General Feedback

This is my all time favorite game, so I'm working on a c# game that borrows heavily from the civ 2 concepts.

What I like about the game:
- It wasn't overly complex. Wealth and unit support was easy to manage.
- Settlers and engineers made the game feel more like a Sim to me. I like that I could build and improve without having to worry about funding.

What I don't like about the game:
- attack/defense and horse modifier wasn't enough combat stats for units
- that terrain didn't really have an impact on most maps
- the size limitations of the maps in order to replicate earth like maps
- managing city queues and large empires
- no fog of war

I could make an exhaustive list, but that's what comes to mind. I'm trying to maintain the spirit of the simplicity of Civ2 while incorporating more advanced, optional (read as automatic) features.

It's turning out to be a bigger project than I would have anticipated! Isn't that always the case? :p
 
Replayability and flexibility.

The former makes every newly started game unique and challenging in its own way, unpredictable in how it evolves.
The latter gives you the chance to battle the evil Axis in WW2, colonize space or defend Minas Tirith from the forces of Mordor, using any of a number of mods and conversions made for this game.

What do I hate? The stupid and cheating AI.
 
Top Bottom