 |
|  |
 |
|
LodeRunner31
|
|
What I would really like to see is the ability to develope your own civ during actual gameplay. While this may not appeal to the masses, I think it would be more realistic. Civilizations were defined by their surroundings. For instance, I don't think it makes much sense that a Camel type UU would be available in a Jungle type map. The fact is, cultures developed based on the available resources and the neccesity to survive. The Vikings didn't have much to work with, so it makes sense to me that they became very proficient at building ships and raiding. Wouldn't it be cool if you could pick what things your civ becomes proficient at.
While this may be more realistic and intriguing from a strategic standpoint, the implementation of this idea might be a bit tricky. I certainly think that it is feasible, though. First, you could start out with templates (e.g. Defensive, Aggressive, Expansionist, etc...). Also, I think it would be neccesary to have a feature to save your civ at any point during the game so you could use it in the next game. The issue of balancing would certainly be present and would take a while to tweak, but again, possible.
As far as UUs go, I can think of two options. One, you could automatically create a UU of whatever type by using the max_ramp% limit. What I mean is that, the first type of unit created that reaches max ramp cost is automatically turned into some type of UU. For example, if I make a lot of foot soldiers in Classical age, when the max ramp value is reached, I get a UU similar to something like the Roman Legions or some other type of unique foot soldier. Two, there could be a make UU research option. You would get maybe one per age or something. As far as the abilities of the UUs, the easiast thing would be to allow the player to pick a couple of options from a list when the UU becomes available.
For bonuses, I think the easiest way is to again use a unique research button. This gives the player the option to pick what bonus his/her civ will have. They could base it on anything they wanted. Another idea I like is that of basing the bonuses on what the player is doing/gathering/building. It would automatically give players bonuses while still letting them decide what bonuses to get by their actions. If you chop a lot of wood, you get a wood chopping bonus. If you build a lot of ships, you get a shipbuilding bonus.
Imagine you are on a large plain, with horses as a resource, and limited wood. You could build lots of farms, get a food bonus, and produce lots of stable units and get a Horse UU. You could build a civ similar to that of Rohan in Tolkien's world. I think the strategy of the game would be exponentially increased if this idea were implemented.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
LodeRunner31
|
|
quote: Isn't that what we are doing anyways when you pick who you play as? |
Yes, you can pick the civ you want before the game starts (from a limited list for which there much debate). But, what I meant was that you would develop your civ "real time" during gameplay. Sorry if I did not communicate that very well.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Black_Venom
|
|
all you people who have been bashing on americans need to stop, first off, without americans, those home computer you are talking **** on probably wouldnt exist, second without the americans the nazi ****s would have conquered europe, third, americans have the most powerful military in the world theres no reason they shouldnt be put in, fourth, anyone british in here better shut up, the americans whooped your ass once dont make them do it again.
think, bill gates is an american you mother ****ers, dont talk **** on an american machine, or any of your ****in foreign offshots.
ill **** all you up you think you tough come to South Central for a day and talk your ****, you wont last a ****in second.
im out *****es
-peace
ohhh yeah P.S. any of you mother ****ers try to net bang on me, dont bother i wont respond, and if you want some kid, come on down.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
RPMemperor
|
|
the infamous left coast
Apr 2004 time: 21:29
|
|
I believe the Americans belong in the first few ages as much as the Romans and Mayans belong in the last few ages. This is a problem with having a game that covers so large a time period.
Regardless, the Americans will be in the game and I think that their unique units are good but I would like to see some unique fighter aircraft units starting in the modern age.
I also think that the Americans should have a unique scout unit from gunpowder to industrial that is a cavalry type unit. It would be less expensive and quicker than the normal scout.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Prot
|
|
Valetta, Malta
Jan 2004 time: 05:29
|
|
Phillippines: The Power Of Spam
|
|
|  |
 |
|
NDigighost
|
|
id really like 2 see hebrew, btw, u said israel is too modern, I can tell u that the bible says somthing like "like the ppl of israel". i know in hebrew it's "bney israel. btw, as a side note the name israel comes from jakob's seconed name.
another note, unlike alot of ron civs, the israelies or hebrewians belong 2 all of the ages.
i had only 1 idea and thats the power of religion or monothisem since they are the earliest monothisem of the world.
im still trying 2 think bout a power...
im trying 2 think whats more historically aproppriate
defensive, offensive, expansive, economic offensive or economic defensive.
P.S.
i know T&P s already out... but maybe in the next Xpack
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ShadowBlade
|
 |
Buenos Aires
Jan 2004 time: 02:29
|
|
Yeah, I think hebrews should be in. They have a history of about 3000 years at least.
However, I think the Americans shouldn't. I must repeat the nation is too young. Most nations in RoN have about 1000 years of history in their pants (Greeks, Romans, Chinese, Japanese, etc. Aztecs too, despite some guy said they only had about 400 years old. HA! Yeah, right ¬¬). There are some younger nations (English, French, etc.) but none of them are newer than 500 years. Sure, the US has played an important role throughout its history, but this period of major activity hardly consists of a century (despite they have about 280 years old).
PS: I know T&P's already out. I'm just expressing my opinion. Since they're included in the XPack, I guess I'll choose to be English to smash some rebels with my redcoats! (no offense)
Last edited by ShadowBlade on 17-05-2004 at 04:12
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Katmandu Wizard
|
|
I think the whole point is to provide for a wide array of scenarios, yes? No, America isn't very old, but for Enlightenment-Info age play, they are very important. Think of it in game terms for a moment. America would exist in four ages, and would play some important role in each of them, from their own revolution, which was important for all of North America, as well as the French and British. Hell, the Egyptians as we think of them no longer exist anyway (Modern Egyptians are ethnic Arabs). The same goes for the Inca, Maya, Aztec and Nubians. Still, they are important for play in certain ages. The Romans existed, speaking in game-terms, from the "Ancient" age, until the very beginning of the Medieval age (The fall of Rome brought this about). The Greeks don't even last the entire Classical age. But these nations were VERY influential for their time, right? In game-terms, America would be around from the Enlightenment to the Information age, having impacted all of them.
I think nations should be included based on how they impact history, not how long they've been around. Other nations included could (should) be the Vikings, Celts, Hebrews, and Arabs. I'm sure there are plenty others if you did some research, too.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
NDigighost
|
|
tell me if some1 dosent agree
civs who should definatly be in are hebrews vikings and arabs.
now im trying 2 think up powers and UU's 4 them
|
|
|  |
 |
|
NDigighost
|
|
dun know what hebrews are?
think israel...
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29. Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|