i think someone else mentioned something like this before so its not my idea, what about having one of the UHVs switced to having japan control what it intended to in the 1930s and 1940s. for instance-control china, the phillipines, austrailia, malaysa, and india(possibly?) by 1950 or whatever is considered the most reasonable to achieve.
Minor Suggestions Thread
- Thread starter Lokolus
- Start date
LukeUeda-Sarson
Prince
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2007
- Messages
- 341
I like the current Japanese UHV - it's a nice easy one that beginners can get their teeth into, and one that you actually occasionally have to worry about the AI achieving.
Having said that I would really like every Civ to have 2 different UHVs - an imperalistic conquest Japan could be a good 2nd UHV route.
Cheers, Luke
Having said that I would really like every Civ to have 2 different UHVs - an imperalistic conquest Japan could be a good 2nd UHV route.
Cheers, Luke
I agree i think 2 uhvs would be a great improvement to rfc. good point about japans difficulty level but their are still many easy uhv's for beginners. greece and portugal i have found to be on the simpler side. I think replacing one of japans uhv's would still make it relativly easy to beat. i play mostly on the viceroy level though so i dont kno if my opinion on the topic is a solid one.
Nerowannabe
Warlord
Oh my oh my god oh my god Rhye is here!
LukeUeda-Sarson
Prince
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2007
- Messages
- 341
Why do Panzer's not require oil? Germany is (rightly) given an oil tile representing the Ploesti fields that were so important to WWII, so it's not as if Germany lacks for oil in the game. Aside from making Panzer's oil-free in tersm of construction, it also has the possibly even worse effect of allowing them to built long before anybody else can build tanks, since Germany doesn't have to research combustion first. But Germany didn't invent the tank...
And further, why are they (along with other tanks) allowed city raider promotions? Built-up-areas are the last place you want to send a tank force into, even worse than forests...
Cheers, Luke
And further, why are they (along with other tanks) allowed city raider promotions? Built-up-areas are the last place you want to send a tank force into, even worse than forests...
Cheers, Luke
No oil is required for panzers, as you can build them before you even get combustion. Not sure if this is intended or not. Seems like its not, because the panzers unique ability is its power vs. other tanks. The oil near Budapest does let you build a number of other crucial modern war machines, like warships and airplanes.
City raider is what you use tanks for in this game. It may not really reflect how city assaults are done in real warfare, but this is an asbtraction, and 90% of your combat is going to be in a city tile in a civilization game.
I doubt this will be useful but i thought its worth mentioning. Couldnt there be a nation similar to the celts or byzantines to represent an austro hungarian empire? the balkans almost always ends up being dominated by germany, who then stretches all the way to settling landau. then as the game goes on the turks control the southern balkans, germany the north, and one time i saw portugal capture a city there. i think an austro hungarian empire or even a group of powerful city states that declare independece from time to time could really benifit the historical accuracy of the game. it would in addtion make the turks game a little more difficult. These independents could be armed similarly to the inde cities in italy, enough to make them difficult but still possible to conquer.
mitsho
Deity
Well, one probably could make the region more prone to spawn independent cities in revolutions...., but not an entire own civ, I'd say.
Panopticon
Utilitarian
Colonial instability.
Big civs should suffer something in-between a single city's independence and total collapse.
A civ with a colonial empire should lose many, or most, or all of its "colonies" rather than collapse. This would be similar to the post-1950 process of the European powers (UK, France, Spain).
In particular, this would solve the problem of the Eternal Mongol Empire.
Big civs should suffer something in-between a single city's independence and total collapse.
A civ with a colonial empire should lose many, or most, or all of its "colonies" rather than collapse. This would be similar to the post-1950 process of the European powers (UK, France, Spain).
In particular, this would solve the problem of the Eternal Mongol Empire.
i agree w/ this, but i think in general it is way to difficult for civs to expand. even the ai seems reluctant to build colonies. w/ uhvs like spain and arabia's this becomes frustrating. Spain did not suffer from the empire it created but other things like what they did w/ captured gold and the removal of many middle class artisans.
In my latest French game, the English found the Mayans and Aztecs before 1400 AD, and then founded Boston, Philadelphia, Savannah, and Toronto before I even got my share of cities in New Orleans and Quebec. And, I was pretty far ahead in tech.
One thing I'm concerned with is England never declaring war on the Celts and so they don't ever get "Ath Cliath" on Ireland. Or maybe they are at war, but I've seen an 18th century Ath Cliath guarded only by a single longbowman, and the English still haven't conquered it!
well, it makes them really strong in the mean-time: I mean, they have about 200 years to build those cities before America gets them...I guess that game will be fun to see how strong USA is.
I guess that was pretty un-usual, as a lot of the time I only see a few colonies around.
Although, in the above-mentioned game, I eliminated Spain (with the help of Portugal) and so there's no powerful colonial Spain to rival the English (and I'm the French... I won't do much more than my UHV requires...)
Lone Wolf
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 9,908
Still, they're better off founding Halifax, Cape Town and even a city in Guyana in the long run. I actually think that the English AI should have some understanding of the American flip zone and build only one (New York or Boston) city in it for roleplaying purposes.
Lone Wolf
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 9,908
Have the French found Fort Caroline or something. (It's not that rare already). New York is enough for the Americans, IMO. I played Americans when only New York flipped to me, as well as some two cities, and I didn't see much difference - my newly-founded size 4 American cities soon overtook NY in everything. You can give the Americans an extra settler, if you still think the USA needs more of a compensation.
The thing that determines the fate of AI America is not, in my experience, what cities flip to them - it is the existence of New Orleans.
The thing that determines the fate of AI America is not, in my experience, what cities flip to them - it is the existence of New Orleans.
The Q-Meister
King
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2005
- Messages
- 774
How about making the Euro civs more active in Asia? Playing as Japan, it can get rather lonely as China either collapses/conquered, ditto with Khmer so you usually have a Pan-Japanese-Pacific Empire and a huge central Asian Mongolia with the random Euro ship passing by and that's about it. It would be nice to see for instance the British try to establish Hong Kong or Euro civs demanding 'concessions' in terms of gold or cities with the threat of war behind it.
i think the ai understands it is difficult to maintian large empires far from their capital and dosent settle there. there are often settlers in dutch cities who dont do anything. would be nice to see the dutch east indies and british austrailia, along with colonies in other places. the ai seems to do a good job with North America and sometimes w/ africa(as long as mali arent vassals) though.
Similar threads
