Prehistory

[Tomoyo]

I like the smilie too, but I think that the is , and I do use the and the a lot, and due to my I use and also, I use the a lot.

 

[Yuri2356]

A city of 2 or 3 is a city of 30,000 - 60,000 (If they calculate the population like they did in Civ1) In prehistory no such thing would be happening.

Yes, we'd have to rework how population is counted # wise, but I've always seen that as more of a cosmetic thing.

 

[Tomoyo]

Who says civ has to be realistic, anyway?

 

[AA-battery]

Maybe population for each person can change when you change eras.

 

[Tomoyo]

...or as you get certain advances.

 

[AA-battery]

I see. Kinda like sanitation except cosmeticwise. I still think era change is the best place to add this in. Techs aren't really meant for cosmetic changes in the game. Look at workers and settlers for example.

 

[Goosbar]

I wonder what the game would be like without eras? Would the workers look the same all the time? Would the cities always look like huts?

what if instead of cities, you could be a nomadic tribe, and during the 'prehistoric era' you should have to scout your place to "settle down" and you should have to look for food before you learn animal domestication.

 

[AA-battery]

what if instead of cities, you could be a nomadic tribe, and during the 'prehistoric era' you should have to scout your place to "settle down" and you should have to look for food before you learn animal domestication.

Nice idea. Too bad this thread has been labeled "crap".

 

[CurtSibling]

Indeed, as one poster stated - The mini-era might be good as a little tutorial that you must do to learn the interface, etc.

Keeps the young tadpoles from invading the forums, asking: "Like, HoW do u plaay this gamme?"

 

[croxis]

Hmm, I can see it as a tutorial but at the same time it should be worthwhile for vet players as well. If you're going to add [re-history its goonna have to provide some way to get ahead.

I wonder if pre-history could also be a means for new civs to pop up later in the game, much like in real life This would be a modification of major/minor civs.

 

[Spatula]

Indeed, as one poster stated - The mini-era might be good as a little tutorial that you must do to learn the interface, etc.

Keeps the young tadpoles from invading the forums, asking: "Like, HoW do u plaay this gamme?"

I assume from your quoting of them that the 'tadpoles' are in fact 'Geordie chavs'

 

[CurtSibling]

Why aye, lad!

 

[Spatula]

Glad to know someone knows what I'm on about

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

why do you need the wheel to know about electricity?

Okay bad example, I was just talking about a really ancient invention versus a rather common invention. Maybe a better example is that in CIV 2 you could have automobiles without the wheel. Anyway reading the othe posts maybe an eraless civ would be better because you are creating your own history.

 

[croxis]

we now know the tech tree is more fluid so I'm thinking hard eras will be removed.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Thats not neccessarily true though, Croxis, as I feel it would be possible to retain eras, whilst still having a fluid tech tree. Part of the fluidity may, in fact, be the result of a tech tree where you do NOT research specific techs, but instead invest in broader research categories.
I admit, though, that I am assuming a great deal, too, based on my own hopes for a retention of broad eras (perhaps not as 'hard and fast' as they are in civ3) and 'semi-blind' research!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.