CivRulesAll
The Void Beyond
- Joined
- May 1, 2007
- Messages
- 590
They have rights of passage, mutual protection, and alliances in civ3, and I believe they have cease fire in Civ4.
I'm not a military historian, but I think that the importance you attach to the WE is perhaps exaggerated. Isn't it true that all of Hannibal's victories in Italy were achieved without them, they having failed to survive the Alpine crossing?
I do not remember a version of Civ2 for the Mac however.
more diplomacy, so that its not just war or peace, they should have;
Total nuklear war
stratigic nukelear war
invasion war
millitary war
cold war
cease fire
non agression
peace
rights of passage
alliance
mutual protection
annexation
I whole-heartedly agree! More diplomatic options would give the game SO much more depth...
Imagine if you could conquer an enemy civ, but instead of occupying their cities (which will be in resistance and have high corruption) you could vassalize their leadership. They maintain control of production, citizens and troops, but you would have full freedom of movement and you would dictate their foreign policy.
I guess this is a blend of Civ and Europa Universalis. lol
EVENTS. User scenarios would improve a thousandfold.
Mapping ability for peninsular crossings, à la Civ2.
oh and none of this
![]()
I liked the religions in Civ 4, maybe they should have something like that in Civ3.
Not sure what you mean by this...Thorvald of Lym said:Mapping ability for peninsular crossings, à la Civ2.
Being able to do this:
![]()
Civ4 BTS sort of let you do it with forts.
More governments would be nice, and maybe the ability to choose if you want a golden age to happen. I hate having a golden age really early in the game.