 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
King Richard
|
 |
Oslo, Norway
Apr 2001 time: 06:12
|
|
quote:

Originally posted by SerapisIV on 04-13-2001 11:19 AM
I don't think the debate was about agriculture, just what extra civs could be inserted. In the Americas, its kind of obvious that the Incans and Toltecs were significant civilizations, look at their ruins (ignoring debates as to who actually built Manchu Piccu). About civilization rising before agriculture, those primative civs aren't ones I want to see in civ. I want some big building or conquering nations. About Oceania, what kind of great leaders would you have?
A question about minor civs, are they just there as small AI opponents to justify barbarians? Or are you able to negotiate with them as you can with the major civs with the diplomacy system?
 |
About the Toltecs: This was a significant civilization, but they were the predecessors to the Aztecs. This means that they have some of the same cities, then you cant have both! By the way: The inhabitants of the Aztec empire is called Mexicas (if anybody cares to know...) About Oceania: The reason I suggested these (minor) tribes is that if we are going to have a bunch of additional civs, we need civs that doesn't occupy the same areas at different times, because of the city problem. Considering the civs in civ2, there isn't really that many to choose from.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
doctahsmooth
|
|
St. Pauk, MN
Apr 2001 time: 05:12
|
|
The Khmer (Angkor) is a good suggestion, as is the Mali. Also, they could break up Native Americains into different Civs, i.e. Inuit, Dakota, etc. (although finding cities would be a giant pain)
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12. Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|