 |
| |
|
|
swagled
|
|
Hmmm....
Here's where this thread startes to merge with that one about how to better implement cultural flips. I do reload my games when a city turns, because I think this is a poorly-done feature (although an interesting concept). It needs more work.
I mean, come on! Before a revolt happens, people take their greivances to the rulers. It's not a "bolt out of the blue". The rulers were ignoring people's discontnent, and THEN they revolt.
You really should get some kind of indication that there is unrest in a city before it flips. I think an easy way to do this would be a random chance of someone leaving the city, or a riot that your troops fight in.
If the cities went through a "riot phase" and my garrisons failed to quench the riot, I think I would view it as my fault for not planning ahead better. Or maybe some of the garissoned troops switch, and some of them flee outside the city walls. Then I have to decide whether it's worth fighting for that town.
It's especially annoying when I'm in the process of building a temple already. The population should be a little more placated when they can "see" what's coming. Maybe flips should only occur when you're building a "non-happiness" improvement or unit. (They sense you're ignoring them by your choice of labor... get it??)
FWIW, I don't always accept flips to my side, for similar reasons. It's so sudden, and it might piss off a neighbor.
Again, maybe cities should just riot on their own. Then you're presented with a choice of accepting or rebuffing the city when the Anarchy ends. If you turn it down, it might join a different civ entirely, or spawn a new Civ.
Another comment: When you use your own troops to put down a riot, imagine it causing the chance of new riots on other cities. I think I could accept that, too. It's kind of like New York in 1864, Or St Petersburg in 1917. Even the loyal populace doesn't like it when you fight your own people.
Imagine this happening in a Civ with no temples whatsoever. A powederkeg waiting to go off... your whole civ could erupt in civil war! 
Last edited by swagled on 20-12-2002 at 01:22
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
quote:
Here's where this thread startes to merge with that one about how to better implement cultural flips. I do reload my games when a city turns, because I think this is a poorly-done feature |
I've known people who are unhappy with culture flips to turn them off before the game starts.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
swagled
|
|
Cyclotron: I guess that's another way of looking at save-and-load. Some of us are trying to adjust the game to behave more like we would have done it, had we been designers.
When something isn't fungible in the editor.... reload, reload.
I don't actually want to disable culture flips. I just want to see it work more sensibly. Right now, my reaction to a flip is:
"Sheesh! If you people had just *told* me you were unhappy, I'd have rushed the temple." Ergo, reload, and do it.
When I don't have the funds on hand to rush the temple, I don't *REALLY* cheat -- by my standards -- by giving myself gold, or going farther back in time to manage my civ differently, as to have it on hand when the flip happens.
I play my games with preserved random seed. I do, inherently, want to know "how things should have turned out".
Last edited by swagled on 20-12-2002 at 08:56
|
|
| |
|
|
|
swagled
|
|
I not disagreeing with you.
Most flips happen in young cities with high corruption in the fringes, and it takes time to get a temple built. The fact that the flip happens --despite my *intention* to placate the populace-- is what is so annoying.
I feel justified in interpreting the actual flip as the "warning" which should have been built into the game.
I guess a real tough-minded "non-reload" player could argue: "Any time you build a new city, plan to put a few more workers and old units into it, and rush that temple right away. You know what could happen if you don't."
But I feel like that's another sneaky "outwit the computer" kind of thing. Sensible game-play is better. If there was a "cities don't flip while temple/cathedral under construction" flag, I would check it.
...
(Right now I'm starting to think about the forms of civil disorder people go through in real society ... like when city administrators sit back and say "Yeah, yeah, we understand your complaints... We're working on it..." and nothing really changes.
Then finally, citizens have a sit-in in front of city hall, or organize a general strike, or something, to get the attention of the officials. "We really mean it! Get moving!" ... And then something is done.
I'll just have to rationalize that is what is happening in my re-load civ world.  )
...
Now, don't even get me started about the "Flipped cities take away ALL of your units" situation. Think Venezuala today. There are *factions* within a dissatisfied society.
Last edited by swagled on 20-12-2002 at 10:46
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BRC
|
|
quote:
I would think most do not care if people reload or not. It is when they come to the board and crow about their feats or give advice and all the time they are reloading to gain an advantage. By that I do not mean mistakes made such as your finger strikes the wrong key or you came back from an interruption and forgot to do X or Y. I mean trying to alter the outcome of a battle or a city flip or that type of thing. I can not see how anyone could say it is not cheating to reload to stop a city from rioting or flipping or losing a combat. |
My exact thoughts on the matter. You need to play the game so that it is fun for you. Otherwise there is no point to playing. I only request that you don't come to the strategy forum telling us how easy it was for you to beat the game on Diety.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
swagled
|
|
Playing without reload is fine and I consider that an option too. It's kind of like:
"Can I wind a game without railroads?"
"Can I win a game without any wonders?"
"Can I win a game without reloading?"
It's just another voluntary restriction to challenge onesself.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
High_Lord
|
 |
Potsburg, Upper Bongolia
Sep 2002
time: 23:24
|
|
When I first started playing Civ III I found myself constantly reloading my autosave if anything went against my plans...if AI puts down settler in spot I want, reload--move troops to block em and rush my settler out, or if AI beat me to a GW I just HAD to have--reload back (too) many turns and tweak and prod till I come out on top...after a while it just got boring and I realized I shouldnt be so dogmatic in the way I build my Civ--adaptation is so much more fun for me! Part of the fun is learning to play better so that on the NEXT time I will not have to be in that situation (and If it happens, well it happens) Now if those settler come they are killed while trespassing in my 'chosen' land, or I just build up my armies a little more and destroy their stupid city while its only defended by 1 warrior!! So much better!! Now I rarely reload--in fact , before I do something big like starting a war or switching gov., I make a save to document this big change and sometimes I will return to it later (as mentioned in this thread before) to see 'what might happen' if I had done differently. Thats what I love most in any game...figuring out (or reading about\learning) some new way to play that I hadnt thought about before. RePLAYability Baby!! Is what is all about!! Not ReLOADability!! As in, play another game, not play the SAME one till you get it "right", cause its a GAME and while there are victory conditions in CivIII its the FUN conditions that I concern with  
Last edited by High_Lord on 21-12-2002 at 12:39
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
19-12-2002 22:43
...yeah, Im not the greatest Civ player (I was so proud just to be off of Chieftain and holding my own
)...my first game on Regent, all the other civs were mean to me (when they finally found me---just so happend my first try was the ol' 'hey im on an island by myself for millenium!' so everybody raced past me, trading tech and resources and luxury while i slowly, then very quickly fell behind) I plan to give er another go next game (ok I admit it--I went right back and played on lovely lovely WARLORD level immediatly after my Regent fiasco, but Ill be back!!)
|