Search results

I'm a big fan of the idea of civil wars. But there's a lot of fundamental problems. How do you make a game out of it? For some people, this question won't matter, but then they shouldn't be playing a game. Civ is a game. Probably the best way to sum up the problem... why should a game company...

Like what? Give us updates. We're an excited bunch. :)

I think that's a pretty fair assessment. It's not like Civ doesn't have atrocities right now. You can enslave your people, and deplete your population. You can raze cities, and people scream. You can wipe entire civilizations out. You can poison a water supply. But the game doesn't use words...

I think they do their best to avoid these uglier parts of history, including racism or sexism. You make the jump from a Monarchy to a Democracy, or from Hereditary Rule to Universal Suffrage, and all those problems supposedly disappear with it. Besides hiding the ugly truth, they also tackle...

I agree that it might be better to launch a new franchise, let alone redo SMAC. I feel like it's too soon for Civ 5. But the arguments you made suggest that Civ 5 should never be made at all. It also ignores the fact that Civilization 4 is one of the best selling PC games of all time, and the...

I never get the big deal about hexes. Okay, the distances are more realistic. But is it worth it to move the game away from what players are used to, and make moving with the number pad more difficult? I would be really disappointed if all they did for Civ 5 was replace squares with hexes. To...

This is a GREAT idea and it's the kind of place I hoped the original poster would go. I think I scared him away though. My first point is that it's not enough to say "make it darker". You have to explain what feature you would like to see. But then, my real point was to have a discussion about...

There IS a close interaction with Arabia and Africa, though. Boundaries between continents are pretty artificial. Before Islam and Arabian people and ideas spread throughout Africa (aside from the southern horn), Muhammed likely learned about Christian ideas from the Aksumites. That is, the...

Obviously most of the hardcore players such as myself would like to have as much as possible. Unfortunately, if Civ 4 has it "right" and there are very few things you can take out of the game, I doubt Civ 5 can actually add anything new.

I'm glad you have a thick skin. My criticism isn't to knock you down and make you go away, but get more concrete in your suggestions. (And I appreciate the grammar lesson.) ;) To meet your movie analogy, it's kind of like the person who says "that's so unrealistic... why doesn't the bad guy...

I'd really like to see this kind of feature. But how would a conquered civilization fight on? Right now, when your city is conquered, that's it. You lose it.

It's been a long time since I've played a strategy game where strategy could trump sheer size. You wouldn't happen to have any recommendations, would you?

I definitely think it's time for something fundamentally new on siege units and military in general. I think you might be able to approach something more realistic by tweaking the rate of withdrawal, and creating special rules for attack and defense. But I think it's time to admit that siege...

For what it's worth, you can raze lots of cities. That's pretty brutal. And people hate you for it. I agree with you in spirit, but I think there's a lot of logistical problems. First off, why should someone hate you just because of your government? Why can't a fascist and a liberal be...

I don't think you can extend the real competition in the game any longer without getting into problems. One way they've managed to make competition last longer in Civ 4 is by making the expansion phase of the game take a lot longer. Settling cities is slowed down, so the map doesn't fill up as...

It goes on too long in the sense that the competition ends between 1200 and 1700 AD, but the game goes on for another 200 turns or so. I see no value to adding even more turns to the end of the game. There really isn't room for a future era, IMO.

Why even have "barbarians"? A lot of it is subjective anyway. Barbarians are just civilizations that seem relatively underdeveloped, with very little regional influence.

None of the above. The game does on too long as it is. Seriously, why keep playing after 1500 AD? You've usually basically won the game by then. A sci-fi only game would be fun. But that's what SMAC is for.

57. you have to go to the washroom once a day. at the beginning of the game, with 40 year intervals, that means you have to manually flush the toilet about 15000 times per turn. it's fun because it's realistic.

I would bet on SMAC2, Colonization 2, or even something new. It still feels too soon for Civ 5, IMO.