Do you think it's good to have civ specified terrain/resource ? So Arabs can have one more food from desert, China has one shield from silk etc. I tried to make a desert empire using the Arabs(tried to control all oils), and it failed mightyly.
civ specified terrain/resource
- Thread starter lz14
- Start date
farting bob
ThEy MaDe Me Do iT.
its a ok idea, but some of the modern civs, mainly america, you coudlnt really say they have a special ability workign on certain terrian. they are kinda all rounders. plus if a civ has an advantage on grassland, he's goignto benefit alot more than one with flood plain because there is alot mre grassland than flood plain.
farting bob
ThEy MaDe Me Do iT.
so say egypt has flood plain (nile gave them fertile soil for large crop growing). that would mean they might get 3 or 4 tiles to take advantage of. say aztecs have jungle, they might be fortunate and start here, but might not coem across jungle for ages.
im jsut sayign it will be to biased agaist civs with forest or anoher common terrian.
im jsut sayign it will be to biased agaist civs with forest or anoher common terrian.
Strider
In Retrospect
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Messages
- 8,984
Actually... I think it's a pretty good idea.... just needs to be worked around with everything else.
Also... grassland is not always the dominate terrian. There is normally an equal amount of plains/grassland on a termperate the normal map... a wet and normal map will have alot of jungle/plains.. and a wet and warm will have lots of grassland/jungle. It depends on your settings.
Also... grassland is not always the dominate terrian. There is normally an equal amount of plains/grassland on a termperate the normal map... a wet and normal map will have alot of jungle/plains.. and a wet and warm will have lots of grassland/jungle. It depends on your settings.
farting bob
ThEy MaDe Me Do iT.
yes it would, but unless there is an equal amount of all terrians it woudl become unfair and unbalance the game.
