.

In late september 1596 (ant NOT 1586) the turks arrived again and this time the castle was defended by ~7000 men under Nyáry Pál, most of them mercenaries, who later arrested the hungarian officers and handed them and the castle to the turks.

Maybe you should visit the place sometimes so you could remember better the facts.

Other than that, how can you say that 2000 men resisting against an army of 70000 is "a result of military might"

The difference between the 2 sieges is exactly the fact that in the first case the castle was ferociously defended by people who wanted to protect their own land, religion, national identity and so on. All of the things that in Civ3 are generically called "culture&nationality".

One more thing: my post wasn't supposed to be about culture flipping, but about warmongering and historical accuracy.
If somebody is a warmonger, fine by me. I'm only disturbed when such a person bashes is his every post the culture system in Civ3 and in return demands more and more military tools to win the game, arguing with "historical accuracy".

Like it or not, culture and nationality played their own very important role in history, even in the history of mlitary warfare.

[SABRA]

As long as there is going to be a type of ON / OFF function , why not .

[Tiberius]

I think nobody can complain about an ON/OFF switch for culture flipping.

Like many other Civ players, I love the culture system and it's my favorite addition to Civ 3. So I don't like others who are complaining non-stop about culture because they can't (or don't want to) adapt their warmonger playstyle with the new rules.
Am I complaining about Immortals being too powerful?

How would this sound to you?
"Hei, Firaxis, the bombers and artileries are too powerful, the enemy is destroying my roads and temples; don't let them bombard improvements!" or
"Why are the tanks so powerful? I had a pikeman in my capitol and he was killed by only one tank! That's horrible!"

Maybe I could make enough noise to force Firaxis to make warfare optional

[Galvatron]

The culture flip system is horrible because in reality people don't really care which emperor oppress them and force them to do this or that and the whole "we belong to a specific culture" thing Firaxis brought into the game is too strict and it can ruin the whole game. You can't concentrate on more important tasks (like conquering the whole world) because you always have to pay attention to the naughty little citizens and babysit them.