Relics
- Thread starter Yui108
- Start date
Aramazd
Deity
I hope not. When I first read the story on the front page it already seemed like a bad idea.
Yeah, and I'm not going to go on some self righteous streak like it will weaken future civvers. But it could make going back to Civ's 3 and 4 hard for those that grow dependent on them. Also if the AI uses them too much I'll be forced too. This is sounding like a different kind of game every day.
Aramazd
Deity
The civ that is closest has a better chance to get that relic.
The 777 Hoax
future skeleton
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2005
- Messages
- 1,599
We don't necessarily know that yet. The developers might have a plan for spreading them out evenly on the map.
Personally, I think the relics are a great idea.
There is always a part of probability in Civ games. I mean you are already at fortune's hands when your starting position gets randomized. Maybe you also need to unlock some kind of technology before you can actually find certain relics.
But there also so un historical...
if the only reason is that it isn't historically correct then i don't see a case. Wonders were not made by all the civs either.
KrikkitTwo
Immortal
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 12,418
I agree atlantis is stupid, in that it didn't exist, but partially that is just a name. All the other relics are no more unusual than a Wonder. If they found a new name for atlantis, then would there be ANY problem with them?
Aemilius
Guest from Overseas
Or a technical failure? Production fault? I can think of many possible explanations. As Yui said, it's just very improbable.
Schuesseled
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 2,081
How is looking for atlantis stupid, a lot have people went searching for the city that fell into the sea. Personally i think its highly unlikely that atlantis slippede into the sea, it was most likely an attempt of building a city in the water, that went horribly wrong.
XxtraLarGe
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 268
Relics seem to be goody huts on steroids. They will be a nice addition for a faster paced game.
dshirk
Firaxian
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2005
- Messages
- 879
Usually there are just three or four of these on the entire map. Depending what sort of game you're playing, you might go for it, or you might not. If I find my starting position is on a smaller island, I end up producing galleys and once I've moved a settler or two to adjacent land, then I start the search for the artifacts. If my starting position is already excellent, or if I have neighbors that are uncomfortably close, I may not put as high a priority on looking for artifacts (which more often than not are located on hard to reach islands). As for Atlantis, this is indeed one of the best artifacts, but it's also found only in deep water, meaning you can't just stumble across it until later in the game.
This was one of Sid's early design ideas, and has grown to become a favorite around the office. It's another choice a player has to make early on in the game, and a variable you have to take into account. It's always disconcerting when your advisory pops up to tell you that your aggressive neighbor found the Knights Templar.
This was one of Sid's early design ideas, and has grown to become a favorite around the office. It's another choice a player has to make early on in the game, and a variable you have to take into account. It's always disconcerting when your advisory pops up to tell you that your aggressive neighbor found the Knights Templar.
How are the AIs made to work with the relics? Do they have a AI method for deciding whether to look for relics or not or is it just random that they would happen to find one? And you say Atlantis cannot be found until later in the game, does this incline that the AI might decide later in the game "lets go adventuring for atlantis" just to get the bonus?
KaiserElectric
Total Freakin Besties
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2007
- Messages
- 3,461
Hmm, relics. Not a bad idea, but I would vote no. I've played the "Age of Empires" series, which invloved relics in the gameplay, and they did prove to be usefull, although irritating 
. However the game series did not invlove religion in the game and Civ does, so the relics in Civ5 would just conflict with the religions. Therefore, unless Sid removes the religious aspect from the game and Bill Gates becomes a beggar, there is about a 0.001% chance of there being relics in Civ5.
. However the game series did not invlove religion in the game and Civ does, so the relics in Civ5 would just conflict with the religions. Therefore, unless Sid removes the religious aspect from the game and Bill Gates becomes a beggar, there is about a 0.001% chance of there being relics in Civ5.
2K Elizabeth
<span style="font-weight:bold; text-decoration: un
relics are by no means necessary to dominate at civ. they are a fun bonus that you can find, if you want, but don't need to.
they are kind of like uber-goodie huts!
they are kind of like uber-goodie huts!
Similar threads
