Uh... he said seconds.If the game freezes for more than 4 minutes, quit.![]()

Uh... he said seconds.If the game freezes for more than 4 minutes, quit.![]()
Then what are you doing on a Civilization forum then eh?
I know there are better games out there, but Civ is still the best Turn Based Strategy game out there
Besides that, this website is about Civ and how we all play it. This isn't Metroid, Starcraft and Any Other Games IGN rates as cool fanatics
We're all Civvers here. If you don't like it, find another website, because you are on the wrong site
#126 You need a hash to say somethingNo matter how much I love Civ4 and how great it is and how much better it is than CivII, CivII is still the greatest of the two. Thats because you have to compare games to when they came out, and I have trouble finding anything quite as ground breaking as CivII. With all the flaws it had (and it had inumerable balancing flaws) it is important to remember that the gaming industry was a lot more amateurish at that time (more games where developed by a small group of people rather than a corporation).
I only have to look at a screenshot of CivII to remember the awe that that game created and the legend that is has become. Civ4 simply does not do that to me, although the Ocarina of Time does - but not to the same extent.
nossr50 said:#130 - Completely ignoring your military is the biggest gamble you can take
#132 - It's not a great idea to place your capital on a resource
#133 - It's not a great idea to place a town in an area without hills early in the game
#135 - Expanding into jungle is a risk
#0 - If I were a moderator, every irrelevant post in this thread would be deleted, I'm looking at you AfterShafter
... but here it isn't. i really liked the idea of that thread, as i like "1000 clues you've played civ too much". but seriously, this is just crap.
#129 Phil/Ind doesn't exist because it is overpowered (seriously overpowered I mean..)
#133 - It's not a great idea to place a town in an area without hills early in the game
You mean City by town don't you?
Why?? I don't get it. Jungle coveres usually grassland -> great science city. risk? i dont see any. Only a lot of work for those workers...
Diamondeye said:Overpowered with a capital O
Diamondeye said:Agree. And that's what they get paid for, not?
huh!? never seen that written with a capital O. But I try to write my posts as correctly as I can (as my language skills allow)
Btw, like your sig![]()
It often is a bad idea founding any city on top of a resource
You mean City by town don't you? And no, BFC with nothing but grassland makes a great science city.
Why?? I don't get it. Jungle coveres usually grassland -> great science city. risk? i dont see any. Only a lot of work for those workers...
nossr50 said:Expanding into jungles is a risky maneuver that will offer a lot of benefits in the long run but not many in the short term. Plentiful workers are needed with many cities in jungle terrain because you need to cut down the jungle and improve the city before it will benefit you.
r_rolo1 said:it is wise to let another civ to do the jungle clearing for you and then conquer their cities. Their worker-turns , our profit
Lord Olleus said:I believe that mining tundra hills is useless, a mine will only make a resource pop if it is being worked. That is, unless you were talking about hooking up uranium/coal/aluminium as soon as you discover the tech for it.