How playing against humans will be different...

[WarpStorm]

Originally posted by aahz_capone
Here's a interesting conundrum:

If a human player obtains a city during peacetime from his neighbouring human via cultural flip, will said neighbour declare war?

According to the rules of war (and civ3) this is not sufficient to wage war, but I don't think many humans will care, and either demand it back in diplomacy (making a nice hostage situation) or just invade outirght.

If it's a city I really wanted I take it back through force now.

[Buster13]

Originally posted by WarpStorm


If it's a city I really wanted I take it back through force now.

Yeah, but if it's a city you really wanted, wouldn't you have rush built a temple and a library or something there to keep the city happy? What about starving out the indigenous population?

I think I would accept a culture flip, since as has been noted, it's a sign that my culture is behind. But, like aforementioned, almost any spy missions I intercept are going to put me off...

[WarpStorm]

Originally posted by Buster13


Yeah, but if it's a city you really wanted, wouldn't you have rush built a temple and a library or something there to keep the city happy? What about starving out the indigenous population?

I think I would accept a culture flip, since as has been noted, it's a sign that my culture is behind. But, like aforementioned, almost any spy missions I intercept are going to put me off...

I always do this and I usually have the culture lead. Sometimnes cities flip anyway. I take this as a sign that it's time to get off my butt and start kicking a$$.

[aahz_capone]

Ah, but now another question arrises. You may or may not sanction a war because a human "culturated" the city from you, but will the rest of the world sanction that? How will your MPP buddies look at you? I don't think they will be as eager to join in a war unless there is something in it for them (like YOUR land once it's been culture flipped), and those players with a "diplomatic conscience" will never allow it.

[WarpStorm]

Then I guess they aren't my friends any more any I'll save a few nukes for them, too.

[aahz_capone]

Oh dear! This unilateralism will never do!

What would the "oh so peaceloving" democracies say of this barbarism?!

NOTHING! 'Cause they'll be DEAD!!!!


MUHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!!!!!

[Odin]

Originally posted by aahz_capone
Oh dear! This unilateralism will never do!

What would the "oh so peaceloving" democracies say of this barbarism?!

NOTHING! 'Cause they'll be DEAD!!!!


MUHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!!!!!

OHHHH, i'm so scared barbarian pond scum.

[TheStinger]

Secret MPP treaties which other palyers don't know about would be fun

[gsmoove23]

Ok, I like playing as a colonialist, spreading small settlements far and wide just for the luxuries and resource. I assume this would be impossible in MP, defending a small corruption ridden outpost, far from my civ core, against a player who thinks the luxury is rightfully his because it is on his landmass/near his capitol/he was going to put a settler there at some point down the road. Unless perhaps I was willing to make it worth the player's while to let me stay. Even so, the moment it proved beneficial he would turn on me.

[Inverse Icarus]

me and my friends have begun creating "out-of-game-diplomatic-deals", such as "worker contracting", "border lines", etc.

[alva]

Originally posted by UberKruX
me and my friends have begun creating "out-of-game-diplomatic-deals", such as "worker contracting", "border lines", etc.

shouldn't you just play co-op then

I don't think this is fare to the other players, in fact IMO this borders on cheating.

Great fun fun when playing 3 against 3 , but in a normal game, hmmm, no.

Just my opinion

[WarpStorm]

Originally posted by UberKruX
me and my friends have begun creating "out-of-game-diplomatic-deals", such as "worker contracting", "border lines", etc.

This is what I hate about clans on other MP games. Rather than playing 'fair', the clans will use exploits ot get ahead. Now clan-on-clan is fine, it's just the clan on non-clan that's inherently unfair.

[CiverDan]

I don't want it to become a situation where I have to find a clan in order to play in a competitive game. I'm not too worried about simple alliances from the get go, I'll just find my own to offset theirs. It's when ppl get involved with leader wars, etc. where it can pose a problem.

[-proletarian-]

I wouldn't get too worried about clans, guys. In a game like Civ there are a million ways in which you could piss off someone else in your clan. There are just too many vital interests in this game, it would be super-hard to keep everyone in line without alienating people within the group. I think you'll see some try, but I really don't see any long-lasting or especially powerful alliances forming in PTW.

[Chronus]

a perfectionist will probaby quit if he's stuck in tundra, but a warmonger will probably figure I'll take some cities, get a leader and move my palace.

Oh, stop with this nonsense already. I'm one of them perfectionist, pacifist builders who's more than willing to play out my lousy artic beginnings.

By the way, does anyone out here ever play to the bitter end . . . even when you have obviously lost? It's quite fun actually . . . trying everything and anything you can . . . just to survive. And sometimes you learn a new trick or two because your desperate situation nearly forces you to try something totally new.