|
Author
|
|
Topic: Tribe nationality affecting stats?! |  |
|
Alinestra Covelia
b.02-15-99
|
 |
posted January 28, 2001 15:17
   | 
 |
 |  |
All right, I'm not usually given over to rumor and mere hearsay (regardless of how I've been portrayed on my website) but I heard that the Civ2 tribes have inbuilt statistical differences, such as combat bonuses and domestic abilities, etc.I am a seasoned (ahem) scenario builder, so I know about the RULES.txt changes for leader personality wrt city construction, civilization tech choices, and treaty faithfulness. This disputed property of certain factions that I'm talking about here has nothing to do with that normal approach. I've heard, for example, that the Japanese tribe gets an inherent combat bonus when attacking or defending. Can anybody clarify this for me? I suspect it was discussed on an earlier thread, but can't find it. I am strenuously against the idea of non-customizable unique faction attributes in Civ3, and I am greatly surprised to find accusations that this has already happened in Civ2! |
SMACed
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted January 28, 2001 15:28
|
|
| |
Nope, I really doubt it.The closest it gets to unique-ish traits is the perfectionist civs, starting techs, colors, etc. SMAC was considered innovative compared to civ2, in part, because of the personalities of each faction leader. The names in civ2 are window dressing, don't worry about a secret advantage/disadvantage you've played under for the past years  |
Scouse Gits
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted January 28, 2001 15:36
|
|
| |
Have a quick look at our "A is for Alphabet" thread - there are a few very minor hard wired advantages that we discovered - in particular the Egyptians have a proclivity to start with Masonry -- beyond this we at least cannot help.
___________________
The SGs climbing into a magnum------------------
____________
Scouse Git[1] "CARTAGO DELENDA EST" - Cato the Censor
"The Great Library must be built!"
"A short cut has to be challenging,
were it not so it would be 'the way'." - Paul Craven |
Zeevico
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted January 28, 2001 20:01
|
|
| |
There was a post which had the Babylonians versing the Romans or some other miliytaristsic civ and it turns out that although the romans won more times than the Babylonians in archer vs archer/ combat and it was never more than 3, and therefor was inconclusive. |
Kitana
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 01, 2001 14:39
|
|
| |
I will admitt something. I used to always play the Japanese civ. Recently I've started experimenting with different civs and I have to admitt that militarilly speaking I have a better time attacking/defending as the Japanese. This could just be coincidental though.------------------
Kitana
Shogun of the Japanese |
rixxe
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 02, 2001 04:00
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Zeevico on 01-28-2001 08:01 PM
There was a post which had the Babylonians versing the Romans or some other miliytaristsic civ and it turns out that although the romans won more times than the Babylonians in archer vs archer/ combat and it was never more than 3, and therefor was inconclusive.
|
Yes, I performed the tests, it was Babs vs Mongols (with archers, and alpine), there has never been a significal difference. |
La Fayette
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 02, 2001 09:36
|
|
| |
SG(1)
If it is Medoc inside the magnum, I swear I play three games in a row as the English. | |
Apolyton Civilization Site Forums-archives
