1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice


Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall: Europe' started by Veshta, May 1, 2011.

  1. LAF1994

    LAF1994 Chieftain

    Feb 7, 2009
    The problem with city independence is that it's completely arbitrary. Also, it doesn't make sense for the garrisoned army to go over to the rebels for no reason. A better setup would be a 'revolt' event which spawns a small army to attack the city and sends it into anarchy for 2-3 turns (this should probably also apply to the minor civ revolts).
    Regarding barbs, the problem is that historically most nations had various means to deal with raids. In-game, training troops to deal with raiders means sacrificing development, which is a problem given how time-constrained RFC is. One option would be to lengthen the early game (increasing tech costs to compensate) so that civs don't take 300-400 years to establish a functioning infrastructure. The other problem with barbs is that their behaviour isn't very realistic; they generally just stomp around smashing improvements until they're killed. Honestly, I'd just suggest removing the pillage ability entirely.
  2. gilgames

    gilgames Priest-King

    Apr 5, 2012
    Budapest, Hungary
    You can be agreed, but if you remove pillage optoin, they woulndt mean any threat except in 1070 for Byzy.

Share This Page