Taxman66
King
Yeah, but it takes 2 (or more) to tango. If all the AIs close their borders you can't have foreign trade routes anyway.
Yeah, but it takes 2 (or more) to tango. If all the AIs close their borders you can't have foreign trade routes anyway.
I think its a mistake to call the neolithic caveman tribes as anarchies.
They were still governed by a chief, and were organized into tribes. I think having Cheifdom etc. as the opening civics makes a lot more sense.
then we would have to remove everything in the tech tree before Chiefdom![]()
True, anarchism come more from Enlightenment (Rousseau or Montesquieu). In French, "Anarchism" was a positive word for a long time.... I think it must be a more positive late Renaissance civic (and Anarcho-capitalism an early modern economic one, but maybe Corpo-nation is exactly this?)
Have the Civics ever been finished? Is this the final CivPlayer8 version? What?
If so, I'd rather go back the Edrinfall's. The gaps between some successions/progressions and non gaps with others makes this set disjointed. It's clearly better to stick with some of the starting Civics till you reach the 3rd or 4th Civic in that set than use the #2 and 3. And this can mean hanging on till the Classical Era with a starting civic.
Other you must change as fast as you can (Like Caste is now0 or die in a sea of overwhelming maint. costs and commerce killing penalties because you built a new city with a critical resource in it's vicinity too fast. And then mustwait for another era's set to pass before the next useable civic appears.
This set is incomplete impo.
JosEPh
JosEPh
I am not finding this. With my play style the second or third option is almost always better than the first. I find Caste is so much better than the first two. Money is tight but it is worse with the first two even when I get over 10 cities.
In the current civics, bureaucracy is called a power civic. What does that mean?