Number of civs

ShadowWarrior

Prince
Joined
Jun 7, 2001
Messages
411
Though it annoys many people on this message board, I personally think that 16 civilizations are enough.

The civilizations that we are going to be using is no different from any others. THe only difference is that the names will be differetn. So what does it matter if there are only 16 civilizations? There's really no point.

If the civilzations are going to be very different, being given special advantages in one area, disadvantages in other areas, and differetn civ-specific units, then I would opt for more civilizations.

Furthermore, if the map is much MUCH bigger, then there is definetly a case for inclusion of more civilizations from which to choose.

But as things stands now, I don't think there's need to have to add so many new civilizations.

 
Here we go again, another thread about this same topic. This makes at least a half dozen. Anyway, I will state what I said before here so it doesn't get missed.

Firaxis, we want more civs AND a bigger map to go along with them! Yes, I know it takes a while to do all the graphics and whatnot, but maybe after reading this you will make a modpack that allows us to have more civs in the game at one time than just 7, and use a larger map than 10k squares.

Please let this be the last thread on this topic. I get tired of having to repeat myself in order to be heard.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0>If you cross the border, you better have your green card!<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0>

[This message has been edited by BorderPatrol (edited June 07, 2001).]
 
Originally posted by ShadowWarrior:
If the civilzations are going to be very different, being given special advantages in one area, disadvantages in other areas, and differetn civ-specific units, then I would opt for more civilizations.

They are. It seems ironic from the standpoint of your arguments, but that's precisely the reason they are reducing the number of civs in the first place. Each civ will at least have civ-specific units, and of course a lot of artwork to make the feel different. I don't know what else, but that was one of the main points Dan Magaha has been making; they didn't want to fill the game with a bunch of cookie-cutter civs like there were before, so they're making each civ unique. But apparently, that's stretching their resources a bit (or at least their time resources), so that's why they're reducing the number of civs.

Personally, I'd be willing to wait until they did all they needed to do to let us at least keep the 21 civs we already have. But I know few people would agree with that, and from a marketing standpoint I can understand why they can't. I don't agree with their decision to reduce it to 16, but I do understand why they did it, and I shall accept it. Here's hoping the number goes up again in Civ IV, eh? Or maybe they'll be really nice and incrementally release additional sets of civs after the game comes out that we can download or purchase for a modest price, install, and play. . . .
smile.gif
 
ShadowWarrior, I agree with BorderPatrol that we don't need yet another thread on the number of Civs, at least not one which doesn't bring a new slant to the idea. This topic has been adequately and more thoroughly discussed elsewhere. Just use the CivFanatics search facility to find it if you can't see it on the list of current topics. Then contribute your ideas to that one.

It doesn't help general acceptance of a point of view to say more often or to say it louder. Quality of posting will do that, not quantity, which is why I always welcome Loaf Warden's contributions.

I'm not going to formally close this thread as yet. I trust to the common sense of you all to understand my points. And there may be a time in the future when it is legitimate to resurrect the thread.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://www.anglo-saxon.demon.co.uk/stormerne/stormerne.gif" border=0>
 
i totally agree with you the maps are so small you can only get about 90 good city on one. And I want at LEAST 12 civs at one time

the spy speaks
 
Maybe I'm wrong but...how many of you have played a game with more that twenty civs at a time?

(I mean a game other that civ)

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://www.virtuallandmedia.com/img1/flags-4/europe/fra.gif" border=0><IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/image_uploads/Azz.gif" border=0> <IMG SRC="http://www.virtuallandmedia.com/img1/flags-4/europe/gre.gif" border=0>
 
I have. Star Trek: Birth of the Federation. Of course, most were "minor races". See the topic on that for more info...

------------------
Civilization I Master of masters and webmaster of Civilization III Arsenal
 
if you did have 20 civs on the map then it would be a pain working out the colors that are easily identified for each race. The total number of civs is not important if the game still allows only 7 during play.
Allow maybe 8 or 9 during game play, granted more would be PERFECT for scenarios but game would experience turn slowdowns like BOTF cuz comp will have too much work to do.
Most of us dont have super fast comps with loads of ram which can handle that kind of work.
 
The slowness in BOTF is due to shoddy programming, not too many computer players. The only time the computer players get to do anything is during their turns, and that only takes a few seconds.

------------------
Civilization I Master of masters and webmaster of Civilization III Arsenal
 
wait till you hit turn 200 and everyone's got 150 ships. turns take 3 to 4 mins to process on my 933MHz puter. Civ 2 also slowed down on my puter (not much but it was noticable) when everyone got big and powerful and had huge standing armies. There is a LOT of work for the puter to do. And if there are more civs on the map, it will slow down further. Gotta keep in mind that not everyone has a super fast comp than can handle all the extra work
 
Back
Top Bottom