View Full Version : Could there possibly be a way where Civ could be RTS?
bob bobato Jul 04, 2007, 08:22 PM Not RTS like 'Warcraft', but like 'Civilization', just without turns. Do you think it would work? I think it would. I have an old DOS game ('Realms', I think it's called) thats basically that, only without techs and new cities.
Or maybe there could be a choice in the map-setup screen, where you choose wheter the game will turn-based or RTS.
CIVPhilzilla Jul 04, 2007, 09:29 PM Civilization will always be a turn-based game, if you want an RTS Civilization game play Rise of Nations as that's the closest you'll get. I personally hope it never becomes RTS, because it will take a lot from what has made this series so strong, the focus on strategy versus fast mouse clicking.
dh_epic Jul 05, 2007, 01:30 AM I think it's doable, sure. But I don't think it will ever happen in this franchise. One main reason why Civ can be so strategic is because twitch gameplay isn't necessary in turn based games. I know I'd be disappointed if they ever made the change.
V. Soma Jul 05, 2007, 02:26 AM I hold it important for Civ to remain TBS, and this way so that you:
- do not have to run against the clock and suffer disadvantage by not doing so...
and
- you do not gain anaything by "running" (clicking) fast...
I believe that TBS helps because:
- it lets you THINK, PLAN
- it lets you check the map, all advisory window, city screens, etc...
- the fact that you are not stressed by time limit lets your mind roaming...
fantasizing about the world you are playing in... to BE IMMERSED...
to play civ for me is part to be in the world I create in my mind...
*
By the way I try to think of a system that would make a turn be simultaneous
(see: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=229869)
bob bobato Jul 05, 2007, 08:17 AM We'll, lets suppose you have a choice on whether or not its turn-based or RTS, when you pick your civ. And lets suppose in RTS mode, everything still takes a long time to build and it still takes a long time for units to move without roads. And there's a pause button that freezes action, but you could still move around and change things. And you could still check the city screen, advisory windows,etc., during which the game is paused. Cosmetically it would look like civ, the only difference would be that there are no turns. Everything would be there, just without turns (so reasearching 'The Wheel' would take about 5-10 minutes, but you could shorten how many years it takes with the tax bar). What then?
alms66 Jul 05, 2007, 12:24 PM Superpower2 is basically a RTS game with a TBS feel, the slowest setting is so slow that if you can't get everything you want done in the allotted time, you're basically brain dead -> you might want to look at that game for inspiration...
Emperor2 Jul 05, 2007, 12:36 PM What I would like to see is what happened in IMPERIAL GLORY Grand Strategy and Axis and Allies Grand Strategy: You move into another enemies territory (in CIV's case, an enemy units square) and decide weather you want to have a quick resolve or RTS battle.
deathr0w Jul 05, 2007, 02:45 PM I would personally love for there to be an option to play battles in RTS mode. So many empires have been founded upon the military genius of a few... :)
Vael Jul 05, 2007, 03:52 PM Civ 3 (PTW) actually had something called "Turnless" mode which essentially makes Civ 3 an RTS. I suggest trying that out if you're curious. :)
Breunor Jul 05, 2007, 04:56 PM The EU series is theoretically an RTS, and the EU series is even MORE Civ-like than CIV. That is, it is a very complex strategic game, not tactical at all.
Having said that, thoguh, in single player mode you can pause the game and give orders, which gives it more of a turn-based feeling. That is, when you pause, you can take your time, study the board, etc. In multi-player, you cannot pause, and it is a real RTS.
Breunor
bob bobato Jul 05, 2007, 07:25 PM Civ 3 (PTW) actually had something called "Turnless" mode which essentially makes Civ 3 an RTS. I suggest trying that out if you're curious. :)
No it doesn't. The closest thing it has is 'accelerated production'. Is that what you mean? Or are you being sarcastic?
searcheagle Jul 06, 2007, 10:45 AM No it doesn't. The closest thing it has is 'accelerated production'. Is that what you mean? Or are you being sarcastic?
Civ 3 Conquests had simultaneous movement for Multiplayer games only. This allowed all players to move at the same time but all players would be on the same turn. If a player finished up early, they would have to wait until all other players finished up.
Mewtarthio Jul 07, 2007, 04:33 PM I actually never played CivIII online, but I do recall hearing something about the "Turnless" mode. I don't recall how it worked; I think it essentially had discreet turns (so if each turn were a "day," a unit that was moved would regain that movement point twenty-four hours later, and all upkeep, scientific progress, culture expansion, and the like would be dealt with at midnight).
|
|