 |
| |
|
|
Drachasor
|
|
Here's a new poll, I saw no need to change most of the content of my original thread, so it is the same.
Well, here's poll about how many Civilizations at max should be allowed in a game.
I've also included the idea of "minor civs"* that own only one or two cities that you can come across. Hmm, perhaps if minor civs are still around when someone gets eliminated, they can become a major civ. Afterall, in history there are many examples of previously almost entirely unknown groups coming to power (e.g. the Romans).
I allowed people to choose mutliple options, but please only choose only one of the major and one of the minor. Thanks.
Now, this isn't about the Civ options you can pick from. I assume that if a really high number is allowed for Civs in a game, then they can randomnize enough Civ names and whatnot to fill the gap. (Basically you'd have 2-3 versions of some civs in a game, but they'd go by different names, and have some different naming system for their cities).
-Drachasor
*I think this has been discussed many times, but I don't recall who brought it up. I suppose it is like goodie-hut civs, but more fleshed out.
Edit: Last paragraph added.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Fosse
|
|
U.S.A.
Mar 2002
time: 23:35
|
|
32 majors, with unlimited minors. Eliminated majors would promote a minor to fill the slot. If there can be some sort of demotion mechanism, then 3rd tier major civs could be shunted down the ladder.
What do people here envision as the difference between major and minor civs?
No matter what research should be balanced to reflect the number of nations, so adding nations doesn't make you fly through the tech tree.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
LordVipper
|
|
32 major,32 minor with more if at all possible?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
LDiCesare
|
|
La Ferté sous Jouarre France
Jan 2001
time: 05:35
|
|
Why minor civs? If you have many civs on the map, that 'major' civ lost on an island will be unable to expand and thus be minor in every respect. Civs can be major or minor 'naturally'.
There's no reason why you should put a limit on the number of civs, except for optimisation of the program. The User Interface can't cope correctly showing more than (at the very most) 9 opponents, so having more already requires the UI to be coded for 'many' which is 10 or more.
I once stated that the number of civs was less a limit in terms of speed than the size of the map, when maps become crowded. So I believe any number would be ok. I don't think minor civs are needed, but didn't vote 'none I hate the idea' because I don't hate it, I just think it can be implemented by giving different starting traits to the various ai's (for example, you could select 3 ai's on hardest level, 4 on medium difficulty and 6 on fool).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Drachasor
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by LDiCesare
Why minor civs? If you have many civs on the map, that 'major' civ lost on an island will be unable to expand and thus be minor in every respect. Civs can be major or minor 'naturally'. |
Well, the minor civ idea is so that less processing power is spent on these civs, and they don't play a significant political role. Also, in my ideas on them, they would be much easier to win over via culture or military means. Since they would only be a couple cities or so, attacking a minor civ wouldn't have too much risk.
Major Civs would be the more aggressive ones culturally/militarily on the map. Minors would be "ai" crippled, and not playing to win, because many cultures don't think that way...at least, not typically. Certain events could change that.
-Drachasor
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ijuin
|
|
Tokyo, Japan
May 2002
time: 14:35
|
|
I think that 32 civs is a good limit, assuming that the maps are not larger than 512 X 512 (and I doubt that they will be). More importantly, the 1024 city limit is a problem for larger maps--we need a limit at least four times as large.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-07-2004 02:29
But in my opinion this can only be posible if they find a suitable way of interacting with them. In civ3 diplomacy with 16+ civs is like a nightmare. You have to "contact" each one of them in order to know which kind of deals you could do with them, (if they have civ advances, spare resources, gold...) and this is soooooo long...
I miss them, these days.
Not only can I hear it grinding to a halt from across the country, but I can hear it doing so in the future from here in the present.
|
|