 |
|  |
 |
|
PapaLenin
|
|
Finland
Nov 2001 time: 05:16
|
|
Hi!
I am playing first game with regent and that is enough to understand that diplomacy sucks like hell. I mean have the civ team changed since civ2 or ac??? Like someone said before it really seems that firaxis is investing more in graphichs and cool looking leader faces than in the "game" itself. Civ2 diplomacy sucked thats ok but Diplomacy in ac was much more advanced than in civ3. For exapmle if u start a war with an allie aganist some civ and then decide to stop you actually cant because your allie will fight till the end, crush the opposing civ, get big load of territory/cities and become much more powerful than you. In ac you could be able to ask other civ to stop war with other. Then ofcource you should be able to trade military units.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
PapaLenin
|
|
Finland
Nov 2001 time: 05:16
|
|
Yes this is a game... But the game, I would say, is divided in three general segments. One is war, two is building your empire and three diplomacy. And compared civ3 diplomacy to civ2 it is just not different at all. The only new thing is that u can decide what to trade. THATS IT!!! And I am saynig that ALPHA CENTAURI has better diplomacy so why the heck cant civ3:s be at least as good? I mean comoon it is not a big deal to make trading military units and asking other civ to stop a war options possible.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
PapaLenin
|
|
Finland
Nov 2001 time: 05:16
|
|
Yes the options in diplomacy are great at the moment but the "suckness" is in that there could be much much much and once more hell of a lot more options including Alpha Centauris.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16. Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|