 |
|
Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto
|
|
Salt Lake City, USA
Oct 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
yes! definetly. minor civs are a must.
but one thing I am worried about is that they will be too easy, and will only take a couple turns to kill.
I personally would like to see minor civs as like...neutral states, kinda like Switzerland during WWII.
[This message has been edited by Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto (edited April 17, 2001).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
tniem
|
|
Hope College
Apr 2000
time: 00:12
|
|
To tell you the truth, I have been on the forums for over a year now. I have read countless threads on how vital minor civs are to Civ III.
Don't get me wrong, I am not opposed to them, I just don't understand them. What's the point? How do they add to strategy?
I have either seen them one of two ways. One is that they are going to be so easy to defeat that they aren't worth the time. Or two, that they are a part of a larger rise and fall of empires. The second version I am in favor of, however it doesn't appear that Firaxis will include such a feature in Civ III.
So now I ask, why does everyone see Minor Civs as a vital addition to Civ III?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ilkuul
|
 |
of Thame (UK)
Mar 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by tniem on 04-17-2001 04:41 PM
So now I ask, why does everyone see Minor Civs as a vital addition to Civ III?
|
Well, I've also been following this topic for some time now, but I must have seen different threads and articles from you, tniem, because I've got the strong impression that minor civs will be included - I believe Sid himself said that. And while nothing is set in concrete at this stage, Firaxis have also talked about their more advanced diplomacy model, and how things like cities breaking away from their former civ will be included.
Now if that's going to happen, and suddenly in the midst of the game you're going to get a separate civ popping up which is not a replacement for a major civ that has just 'died' (as in Civ2), then to me that would be one of the most logical ways in which minor civs would come into play. I.e., in addition to the 8 or 16 major civs that you start out with, there would be provision for a certain number of minor civs as well (another 16??), which could (1) occur randomly like the huts of Civ2 ('advanced tribes'), or (2) arise as a result of rebellions, secessions, etc. Sometimes cities revolting from their parent civ would immediately join another major civ.; sometimes they would become a minor civ on their own. They would therefore not necessarily be weak! They might include some of the largest, most well-defended cities of their former parent civ.
For me it's their potential role in rebellions & secessions from major civs that makes the inclusion of minor civs so crucial in Civ3. If there is no setup in the game for diplomatic negotiations with minor civs, then rebellions/secessions of groups of cities can only be handled in a rather primitive, unsatisfactory way - as in Civ1 (see the thread "The citizens of Sparta admire the prosperity of New York" in this forum). Sparta admires New York, and **pouf!** just like that it's left the Greeks and joined the Americans. Unrealistic and unsatisfactory: the last thing the Americans want is a small, under-defended city on their border with the Greeks! But they have no say in the matter. Whereas if Sparta, at least temporarily, becomes a minor civ when it breaks away with Greece, and negotiates with America, then there can be an intermediate period during which America can decide whether it actually wants Sparta or not. And Sparta might end up being reconquered by Greece, or might succeed in going it alone as a minor civ, or might in the end be annexed by America. It opens up so many more possibilities, as well as being a lot more realistic.
[This message has been edited by Ilkuul (edited April 17, 2001).]
|
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
14-04-2001 15:11
But don't we already know that they WILL be included?
.
|