 |
|
Oligarf
|
|
I think the turn-based system of Civilization slows down the game. A real-time approach would force players to make smart fast decisions. Multi-player possibilities on the Internet would be more exciting too. Now you have to wait and wait. Time limiting destroys the fun too, at a certain moment I was able only doing half the things I wanted to do when I were in a multiplay game. I think it should be or should become an option in Civ III or Civ IV.
Agree?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Eli
|
|
Israel
Jul 2000 time: 07:15
|
|
What UR said.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
tniem
|
|
Hope College
Apr 2000 time: 00:15
|
|
Empire Earth is going to try and take a RT to the whole of human history. But it appears to be a similar game to other RTS where you start out in an era of your picking and then you have to pay to upgrade to the next epoch.
Meanwhile, MOO3 is going to bridge TBS and RTS. We will see how it works but Civ is Civ and should stay TBS.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Marcus Agrippa
|
|
So Starcraft is the sterotype RT game everyone brings up in here? lol
I prefer Age of Empires II myself. I do agree with the status quo, however, on Civ being best as a TB game.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sabre2th
|
|
quote: Originally posted by isaac brock
you people |
Not one person has liked the idea
(That has posted)
Last edited by Sabre2th on 26-08-2001 at 21:40
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
Civ an RTS game? I'll take a pass on that. Civ is about letting a long term strategy unfurl slowly. It's a game of history and strategy, not tactics. Besides, I always hated racing all over the AoE map repelling enemy attacks while launching my own attack. If I want to test my reflexes I'll hit my Playstation.
Yeah, RTS civ would be like RTS chess
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15. Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|