Recent content by risc06

Step 1: Don't panic - warriors, wolves, lions, panthers and bears aren't really that big, it's just a game.

These look great - the Apostolic palace is just the sort of thing I've been looking for in a Civ game for so long - I often thought a wonder called the 'Balance of Power' might have been handy, to enable you to intervene to prevent the conquest of a Civ you've wanted to preserve as a buffer...

I think we may be arguing at cross-purposes here. I do have to agree with you on the lack of clarity on what qualifies as a 'civ' in the game, and the weakness of my Arab example. However, I think the Arab example is a good illustration of a key issue here: for many, 'Arab' civilization is less...

This is so problematic, I'm not sure where to start - no continuity? Jews have been resident in the holy land since the destruction of the Herodian temple, as well as being dispersed throughout Europe and the world. Certainly, their numbers fell drastically following the first-century conquest...

Got to agree with the last two guys by the way: if Australia has NOT contributed enough to warrant inclusion as a CIV, then Israel/Jewish Civilization has contributed SO MUCH that I'm a bit confused as to why they haven't yet appeared (particularly since Judaism appears in CIV IV). And Thorburne...

Yeah - corporations sound interesting. I'd be happier if they were more powerful/important than religions, though, e.g. something like a Dutch/English East India Company, which could operate covertly to bring down opposition Civs or force them to do your evil bidding. This would add spice (and...

In a way I agree with Hyoga - though the Brazilian Empire was not the only monarchy in the Americas: Mexico was an empire 1822-1823 and again during the Napoleonic intervention 1864-1867 (under the House of Hapsburg). I think Brazil is a good candidate for a civilization, particularly if my...

This sounds great (particularly if I allow myself to buy/play it instead of concentrating on work). Disasters/events etc, eh? What about bringing back the good old CIVI civil war issue, where your Civ splits in two (or parts of it that aren't terribly happy/far away/suffering from other such...

Even though the Hapsburg empire was a dynastic thing rather than the basic model for other 'civilizations', I must say, I agree (Ottomans are technically only one group of Turkic tribes). I recently put a post on the WWI scenario thread and I'll say it again here: CIV has always been a bit too...

I'm with the Joisey-sider on this one. I've always thought that CIV was far too nationalist in this regard - people didn't really start kicking up a stink about losing 'national' populations until after the French Revolution - before that (and even into the twentieth century in the case of...

Just a couple of issues further to what other people have said/asked. I'd be in favour of giving destroyers the ability to 'sweep' mines and lay them - I'm pretty shocking at the game design/programming side of the CIV-experience, so feel free to shoot me down like a Fokker E.III if you guys...

First of all - this is the best Great War scenario I could have hoped for first off. Trip, your realisation of the frontiers and the positioning of cities, etc. is absolutely brilliant, as is the use of the flags instead of leader heads that might look wierd (as in the WWII scenario way back in...

Hmm. I'll reserve judgement until I've actually played the expansion pack, but the realisation of Churchill by the designers is not great.

The "warlord unit" screenshot certainly looks encouraging! I wonder if that image is scenario-specific, or if it is a representation of the bronze age/ancient warlord (just as the army and great leader units changed their appearance from epoch to epoch in CIVIII). It does seem a little awkward...