Apolyton Archive  |  Preserved copy of the Apolyton Civilization Site forums as they ran on Ultimate Bulletin Board, 1998–2001. Read-only; nothing here can be posted to or replied to.  |  Forum index |  About this archive |  The 2005 site & forums

  Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
  Civ3-General/Suggestions
  Civil Wars

Post New Topic  Post A ReplyPost A Reply In A New Window

profile | register | preferences | faq | search next newest topic | next oldest topic bottom of page
Author Topic:   Civil Wars            Current Date/Time: April 20, 2000 08:11:04
WarVoid
Chieftain of Otis, Mass., U.S.A., born Apr 2000
posted April 16, 2000 21:14   Click Here to See the Profile for WarVoidClick Here to Email WarVoid Edit/Delete Message Reply To & Quote Message IP: Logged, Admin Access Only


Okay, here's the scoop. In civ2, sometimes when you capture a large enemies capitol the empire breaks into many factions. Well sometimes the Romans would split into the Chinese and the Incas. That dosen't seem quite right. How about having the civs split into their actual counterparts.

Such as the Romans would split into the Byzantines and English which were actual empires created by civil wars in the Roman empire.

Or for instance the Mongols would split into the Turks and Chinese. Russians into Kazakhs and Goths. Etc.

Does anyone think this is a good idea?
[This message has been edited by WarVoid (edited April 16, 2000).]

Earthling7
Chieftain of Netherlands (although I am Icelandic), born Jul 1999
posted April 17, 2000 07:45   Click Here to See the Profile for Earthling7Click Here to Email Earthling7 Edit/Delete Message Reply To & Quote Message IP: Logged, Admin Access Only


Absolutely. It's a good idea. It's not essential to gameplay, but if you want to improve on the best game ever, you might as well do it properly

------------------
Greetings,
Earthling7
ICQ: 929768

ivorgrubisic
Settler of Ljubljana, Slovenia, born Apr 2000
posted April 20, 2000 05:57   Click Here to See the Profile for ivorgrubisicClick Here to Email ivorgrubisic Edit/Delete Message Reply To & Quote Message IP: Logged, Admin Access Only


Yeah, good idea.
tniem
Chieftain of GR, MI USA, born Apr 2000
posted April 20, 2000 08:11   Click Here to See the Profile for tniemClick Here to Email tniem Edit/Delete Message Reply To & Quote Message IP: Logged, Admin Access Only


I agree, but more importantly is the whole idea of Civil Wars. They should be a lot more often and over more things. I think if there is the idea of ethniticity included in the game then regions with different ethniticities and religions would have different beliefs and then may rebel in certain situations. This can be see all over Europe throughout history.

Plus, Civil Wars occuring when the capital is taken is totally unrealistic. The American Civil War happened and the U.S. capital was never taken. Chinese, Russian, and Cuban Civil Wars to Communism never had there capital taken except when the Revolutionary party took the capital. Most Civil Wars start from the inside and have nothing to do with a foreign invader taking the capital.

I just think that Civil Wars need to be more impactful and often especially when the Rise and Fall of empires is included.

Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
> > > Civ3-General/Suggestions Forum

next newest topic | next oldest topictop of page

All times are EDT

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A ReplyPost A Reply In A New Window Contact Us
Apolyton Civilization Site
Hop to:

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.44a
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.

Front Page | Civilization III | Dinosaurs | Civilization II | Call to Power | Call to Power II | Alpha Centauri | Alternative Civs | Misc | Links | About ACS | GameStats
GameLeague | Scenario League | Hodadian Award Central | Civilization Scenario Collection | Spanish CivII Site | Clash of Civs | CtP Maps