|
Post by Atomation on Apr 9, 2007 4:00:08 GMT -5
What if liberalism gave a tech for every team (including 1 person teams), rather than just one? What if every tech that included a great person gave that great person to each team? What if world wonders became wonders that could be built once by each team rather than once globally? Sick of getting busted by the RNG where you hit one of these milestones the same turn as another team/player and you come out empty handed (or virtually)? In my eyes, it would be a nice addition to see an "allow duplication" option to provide us with an interesting twist on gameplay which allows each team to decide the when and where of important techs and wonders. When will you grab that great person - it's there waiting but is now the best time? When will you decide to construct that monumental wonder? Perhaps you should wait and build some cities first? When will you decide to research liberalism. Will you gain more benefit from learning it now, and taking a fairly big tech, or risk waiting until later so you can take something much bigger? All these questions ooze strategy, and I think this new option would be a great addition to civ4 multplayer.
|
|
|
Post by SweViking on Apr 9, 2007 5:33:55 GMT -5
Ok maybe as a option to have wonders beeing built once a team, not just once a game.
But im not sure i would like to play with that option, the thrill and exitement is IF you are going to get music first or IF you are going to build great libary first. Things like that i see is a part of civ aswell, to try to guess what other team are doing.
Sometimes you loose it on same turn... sure might feel crap, but what goes around comes around.
Even remember a game where i lost a wonder same turn, got 200 gold or something. But then i had money to upgrade two galleys same turn we got astronomy. So i did, and went to kill before they even knew we had astro.
So basicly, me losing that wonder gave the team the victory ;D
|
|
|
Post by xiaojuzi on Apr 9, 2007 8:09:18 GMT -5
both sides getting the wonder in the same turn lose the wonder only converted into coins,simple.
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Apr 9, 2007 13:29:02 GMT -5
Personally, I love the luck factor in games because it adds to strategy, but the luck factor in assigning wonders and tecs when players get them the same turn ruins the game. If 2 players get a tec or a wonder the same turn, the player who has the most spill over research or spill over hammers should get the wonder or tec, simple as that, no questions asked. This adds more strategy to the game in an area that is in great need of strategy.
Your idea is ok, but I personally have very minimal to no interest in playing this type of game. My problem with the idea is there is a nice feeling and a great deal of strategy in building a wonder that will be completely lost when people play with this option. Lets not mention that wonders like stone hedge will make creative obsolete, and liberalism and the oracle will be completely abused to get certain combinations of tecs making all intelligent players go a single tec path further removing strategy from the game.
|
|
|
Post by Necrominousss on Apr 10, 2007 2:12:55 GMT -5
Duplication sounds OK to me. Having a option for MP would be nice at least.
|
|
|
Post by smatt834 on Apr 10, 2007 16:14:46 GMT -5
waaa waaa someone built a wonder the same turn i was gonna. waa waa. if you lose games cause you miss out on a tech or a wonder you should just give up. and changing it to spill over would just make people do stupid things like chopping extra forests down on the turn the wonder has 1 turn left or turning on priests or engineers on that turn or scientists for tech. just silly and dumb imo. but the idea of an option isn't nearly as repulsive.
|
|