 |
| |
|
|
skrobism
|
|
I just don't see how starting a generic religion changes or improves the game. Civ2 did not have specific civ units, or abilities but at least the civs had different attitudes and behaviors. Civ3 added abilities and UUs. Maybe if the religions were not generic then there'd be more reason to offend. So it looks like to avoid that controversy they created generic religion with actual names.
I am not offended. I just see problems coming with no improvement in the game play.
I do have some ideas on what religious game play could have been but it doesn't matter at this point. I see this as a wasted opportunity.
Maybe it will be great and I'll be wrong.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lebensraum
|
|
edited previous post.
too late now to delete the whole thing. parts of my post were clearly below the belt. maniac et al. please accept my apologies. sorry for being a d!ck.
and thanks at this point to maniac
this discussion has certainly helped me refine some concepts.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lebensraum
|
|
@ skrobism
thanks for the link. yeah, i couldn't think where to get an exact date from.
i don't agree with you about dogma. and i'll admit it'd be fun to get stuck into some trash-talk about how dogma actually develops.
for the purposes of this thread, though it's probably oaty.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Illuminatiscott
|
|
I think you should be able to choose your starting religion when you pick your civilization during setup. Or, each different civ would start out with a particular one, and have to change later; e.g. india starts with hinduism, persia starts with islam, etc
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
17-06-2005 21:21
|
|