Recent content by Drewbc

Ok. I've comfirmed the barbarians are definitely more numerous and coordinated. As some have pointed out, they are definitely more prone to go straight for trade routes. And in my current game barbarian units were sieging on of Spain's cities. And they would've taken it if they weren't all...

Yh it could just be the new units giving them more options to play with. Well, another reason for the player to stay on his/her toes. For me, defending trade routes is quite tedious.

That idea is pretty interesting. It'd place some, much needed, and realistic limits on military. And population/manpower would finally mean something; more than just numbers to look at on the demographics screen. I think with some tweaking, this could make for a more interesting game. And as...

Has anyone else noticed that the barbarians seem a little more "organized" as of BNW? I feel like all-in-all, they're smarter and coordinating their attacks against me and my trade routes. I've seen them send warriors and archer at me from one direction which I responded to by sending my troops...

One thing I've noticed is that warmongering Civs, Attila and etc, tend to keep their cities at smaller sizes or lower population. This way when they do go on a conquering spree, they don't take as harsh a happiness penalty. For me, that's one of the main warnings to start building up my forces...

This could certainly be interesting, the idea of un-popped barb encampments turning into city states. But the limit you set at the beginning of the game should be the limit to the number of city states that form. Okay, after some thought, here's what I have to add. You know how barbs will take...

Hey everyone! Has anyone ever proposed the idea of Religious schisms? The addition of religion in G&K really enhanced the game and made things more interesting. But it can't be denied that religion is too heavily tied to the founder of said religion. This is both inaccurate and somewhat stale...

This thread should be dead! ;)

So I've an idea. I think assassinations should be implemented into the game. Not the leader of a Civ, but annoying settlers of other Civs coming to settle their city as close to your empire as possible (and right on top of the only spot with iron, on your side of the continent). I think if you...

Oh..... my...... gosh........ How did Ghandi last that long???

Lol. Whenever the AI does this, I just think: "For me?? You shouldn't have." :mischief:

Rush it. I always build ND because I'm not the best at managing happiness.. Then again I always have the world's 1st and 2nd largest cities... Suddenly, life makes sense. :eek:

I'm afraid I don't don't understand. If the AI has good resources and you don't, why don't you simply take them lol? :lol: But in general, when this happens to me, I just build cities earlier and faster than I usually would. Instead of going into the Tradition tree, I go into Liberty and get...

I know, I agree. During war, you really shouldn't be moving at the same speed as your enemies through your own territory. Anyone ever heard of home field advantage? Oh and about maintenance, I just meant no maintenance for the civilian roads. "I ain't build 'em. I ain't payin for 'em." :D

Does anyone think the road system could use adding on? I'm thinking there should be two types of road. One is the main road that we build to connect our cities. The other could be a sort of civilian road that the populace slowly builds over time to connect to resources and the far reaches of...