"Fall Patch" announced
- Thread starter Pouakai
- Start date
- Status
Gucumatz
JS, secretly Rod Serling
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 6,181
2 Words:
John Connor
---
And for all the gripe about the prequels - Revenge of the Sith was amazing - made up for the Phantom Menace in my mind.
Monthar
Deity
Since we're already off topic anyway, I liked all three prequels.
elprofesor
Pluri-editing poster
Now the question is: Grand Admiral Thrawn or the Yuuzhan Vong? In any case, we'll get to see some "anti-magic" (caution: tv tropes) plot devices...
Impossible.
Socratatus
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2007
- Messages
- 1,636
Right.
Hopefully, Disney will get GOOD WRITERS in for the films and just give LUCAS HIS CASH. Although I don`t really like the idea of Disney getting it either. But like you say, they can`t possibly make it any worse or screw up the whole idea of Star Wars.
Can they?
NOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!
dilettante
Governor
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2011
- Messages
- 71
I'm with Horizons on this one.
Piety is awful and religion is implemented for the sake of having religions instead of using it as drawing alliances and factions which can add to the fun of it. I just avoid religions now because it just detracts from doing other things. there's no religious victory, no holy war, no AP (however broken it was, it was still fun to be the leader of a bunch of religious nutcases), no nothing /smh
Cristo Rendentor is alright but seriously it's btw that, CN tower, or Sydney House if I'm going culture? Why the hell not pick up the UN, i'm almost there anyways.
This game aggrieves so much. So much more could be done with it, so much more could've been done with it.
Replace Jar Jar with Donkey from Shrek.
ThisNameIsTooLo
Emotion Lord
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2012
- Messages
- 213
Well, Shrek not being a property owned by Disney aside, that actually sounds like a major improvement.
They lack imagination. The new espionage system is living proof. I hate to say it, but I don't think any of them ever watched a spy movie.
The only one that seems to know about history is Ed Beach, which is strange, because little of his influence went into the game's religion system. Perhaps, he just wanted to make it simple and insignificant. Which in ways it is. No holy wars, no religious alliances. People that follow the same religion, tend to stick together. They, also tend to not trust other religions. My point is religious beliefs, should play a much bigger part in the diplomacy between civs. I also feel that SP choices early in the game should affect diplomacy in some ways. For instance, civs that choose honor, would be potentially more belligerent. Therefore civs that choose liberty may not care for them so much. People that choose tradition may have different feelings towards those that choose liberty.
Fundamentally, civs that complete some of the same SP trees, have more in common, which would lead to potentially better relations. At least they can relate to each other and find some common ground.
What if civs pick SPs from several trees? I suppose that would be based on choices the civs make during the game and how they comport themselves owards their neighbors.
Let's say...
Civ 1 picks tradition/piety
Civ 2 chooses tradition/honor
Civs 1 and 2 have things in common, but one believes in peace, the other tends to favor war, in some form. Even though the foundation of their society is based on traditional influences, their goals would seem to greatly differ from each other. Civ 1 wants to influence the world by spreading their religious beliefs. Civ 2 could be more expansion minded, or may be peaceful, but has a more warrior class based society. They do not want to expand so much from war, but want to be able to protect themselves more readily from harm. Similar to Ethiopia.
Of course Civ 1, could also be expansionist minded. Who conquers and then spreads religion to new territories/Cities/CSs.
Because of this, SP choices should influence diplomacy through positive/negative bonus system. This influences how civs can relate to each other to a point. However, the real feelings civs have towards each other should be more influenced by choices they make, and how the world views them. This is more or less how it should be before civs are able to choose between Order, Freedom, and Autocracry.
gunslinger6792
Warlord
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2012
- Messages
- 282
They lack imagination. The new espionage system is living proof. I hate to say it, but I don't think any of them ever watched a spy movie.
I also feel that SP choices early in the game should affect diplomacy in some ways. For instance, civs that choose honor, would be potentially more belligerent. Therefore civs that choose liberty may not care for them so much. People that choose tradition may have different feelings towards those that choose liberty.
Fundamentally, civs that complete some of the same SP trees, have more in common, which would lead to potentially better relations. At least they can relate to each other and find some common ground.
What if civs pick SPs from several trees? I suppose that would be based on choices the civs make during the game and how they comport themselves owards their neighbors.
Let's say...
Civ 1 picks tradition/piety
Civ 2 chooses tradition/honor
Civs 1 and 2 have things in common, but one believes in peace, the other tends to favor war, in some form. Even though the foundation of their society is based on traditional influences, their goals would seem to greatly differ from each other. Civ 1 wants to influence the world by spreading their religious beliefs. Civ 2 could be more expansion minded, or may be peaceful, but has a more warrior class based society. They do not want to expand so much from war, but want to be able to protect themselves more readily from harm. Similar to Ethiopia.
Of course Civ 1, could also be expansionist minded. Who conquers and then spreads religion to new territories/Cities/CSs.
Because of this, SP choices should influence diplomacy through positive/negative bonus system. This influences how civs can relate to each other to a point. However, the real feelings civs have towards each other should be more influenced by choices they make, and how the world views them. This is more or less how it should be before civs are able to choose between Order, Freedom, and Autocracry.
Perhaps when we do get the DLL modders here will be able to help fix up religion making it more complex. I would love to see holy wars or something to that effect. I was rather disipointed my espionge. Even in the Iphone version had more options for spys, you could use spys to disrupt construction, assinate great people, and steel money.
If only Richelieu or Louis XIV had read the same history books as you...
Deaths Advocate
Prince
I dislike that the Star War films were aimed at children, even if I enjoyed the originals as a child
Gucumatz
JS, secretly Rod Serling
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 6,181
If there is a god in Heaven, he presumably has much to answer for, but, if there is no god... well he was Successful - Pope Urban VIII
-----------
Darn Richelieu kept Germany centuries behind from being the center of Europe and hegemonizing it under one empire. Stupid French - one day we will teach them a lesson [again]
Anyways religion can be a unifier but it shouldn't be used as an excuse for frequent religion vs religion wars. The Muslims are highly divided between multiple sects and have fought often with one another. Christians the same. Hinduism didn't stop inter nicene wars.
-----
The point is I would love to see the Apostolic Palace return. Having a center for diplomatic options through religion was fun - but as for holy wars, I think we can do without
Is that right. We just bought a brand new apple ipod, it is not a phone. Although it does have a gaming center. I wonder if I can play that version of CiV on it. If not I am getting an Apple Iphone. If they have those changes for the iphone, perhaps they plan on adding them to the PC version.
Why because Richelieu waged war on and defeated the Huguenots? Or was it, that he did not wage war on them, because they were protestants, but because they stood in the way for his plans of creating an absolute monarchy? Either way, the war between Catholics and Protestants, waged on. The idea being, is that one religion destroys the other, for one reason or another. Just, because in this case it was done for a political agenda, does not make it any better. That's just an excuse. Anyway, wars of religion should be added to CiV.
Exactly right! Bravo! That is why, as the game stands now, social systems in a society, should play a part in diplomacy between civs. In CiV, the one thing that can be used for this are the civs individual choices for Social policies. Because within the game, we do not have two or more sects of the same religion. Like the two major denominations of Islam, Sunni and Shiite. I feel they should add religions that can break in two or three sects. That would be very interesting.
bcaiko
Emperor
Cultural VIctory got a lot more versitle with the changes to Golden Ages. There's a lot more ways to get there now. Religion is one, since Religions can be a diverse and powerful tool in getting you the direction you want to go (I always create a Production focused Religion myself).
I have never seen a single Star Wars movie. At this point, I can't say I care to.
SammyKhalifa
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2003
- Messages
- 6,742
Is that right. We just bought a brand new apple ipod, it is not a phone. Although it does have a gaming center. I wonder if I can play that version of CiV on it. If not I am getting an Apple Iphone. If they have those changes for the iphone, perhaps they plan on adding them to the PC version.
My idea won't work if people of certain religions do not stick together. God in heaven can't you see that?
Honestly, the "if you're my religion then you're my friend" aspect of CivIV was one of the things that annoyed me about religion in that game (though it was a good start into the concept). It seemed to cheapen the politics/diplomacy a bit.
If you read further back. That is exactly why I said this.
That is why, as the game stands now, social systems in a society, should play a part in diplomacy between civs. In CiV, the one thing that can be used for this are the civs individual choices for Social policies. Because within the game, we do not have two or more sects of the same religion. Like the two major denominations of Islam, Sunni and Shiite. I feel they should add religions that can break in two or three sects. That would be very interesting.
SammyKhalifa
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2003
- Messages
- 6,742
Yeah, sorry. I agree with what you're saying about the SPs playing a bigger role. I didn't mean to make it sound otherwise. I'm not sure about making the religions split up, etc.
- Status
