I really hope they bring back the colony/outpost thing they had in Civ3. The best part of the Civ3 "single city challenge" games was trying to keep all those resource colonies hooked up by roads to your city. I had a number of scenarios I'd created in Civ3 that were based on the "single city" model that turned out to be completely undoable in Civ4 simply because there is no way to secure resources that are not within your city's cultural radius.
Civilization V Announced!
- Thread starter Thunderfall
- Start date
Common!! Think of the possibilities! Think of resource/ terrain distribution and the city screen! It could be AWEsome, or even OH-SUM!!!!
Vortilex
Imperator Mundi
I think the colonies were nice. I can't say how many times I wished they existed.
Mustakrakish
In 'Node' We Trust
Hashishim# You didn't offend anyone relax, sorry if I sounded too aggressive. I may have over reacted. It's nice that you bothered to clarify, I see your point now 
OF COURSE it's my preference, of course it's my opinion. Why do people keep throwing that? WHEN it is NOT someone's opinion whenever someone speaks of something??? There is no need to constantly clarify that, it's as clear as 2+2=4.
Again please don't think I'm being rude, attacking you or something... it's just that I get nervous whenever someone says that.
Click the heels of your pink bunny slippers three times and say, over and over ... "its only a game ... its only a game ... "
It is not stupid, it is just not your preference ... that is what you meant to say, right?
dV
OF COURSE it's my preference, of course it's my opinion. Why do people keep throwing that? WHEN it is NOT someone's opinion whenever someone speaks of something??? There is no need to constantly clarify that, it's as clear as 2+2=4.
Again please don't think I'm being rude, attacking you or something... it's just that I get nervous whenever someone says that.
da_Vinci
Gypsy Prince
Yeah I find it hilarious that every argument ever has to end in "OK well it could be an OPTION in the game right?'" and "Well everyone has their own opinion". If it doesn't end like that, well.... No it just can't.
That's the problem with nowaday's being politically correct...
Of course how much effort is it for someone to put IMHO at the end of there postings?
DD
Keroro
Dororo: Ninja Frog
I agree with that. FfH got part way around it by allowing fortresses to upgrade over time and claim territory - that way you could start working resources outside of your cities direct influence.
IMHO there's a whole load that they could do with resources if they want to improve the realism. Let me ask you this - if you want to start a vinyard then do you have to move to where the vines grow, or can you bring some home and start growing them there? If you want to breed horses then wouldn't you get some and bring them to where you live rather than trecking half way accross the world and building a road between you and them? Resources are spread by human influence as well as by nature and the forces of chance. That doesn't work as well for mineral deposits, but you should be able to seed live resources in your own territory as long as you have suitable terrain available (though it should take plenty of time and there should be a decent chance of failure).
Mustakrakish
In 'Node' We Trust
Yeah that would make sense a lot more than the way it is in civ4.
Whaleyland
Chieftain
I was thinking the same thing last week. If growable resources could be transported and reseeded elsewhere, that would be awesome. Maybe something like (though definitely not as complex as) the concept in Colonization. Players could slowly build a reserve of available resources that could then be either used to plant a crop somewhere else (or even replant in the same place) or sell for gold. I'd love to have more ways to get some quick cash.
Nocturnal
Chieftain
Not true, he never was in civ 3 (without mods), in addition one of the great debates about leaders in CIV has been why firaxis has included modern day demagogues and mass murderers like Stalin and Mao (and im not even considering ancient ones) and have always left Hitler out of the picture, not that he deserves to be in th game though (IMO).
It's not a debate and never has been. Hitler cannot be included in the game or Firaxis cannot sell the game in Germany. After the USA, Germany is one of the largest Western gaming markets, so it's that simple.
Only if Big Brother says 2+2=4. It can be 5, also.
Nocturnal
Chieftain
well, while yours its a very heavy bussiness decision (it will be mantained), the topic has ben debated many times for ideological or historical reasons, just one:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=169268
wathever
, the whole thing is kaputt
dcmort93
The Stig
One thing that i think might be a good addition to CiV would be expanding the relics idea from civ rev. Right now we hardly get anything from the goodie huts, but the relics add so much more reward for those who find them than the goodie huts do.
My last game I popped BW, Fishing, Archery, Masonry, and Agriculture, plus cash, maps, and experience. That was one hell of a reward.
goodie huts should be removed and each civ should start the game with 50 golds instead. it is a very randomizing factor. players shouldn't make their strategies according to their hopes on free techs from goodie huts. i know many guys reload many times to have a free tech from them. if u move on them on the same turn, you get the same result. but if u waste 1 turn and move on it 1 turn later, you get another option and free tech, maybe this time. well, it is just stupid.
Mustakrakish
In 'Node' We Trust
Yeah it is kind of stupid. I remember doing it once, then I thought "what the hell am I doing? Why not go all the way then and open world builder and add the freaking techs?" The line between honest popping and cheating kind of gets blurry there for me when I pop 2 techs in a row.
I'll add "IMHO" so people won't attack me with no reason...
Similar threads
