|
Author
|
|
Topic: Break away groups |  |
|
Deathwalker
Settler
Britain
Mar 2000
|
 |
posted July 06, 2000 08:53
   | 
 |
 |  |
I was reading though the forum on Civ 2, when I saw an idea. How about if you ignore or neglect a city or group of cities they break off and set up on their own, E.G. America and other former colonies. |
UltraSonix
Warlord
Melbourne, Australia
May 2000
|
|
posted July 10, 2000 03:53
|
|
| |
I'm not so sure that's a good idea - eg what if you ignored a city just 'cause it was building a wonder? And I don't think that former colonies broke away simply because they were "ignored" or "negleted".------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... |
Grier
Warlord
of Reading,England
Feb 2000
|
 |
posted July 10, 2000 09:48
|
|
| |
I think he has a point, a distant colony might become unhappy if practicaly all of the civs investment was being spent on a few central citys and none on them. After all they pay taxes as well, maybe they think that they could run things better on their own.Just off the top of my head heres an example of how it might work. Each unbuilt improvement possible at the current tech level, will inflict a certain amount of unhappieness in a city, modified by the city size and the distance from the capital. This way those civs with higher technology levels get more of a problem.
Also the more units you build from a distant city the more unhappy they get, why should they fight in the war when they dont get the benefits of victory (a historical example might be Australia during the second world war, where many brave Australians went to fight and die in another mans war). The net result should be that you have to be realy kind to your distant citys to stop them declaring independance from you. | |
Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
