 |
| |
|
|
cyclotron7
|
 |
Drowning in Schnitzel
Jan 2001
time: 21:12
|
|
I think that the only bonuses should be those that the player wins for himself. There is simply no other choice that is not completely destructive to Civilization strategy.
Which would you rather have? The "strategy" of picking one race or the real strategy of developing your Civ over time?
Civ-specific units that are bestowed no matter what at the beginning of the game will be the worst thing to ever befall this game. They are eliminating your own strategy for less "bland" Civs. What a joke!
If you guys scroll down the forum list of topics, it looks like a lot of complaining to me... much of which is justified! Firaxis has made some poor decisions that have many people asking "why?" and Firaxis doesn't seem to have an answer. Truly, "why?" Friaxis? Why ignore people wanting more Civs? Why ignore the many people who recognize the danger of co-called "unique" civs? Why, Firaxis? I'll tell you why: This isn't Civ3, it's SMAC 2. The same engine, looks like. The picture gets clearer: This game is going to suck. I've given my input, and many other people have too... and have been ignored. Well, when it comes out, and it DOES suck, at least I won't have myself to blame.
------------------
- Cyclotron7, "that supplementary resource fanatic"
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ralf
|
 |
Sweden
Mar 2000
time: 06:12
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by paiktis22 on 04-30-2001 02:52 PM
Ralf please take the time and read the earlier posts.
|
  Paiktis22, heres a word of advice:
Before you post adrupt 1-liners telling people to read earlier posts in the subject, perhaps you should try to follow your own advice a little better yourself.
I have posted at least 4 lengthy replies in the very thread that started the whole damn debate: 14 Poll: "unique benefits depending on the civilization you choose" arguing vigorously against any SMAC-style benefits/trade-offs for each civ. Yes, my viewpoint have been downtuned somewhat since then, because A: the whole thing is likely optional anyway, and B: the issue in this particular thread (civ-specific units - yes, I have read the whole thread; some few talk about the original thing, but most people are ranting about those units) seems comparably much easier to swallow, then the original bigger issue.
Click on Poll result and see for you self. This is what the whole thing originally was about : having faction-style science-, trade-, happiness-, production-, combat-benefits & trade-offs, unique for each and every civ.
This is why I am a little surprised why you guys now over-emphasize the comparably minor issue of "Civ-specific units". Why does this steer up so much fuss? Civ-2 already had AI-civ unique temperament- and management emphasize differences, and you are upset that each civ now have its own set of unique units. WHY?
Each civ-specific unit can almost certanly be tweaked back and forth any way you like it through the text-files. And you can always duplicate the graphics for one prefered civ, over to the other civ-specific folders as well. Or download modpacks.
[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited April 30, 2001).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
Cyclotron: I think that a post of that calibre is required when someone insinuates you "can't count to 10" simply because you disagree with his/her opinions (and successfully undermine them with playful satire as well). Again, I stand by my reluctance to have cheesy attributes forced on all civ players because of the opinions of a tiny minority.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
markusf
|
|
What a bunch of whiners... I actually like the idea, if i where to impliment it i would give every civ a special unit for each "age" So maybe 5 special units per civ.
ie germans would get.
a ship that moves 2 more squares then normal
a plane that has a stronger attack
a superpikemen
a big tank
a more powerful courthouse
I would extend this idea to buildings and production as well. For instance germans would only need 50 shields to build a tank instead of 60. Or a bank increases gold by 60% instead of 50% etc etc
|
|
| |
|
|
|
cyclotron7
|
|
Drowning in Schnitzel
Jan 2001
time: 21:12
|
|
In addition, Yin: Those 64 civs are only the exact same if you play them that way. We're not talking about realism; we are talking about gameplay. I personally feel that you civ should earn and develop that benefit, not just have it bestowed upon you like a gift from heaven. Like I said, those 64 civs are static if you play them all the same... if you take a different strategy to each one, and try different styles of play, I think that those 64 civs won't seem like one another, or even different because of their abilities... they will seem like your civs, that you created with your own decisions and your own mind. And that, my friend, is what Civ is all about.
------------------
- Cyclotron7, "that supplementary resource fanatic"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon Miller
|
|
I agree iwth Cyclotron
Jon Miller
|
|
| |
|
|
|
cyclotron7
|
|
Drowning in Schnitzel
Jan 2001
time: 21:12
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by yin26 on 04-30-2001 09:54 PM
And maybe the majority will play the game and say: "You know what, I'm awfully glad Sid was willing to take some risks and follow what I realize now were awfully damn good ideas."
|
This certainly is a possibility, Yin. But I consider it equally likely that you guys will play the game and say, "boy, Firaxis didn't do a very good job with that. Why ever did I want these silly unique units?"
Both scenarios are entirely plausible, but you can't blame a guy for speaking on what he knows. My experience is that this is a bad thing, and yours may be that it is a good thing. That's fine.
Yin, promise me you'll stick around long enough for me to buy this game and play it a bit... so at that time we can actually analyze this issue. In the mean time, all we can do is spout our opinions, so spout I shall! 
------------------
- Cyclotron7, "that supplementary resource fanatic"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
 |
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001
time: 06:12
|
|
The essence of Civ is to recreate history. To do this, you start with a generic civilization which you can modele to your style. It can be different each time you play because each time you can change styles. This is counter to AoK where when your the Brits, your forced to build Longbowmen to match up against the Teutonic Knights or whatever other UU. I just don't see how giving the Germans pazers at the beginning of the game will let you play that civ to your own style. It puts you down a certain path, just like AoK. UU are good, but not the way we think FIRAXIS has implemented it.
In the List i think that this was inclueded by Im not sure.
After the discovery of Armored Warefare, you have the option to research the tech called 'Panzer tanks'. If you want this UU, then you can research it.If you don't, then you don't have to. Each game, when you get to this point, you have the option to take it, or leave it. If you take it, its gives you an edge in armoured warfare, but you may fall behind in other aspects. Do you want to fight a war now and use this new tech, or wait for more advanced units? This choice in itself is more of an option than if you have panzers at the beginning. You will still have to look out to see which UU the other civs are using against you, but you still have the choice. Historically, the Babylonians were killed off a long time ago. In civ2, they can survive into the 21th century. This may seem wacky, but its alternate history. If they can survive that long, why not also let them research Panzer tanks? Why limit the Panzers to a single civ? This is my primary objection to UU assigned to certain civs. At the dawn of civilization, anything is possible. Did the German civilization know in 4000 BC that they were going to develop Panzers 6000 years later? No! Why give UU to civs, why put each civ down a certain path, when unpredictability is what civ is all about. i fear that veteran players of civ3 will learn how the AI uses panzers, and then the novelty has worn off because they know how to conteract. But if a whole different civ develops Panzers, you might know how to react to them.
------------------
Its okay to smile; you're in America now
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chronus
|
|
Okay, I'm not exactly sure what all this hub bub is about. Is this an argument over Unique vs. Generic civs, or is it REALLY an argument about whether unique civs can be turned on or off with a "switch".
I think most of us "generic civ" folks would have no problem with unique civs as long as it is optional. Everybody is yaking as if it's going to be one way or the other (and, yes, I understand that SMAC can leave us with this impression). So then, can we all agree that making unique civs as an option is a good thing? And since there doesn't seem to be any official announcement, can we all wait and see if Sid (the master programmer, etc., etc.) will make it an option just as it is in AOK?
Voice our opinions? Yes. But it's a bit too early for all this whining and crying (not to mention silly).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
 |
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:12
|
|
First off, we know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about how this will be implimented. The Civ3 forums seem to be suffering from people who jump too soon to conclusions. I suggest a wait and see attitude.
Secondly:
quote:
Civ is all about strategy. What kind of fool would choose a civ that puts him/her in a strategic disadvantage? I expect the AI (or MP) to challenge me.
|
*cough*SMAC*cough*
Also, addendum to second point: For those that think this is SMAC2 or Sid 'selling out', you really don't get it, do you? Compare Civ1 to Civ2. I think all the new information we've recieved about Civ3 (which is still only 50% complete) shows that Civ3 from Civ2 (or SMAC) is a MUCH BIGGER jump than Civ2 from Civ1. Where were you saying Civ2 was a sell out? And if this is SMAC2 (different starting point, btw... you might have missed that), then so be it. I loved SMAC...
Thirdly:
Sid is the best game designer on the planet. If anyone can make anything work it is him. If it turns out to suck, Sid is 'man enough' to take it out of the game. It's SID we are talking about!!! While I do not like the idea of unique units, I'll see what Sid comes up with. I know I'll buy it, since Sid has never disappointed me.
And, Fourthy:
Zylka, do you know how annoying you are? Did you just come from Red Alert time? Yin, while I don't agree with him on everything, is a well respected poster who led the bug search in SMAC and led 'The List' project. You are nothing compared to him. While I do not agree with him here, I respect his view and see where he is coming from, and I don't have to call him names or question his intelligence. And, yeah, I'm a Deity.. though I don't see why Chieftans and Settlers can't join the debate.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Il principe
|
|
I agree with the last post of Lawrence of Arabia
|
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-05-2001 09:08
we're having. 
)
|