Sanaz
Gorilla Joe
EDIT : Deleted after a second thought.
I Hate this GD Game!
- Thread starter Advocate
- Start date
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
As for taking history 101, thank you, I've been there already. I know very well cities did not just "change countries" like that, but I happen to try to see actual meaning of culture-flipping instead of remaining stuck on the basic level. I was not tryign to insult you btw by stating I have uni knowledge in history, but to clear out that I'm not just a random joe schome talking about something I have no inkling about, which is what YOU accused me of. Neither are you apparently, good.
I guess we both have time to waste at that - you trying to prove that Civ III is an horrible abomination, and me trying to counter your points.
Let's try this again. If you aren't willing to actually debate the points I did make, then you just go to show that your arguments against Firaxis are weak.
1-Culture-flipping doesn't represent cities just "going over to the other side" as one would be tempted to think. They are a representation, within the game's limited capacities (IE, limited number of Civs) of the phenomenon of cities and territories breaking apart from the government which control them and aligning themselves (either economically or in other terms) withanother country which served in a way as an encouragement to that rebellion.
In Game Terms, there are no "Small countries" and "World Powers" - only Civilization, which tend to comprise both the world power and the weaker countries alligned with them.
Comparing this to a real-world example, you have the situation in the late eighties in Europe. There were two serious "World Powers" so to speak in play there : the Western World (Wheter you see that as Europe, or Europe + America, or whatever), and the Soviet block. Culturaly speaking, the Western World was strong in terms of game culture and attraction, where the Soviet block wasn't quite so strong.
At that point, several republic of the soviet union and several country of the warsaw pact one after the other opted out of the communist boat and alligned themselves to an extent in the western power.
Did they officialy join a western country? No. Did they allign themselves far more on the western country? Judging by the fact that some are now askign to be let in/being let in the EU and NATO, judge for yourself.
Culture-flipping represent this kind of events, not cities surrendering to overwhelming cultural power.
Now, as for culture rebellion (IE, in cities you captured), I already said I agreed with you that garrisons should count for more. But does it make sense to have parts of countries which are ethnically different want to separate? Heck, yes! Being from Québec, I've been personally in contact with it all my life, but if you stop and think about it a moment, there's Palestine, Ireland, Kosovo and a thousand others hot spot which literaly leap to mind.
Again, at that point them "flipping" to another country represent them alligning themselves on another nation than yours.
As for encouraging the removal of a troublesome population, it's not a solution that's news to Civ III. Slaughtering and/or exiling (IE, by making into workers) all the citizens of a newly captured territory or of a rebelling territory has been done in the past to get a firmer hold. I can name you a few examples :
Late first century : the exile of the jews after their rebellion against the Romans. Which eventually lead to the whole mess we have there today.
1755 : Deportation of the Acadians who refused to swear fealty to the british crown. They were picked up by boat and sent to various territories to free up the land.
In both case, it was effective at allowing the conqueror to keep the land. Is it now that the game is too realistic in making the drastic measure a valid choice when all else fail that's the problem?
I said it before, I will now say it again, garrisons should have more of an effect (think Palestine), and you should definitely get a warning ("Lord, we have heard of a separatist movement in X, inspired by the theories of the Y culture! We must act to preserve our national unity!"), especially in democracies. That, yes, that should be changed.
But just painting culture flipping overall as wrong is not as accurate as you seem to think. It does make sense - if you try to look at it from an open view rather than a closed "Cities going over to the other country. Never happened." view.
I guess we both have time to waste at that - you trying to prove that Civ III is an horrible abomination, and me trying to counter your points.
Let's try this again. If you aren't willing to actually debate the points I did make, then you just go to show that your arguments against Firaxis are weak.
1-Culture-flipping doesn't represent cities just "going over to the other side" as one would be tempted to think. They are a representation, within the game's limited capacities (IE, limited number of Civs) of the phenomenon of cities and territories breaking apart from the government which control them and aligning themselves (either economically or in other terms) withanother country which served in a way as an encouragement to that rebellion.
In Game Terms, there are no "Small countries" and "World Powers" - only Civilization, which tend to comprise both the world power and the weaker countries alligned with them.
Comparing this to a real-world example, you have the situation in the late eighties in Europe. There were two serious "World Powers" so to speak in play there : the Western World (Wheter you see that as Europe, or Europe + America, or whatever), and the Soviet block. Culturaly speaking, the Western World was strong in terms of game culture and attraction, where the Soviet block wasn't quite so strong.
At that point, several republic of the soviet union and several country of the warsaw pact one after the other opted out of the communist boat and alligned themselves to an extent in the western power.
Did they officialy join a western country? No. Did they allign themselves far more on the western country? Judging by the fact that some are now askign to be let in/being let in the EU and NATO, judge for yourself.
Culture-flipping represent this kind of events, not cities surrendering to overwhelming cultural power.
Now, as for culture rebellion (IE, in cities you captured), I already said I agreed with you that garrisons should count for more. But does it make sense to have parts of countries which are ethnically different want to separate? Heck, yes! Being from Québec, I've been personally in contact with it all my life, but if you stop and think about it a moment, there's Palestine, Ireland, Kosovo and a thousand others hot spot which literaly leap to mind.
Again, at that point them "flipping" to another country represent them alligning themselves on another nation than yours.
As for encouraging the removal of a troublesome population, it's not a solution that's news to Civ III. Slaughtering and/or exiling (IE, by making into workers) all the citizens of a newly captured territory or of a rebelling territory has been done in the past to get a firmer hold. I can name you a few examples :
Late first century : the exile of the jews after their rebellion against the Romans. Which eventually lead to the whole mess we have there today.
1755 : Deportation of the Acadians who refused to swear fealty to the british crown. They were picked up by boat and sent to various territories to free up the land.
In both case, it was effective at allowing the conqueror to keep the land. Is it now that the game is too realistic in making the drastic measure a valid choice when all else fail that's the problem?
I said it before, I will now say it again, garrisons should have more of an effect (think Palestine), and you should definitely get a warning ("Lord, we have heard of a separatist movement in X, inspired by the theories of the Y culture! We must act to preserve our national unity!"), especially in democracies. That, yes, that should be changed.
But just painting culture flipping overall as wrong is not as accurate as you seem to think. It does make sense - if you try to look at it from an open view rather than a closed "Cities going over to the other country. Never happened." view.
To answer your question, Space Empires IV. That game is so customizable it boggles the mind. And it is easy too customize.
I have been messing with the editor, and have slightly tweaked some of the units. I think that better control over unit values would be a nice thing, however, given the out dated nature of the control and bad AI issues, I would just settle for a control feature that would tell the AI not to build units that are out dated.
Also, I would pay real money to have a NEWS flash feature that posted all the events from the turn in order by city instead of the bounce -e- bounce city to city way the game currently does it.
I also would like GOTO control, and if possible, turn off the AUTO MOVE TOO feature. A Next Availible Unit button would then also be needed.
This way if I want to focus my attention on a problem spot, I can do it without being moved to the oppisite side of the map to look at a stupid message saying that the "Celibration has ended."
All messages can be posted in the NEWS report, and I can view it at will.
Also, is there a way to build a pre-designated job que. Whenever I build a new city, I have to manually fill the que. Is there a way to just say build Que 1, and have the AI load that Que?
Also, how do you specifically upgrade all unit types of a specific type at ONE time? I can't seem to get this too work.
One final thing, please forgive my spelling, whooked own foniks werkid fore mea.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Shift-U I think for mass upgrade of all units of any given type which can be upgraded (IE, you can't upgrade units which aren'T in town with barracks connected to all necessary resources).
As for building stupid old units, I find that making it so that the units are repaced by others, more modern units in teh build queue doesn't work all that bad.
AFAIK there's also supposed to be a way to save and load queues...not sure on that one, though. You may want to check the main Civfanatic site.
As for building stupid old units, I find that making it so that the units are repaced by others, more modern units in teh build queue doesn't work all that bad.
AFAIK there's also supposed to be a way to save and load queues...not sure on that one, though. You may want to check the main Civfanatic site.
Bill_in_PDX
Grumpy Submariner
Do you have any actual proof of that occuring?
I find that the AI, rightly or wrongly, routinely has several settlers on hand in standby waiting for action. I've noticed that many human players are now posting that they routinely build many settlers prior to a big war.
I am pretty sure you are right, Bill.
Just a reminder to everyone. CIV 3 is a game! It cannot be real life. The reason most of us play games is because they are not real life.
dreadknought
timelord
Add hitpoints to your units as they become more modern and this helps this problem alot. I add a lot of points to all my navel units but I up the cost alot to.
sumthinelse
civ investigator
How about Hong Kong? It is a "special" province of China now, under special rules, but it succumbed to tremendous forces surrounding it. (China promised to pretty much leave the economy alone, but look at how China regards the sovreignty of Japanese and S. Korean embassies lately.)
The U. S. military bases in the Philippines? The Panama Canal?
Now I will admit that these changes are not simply a matter of the surrounding territories building a bunch of "culture-producing" buildings, but there does seem to be some kind of tendency for territories to be absorbed by a strong presence around or near them.
The U. S. military bases in the Philippines? The Panama Canal?
Now I will admit that these changes are not simply a matter of the surrounding territories building a bunch of "culture-producing" buildings, but there does seem to be some kind of tendency for territories to be absorbed by a strong presence around or near them.
Just making sure you remembered. I actually got shot at while attacking some infantry the other day.
SirJava
Chieftain
I love civ 3 and would not give it up for anything.
That said culture flipping is the most stupid thing of all time. I dont see how a city of size 5 can revolt and despose my 50 modern armour! there should be an option to slaughter these disgusting pests!!!!
Please firaxis free us of this burden. culture flipping has ruined many of my good games!
That said culture flipping is the most stupid thing of all time. I dont see how a city of size 5 can revolt and despose my 50 modern armour! there should be an option to slaughter these disgusting pests!!!!
Please firaxis free us of this burden. culture flipping has ruined many of my good games!
Similar threads
