30-05-2001 04:13									#31
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

It's a real shame they've taken SE out. Personally I'm all for the flexibility that came with it, and I thought the SE choices were really groundbreaking. If Civ3 leaves that out, we'll be regressing to shoehorned approximations instead of the wonderful versatility of SMAC.

I hope Firaxis know what they're doing. Because trying to tweak your society settings in Civ2, after playing SMAC's SE choices, is like trying to type with boxing gloves on.

	30-05-2001 04:30									#32
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

im not down with this whole "1 stack every 4 cities" deal.

i understand that this goes bye bye in a nationalism, but how far along is nationalism down the tech tree?

the ancient Romans had a lot of nationalism, that was early on...

the Japanese were a tiny presence, but due to nationalism (or jingoistic ethnocentricism) they took over a lot of crap in ww2.

i kind of like the civ2 army style, where i could use like 20 stacks of units (say 20 groups of a rifleman and a cannon), and effectively starve out a city by camping all of its spots.

that really pisses off human players

	30-05-2001 06:46									#33
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I never played SMAC, and have no idea what 'SE' is.

@ MagnusL
I'll have to shape my idea differently to explain....
The governments in Civ are not really governments, they are economic plans. And thats why I dislike what you have stated.
I was in favor of Fundamentalism, I am also in favor of Nationalism. These are ideas that can be applied to a 'government model'. You can have a fundamental democracy, a Lazie Faire(sp?) Monarchy. Communism however is a much debated subject because it can mean both a 'government model' an a economic plan like Socialism. That plan would be a classes society, were there is no rich and no poor, and everyone owns everything. Some would call this a utopia... and it is. Therfore I am arguing for gameplay in Civ not the definitions of government types. I do not favor having a choice of governments after a 'revolution' that are 'government models' like a Constitutional Democracy (which would probably be implied). Instead a list of ideas or economic plans would be my choice. That list would be, Fundamentalism, Nationalism, Communism, Free Market, etc. Because the names which these ideas and actual 'government models' are very close its hard to tell what ones talking about. So, since these are economical plans, they could be linked very well to Culture... it would be impressive if Firaxis did something like this. So in conclusion, the 'government model' should not really be know.

	30-05-2001 07:01									#34
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Geoff the Medio If this is slightly unrelated to the topic being discussed, sorry. As far as I could tell, the decisions of the senate in democracy and republic in CivII were completely arbitrary. It would often force me into peace at very... illogical times... like when another civ has started a war with me, then wants peace before I can recuperate from or retalieate for whatever damage they'd done. It'd be nice if the senate considered the situation somehow... and didn't force peace when it shouldn't... (just in time to prevent me from liberating cities/striking back) of course I could be wrong... did the senate act more reasonable for others...?

Well, there were times when the Senate would agree to allow 'continued police action' against another civ. It was usually if they'd attacked you first, or if there had been a long history of dislike between you. The longer the war ran, however, the more likely the Senate was to make you stop.

Marc