 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
hardjoy
|
 |
Odense, Denmark
May 2001 time: 06:18
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Jacobite1688
... So far the biggest complaint has been that the rules and tech tree do not differ enough from the standard CIv II game. I ask you all: exactly what needs to be changed to make a scenario good? I think changes from the standard Civ II game should only be made if they enhance the scenario. Civ II, esp. with the Fascist Patch or something like it, plays pretty well to begin with. That's why we're all here in this forum. My philosophy is if it ain't broke, dont fix it. |
Agreed. I think it depends on what the creator wants to get thru to his players. In a scenario that focuses much on era-specific changes in technology etc, with lots of units, a fullblown tech tree will definitely add something. But even a halfway tweaked tech tree will do wonders. It'd be hard to make a fullblown era specific scenario without at least tweaking the tech tree to fit with unit progression etc. BUT the basics remain setting up the variables of geography, economy, terrains, cities, the groundwork on which the player is to base his decisions. This can, of course, involve a a new tech tree og tweaks to the existing one, but might not. But perhaps, in order to make it interesting, might involve new approaches to something known, then. But there's no need to overhaul everything if the standard thing fits with your agenda. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18. Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|