 |
|  |
 |
|
biru biru
|
 |
Tokyo
Oct 2004 time: 14:25
|
|
quote: Originally posted by GePap
How do you "hurry wonders"? The only way to do so that in any way mimicks life if double the workload. Otherwise, it takes what it takes to build it- the caravan notion was a nice little game trick, but it makes it too easy sometimes.
|
The US-USSR race to the moon was a good example of two nations "rushing" to complete a wonder. Nations should be able to chanel resources to complete a great projects. The Manhattan Project is nice, but if WWII is over while you are waiting for it to be complete, it wasn't much fun in the game.
It takes a certain number of "shields" to build a wonder, but the time to accumulate those shields should depend on the skill of the player in some way.
One of my Civ pleasures is scraping that last temple, and finishing a road just in time to get that last caravan in in time to finish a wonder before a rival civ gets it.
Of course, once you know the caravan trick, it is possible to build a wonder sometimes very easily. Arguably too easy, granted. Still, I very rarely complete all of the wonders in a game of civII at diety lvl. The woder-race game is challenging and fun, and caravans are key to it, without alternative so far.
I still like the other functions of caravans too! Cities of 100 are not necessary, but they are cool! Also, protecting weak caravans with military escorts was interesting. Finally, using caravans when you're in a pinch for money, or science beakers, was always an option for the sophisticated player.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gearyman
|
|
Pensacola, FL
Feb 2000 time: 05:25
|
|
I loved aspects of all 3 Civs, but I also voted no for a Civ4. Some day, yes...but it just seems too soon. Civ2 was the best because of its originality, interface, and simplicity of use. Civ3 did well, but a Civ4 needs to do something new, radical...over the top. If not done right, Civ4 may become a 'Call to Power' look-a-like, which would be a disaster.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Odin
|
 |
Biology Nerd at Minnesota State University Moorhead
Sep 2000 time: 23:25
|
|
1. A Social Engineering system, I want my Democratic Socialist paradise. 
2. Better Diplomacy system with more options, such as multilateral agreements. Get rid of the UN wonder, instead, when the modern age is reached players can use a system similar to the Orion Senate in MoO3, which represents the UNSC.
3. a more realistic economic and trade model
4. Scrap the cartoony talking leader heads, no leaderheads period. The diplomacy screen background should be a age-accurate diplomatic "round-table" or conference room, with the diplomatic options boxes look like pages of papyrus (ancient), parchment (medevial), or ornate paper. (industrial & modern)
5. I want a game that has an epic feal to it. Make it more epic than LotR, I want to FEEL like a ruler of an empire! Bring back the wonder movies and the talking, arguing, bickering, advisors (ELVIS!!!) 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Toby Rowe
|
|
London, UK
Feb 2001 time: 05:25
|
|
The way and times I might wish to play an MP game will never suit my opponents- 1am, 2pm or 8pm. Online gaming is a way for companies to charge you for their own inadequacy- eg; They can't programme a decent AI after 20 years of trying, simply as they are too arrogant to ask the future customers what should happen. (If a sequel)
I used to buy at least 12 games a year, now I've brought 1 in half a year, lack of dosh dictates, but also corporate-produced games. Publishing houses have taken the human out of gaming, it's now a product only and ultimately in search of the dollar, the only market left will be 12-25 year olds. It shouldn't be so...does this make sense? (getting tired). (15 year olds all will eventually be 26, with kids, and want private time away from family once the nippers are fast asleep, but won't want "kick 'an' punch" type games aged 28+ etc)
Toby?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Max Sinister
|
|
I'd wish for a better AI, but the trade/economy system could be improved, too.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Toby Rowe
|
|
London, UK
Feb 2001 time: 05:25
|
|
Odin,
"Bring back the bickering advisors"
I loved that as well! It put a bit of humour into the game- occasionally I used to click on them to give me a laugh. Well done for mentioning that funny aspect of Civ 2!
Toby
Ps; Not being able to see all nations at once in the diplomacy screen when I first played Civ 3 made me uneasy regarding the quality of Civ 3.
This was confirmed once I understood the new trading system which demands the "around the table" you want as the trading screen is pretty useless to me at least.
Last edited by Toby Rowe on 11-03-2005 at 08:35
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Toby Rowe
|
|
London, UK
Feb 2001 time: 05:25
|
|
Heh! Odin,
Us British working class are still blamed for the Colonial policies of the upper class that ruled the modern UK- Ireland? WTF did that have to do with me?- although the Irish side was binned by the English side in my family for taking part in the Dublin uprising- But they were ancestors of my family, and I wasn't responsible for rich upper class idiots that was the British government back then.
I can't believe that people actually think that moaning to me as a British person about the government in 1760/1916 or something has an effect on me and makes me bow my head with shame or something. They did what they did, but never in my name.
My government didn't even allow us "common" people a vote in Britain until WWI was finished in 1918, and it took New Zealand to lead the way, which the public knew about due to the war.
If I were to choose a British leader, King Arthur would suit me fine- mythical perhaps, but no historian can say he is mythical with conviction- the case now seems to be "prove he didn't exist", my Cornish side awaits the outcome, as another city claims the table as well, regardless of the French author....perhaps!!
Toby
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Alexander D
|
|
multiple building queues (i.e. Master of Orion 1)
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Toby Rowe
|
|
London, UK
Feb 2001 time: 05:25
|
|
What was I rambling about...
Ignoring issues we know are going to be fixed in Civ 4;
1) A diplomatic screen in which all leaders are visible.
2) A decent AI for the Navy.
3) Difficulty levels based upon challenging you, rather than making it easier for the AI by cheating. Simply making making the player pay more to discover each new tech might be the solution for this.
4) Fixed strategic resources, so that you can plan a war carefully, and/or defend your own carefully. Watching the AI fixated with trying to destroy, by bombardment, your Xth source of Saltpeter whilst you are building Modern Armour is daft, along with the fact that it might vanish next turn anyway.
5) I think all want a decent AI for diplomacy, and the Allied part is the weakest. Watching your single mutual defence partner ride upto one of your cities with 30 cavalry and then attack it is unforgivable. None of us would dream of doing such a thing.
6) A return to physically having to set up a trade route, it took planning time and effort, just like the merchants expended throughout history.
7) A return to being able to physically move a stack of 12 units (at least).
8) To counter the AI rushes, a chance to build a spy network in which you can place spies in each town in order to gain advance knowledge of them; if you are prepared to pay the placement and upkeep costs!
9) No return to partisans, they were the worst feature of Civ 2, whilst Civ 3 for pollution must hold the record for most ever irritating feature ever in a game!
10) A Public works system combined with the ability to build workers as well as a seperate unit, not least for working inside other nations territory if allied.
11) Border integrity: Move a military unit inside my border (using the cultural model, but without the culture aspect) and you've declared war on my nation- end of story. Hopefully a diplomatic model will cater for exploration and levels of Allied agreements, as exploring is fun, and it's a game, not an exam!
Toby ;-)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Toby Rowe
|
|
London, UK
Feb 2001 time: 05:25
|
|
Hi Odin,
So out of interest, as an outsider looking in the UK (thus neutral!), which of the two nations would you say has the greatest claim on the chap, (real or not)?
With my limited knowlege of the dark ages I think the Romans never took Cornwall, and only parts of Wales?
Toby
Sorry mate, not reading closely: Romano-Celtic? That puts a wole new spin on it for me. I thought the Angles, Saxons and the other North German tribe never settled in either nation, just modern Southern England, whilst the Vikings took the North.
I do remember reading an OUP history book in the early '90's saying that it thought it unlikely that any native English peoples had survived beyond the Roman period, and if any did, only as slaves. (Just as well we tend to start our serious history lessons at school from 1066 onwards then!)
Still, Early British history might be useful when regarding modern nation states often made up from a patchwork quilt of peoples each with a strong seperate identity, Europe has it in abundance, whilst the US seems to a have avoided that problem completely?
Toby
Last edited by Toby Rowe on 19-03-2005 at 06:14
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Toby Rowe
|
|
London, UK
Feb 2001 time: 05:25
|
|
Hi mate,
I know Arthur is Celtic, I'm English, but my surname is Cornish. My queston is was he Welsh or Cornish in your opinion? As an outsider on it as they argue on the subject, not me in London!
I heard the book was written by a French man- from Normandy, who the Vikings were given simply in order that they stopped attacking what became modern France. 1066 was a result of that legacy.
I actually don't mind who might win the Welsh/Cornish arguement as I don't think the chap ever existed.
Whilst I dismiss it, I am aware that somone 800 years ago might also have dismissed Bede before them, had he been unable to write and record the world he knew.
Essentially, the Celtic tribes seemed to be far more advanced, with the Irish Scotti tribe giving Scotland her name once invaded for example, whilst the English tribes never seemed to do anything, except kill each other without actually changing anything.
If the King existed, he must be Celtic as England modern couldn't even produce a pork roast, but Welsh or Cornish? Which one as an outsider looking in?
(If you have no opinion on it, fine
As far as I know the Angles, Saxons and Jutes took over Southern England, and the Jutes were modern Dutch and gave us lot the English language in it's earliest form, I never heard of these tribes going North- the Danes were settled there and gave us Dane Law, and words like tithe, to and the. That is really stetching my knowledge to the limit.
Toby !
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Max Sinister
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Nikolai
I think the Jutes came from what today is Denmark. Not sure though. |
I think that's right. Continental Denmark is called Jutland even today.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:25. Apolyton Time is 00:25. |
top of page
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|