I think it's fun to have a far- flung empire. Care to explain why there needs to be some penalty? Is it just because it's historically unrealistic? If you want to limit expansion, maybe limit the total number of settlers you can ever build or limit the distance Settlers can travel, or their lifespan.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Atari Sells Civilization Franchise!
Collapse
X
-
There needs to be some penalty for having a far-flung empire partly to stop run-away civs, partly to maintain a modicum of realism - it's always been tricky to keep distant provinces firmly under control and contribute as much as they should to the central gov't.
I don't think that 95% in every city far enough from the capital is much fun either. But that could be solved by simply upping the minimum efficience (as they did in Conquests, altho it might be still too low).
As for limiting the number of settlers you can build, my spontaneous reaction is that I hate the idea. It would be a bizarre ad hoc rule, prevent resettlement of razed cities, and it breaks the philosophy of presenting the player with a strategic choice; do I continue expansion despite the diminishing returns? If the number of settlers were capped, there would be no choice.Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?
It's no good (from an evolutionary point of view) to have the physique of Tarzan if you have the sex drive of a philosopher. -- Michael Ruse
The Nedaverse I can accept, but not the Berzaverse. There can only be so many alternate realities. -- Elok
Comment
-
Originally posted by nostromo
If you ask me (but you're not, so I'm saying it anyway ), its a basic problem with all Civ games. It has nothing to do with Firaxis: the culprit is the original Sid Meier design.
You expand, you expand and you expand again, and you end up with a ton of cities and workers. In other words, you end up with micromanagement nightmare on your hands. Not fun. Not fun at all. That's why I rarely finish my Civ games. That said, Civ 3 has a lot less micromanagement than Civ 2. Or maybe you're talking about something else?
There are no caravans in SMAC. But commerce, which replaces it, is better.
Also, social engineering, which exists in rudimentary form in Civ and Civ II, is of major, major importance in SMAC. It makes the game, IMHO, "fun."http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en
Comment
-
Corruption in SMAC is well balanced in that it mainly affects commerce, but not minerals. The effect on minerals in Civ III is just a bit unreal.
I also hated Civ III's prohibition on rushing secret projects. The race to build secret projects was one of the major adrenalin rushes of the earlier games.http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en
Comment
-
Originally posted by Brent
I think it's fun to have a far- flung empire. Care to explain why there needs to be some penalty? Is it just because it's historically unrealistic? If you want to limit expansion, maybe limit the total number of settlers you can ever build or limit the distance Settlers can travel, or their lifespan.
Comment
-
Hee hee, I played SMAC but never really did social engineering much.
I want to be able to finish wonders while I'm still in ancient times by rushing, and use money, not kill my citizens. And I want to be able to without having to get a Great Leader.
Is there no way to have a huge empire without much corruption but still allow small empires to be successful? Maybe give small empires some particular advantages instead of disadvantaging large ones in any frustrating way?
Comment
-
I loved SMAC's social engineering.
I'd not mind if rushing wonders were banned althogether. Just buying them is stupid, and let's not start on building them instantly and for free with essentially random Great Leaders.Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?
It's no good (from an evolutionary point of view) to have the physique of Tarzan if you have the sex drive of a philosopher. -- Michael Ruse
The Nedaverse I can accept, but not the Berzaverse. There can only be so many alternate realities. -- Elok
Comment
-
make it so that usable population goes down as the empire grows in size
so in civ it goes
10k
30k
60k
...
instead have population / f(empire size)
so a small empire would have more usable population
make it so the problems are a fuction of population, not usuable population
so one 1m pop city would be a lot better than a empire of a 1m population
Jon MillerJon Miller-
I AM.CANADIAN
GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.
Comment
-
Let's not discuss what Civ IV should have here. M'kay?Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...
Comment
-
What else should we spam about? The on-topic discussion has basically degenerated into "we'll just have to wait till further notice".Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?
It's no good (from an evolutionary point of view) to have the physique of Tarzan if you have the sex drive of a philosopher. -- Michael Ruse
The Nedaverse I can accept, but not the Berzaverse. There can only be so many alternate realities. -- Elok
Comment
-
lol
Odd, isn't it, that nobody has said anything yet?
I wonder if it is indeed firaxis, and they're staying quiet so people keep talking about them for a few more days<Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.
Comment
-
I've heard that Osama Bin Laden bought the rights to the Civilization name. He intends to create a new Civ meant to be played only at the "Osama" difficulty level, where the Taleban civ starts with 300 suicide mujaheddins and wreaks havoc on the other Western civs. The game will be called "Civilization: I Don't Think So".
I watched you fall. I think I pushed.
Comment
Comment