June 15, 2000, 15:09
|
#31
|
|
Chieftain
Local Time: 00:23
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: La Jolla, Ca, US
Posts: 93
|
Why do I think that Civ 2 was unbalanced as far as the military is concerned? After all, only one in three build choices were military, and the only way to resolve disputes (and for that matter, win the game) was by force. I want to see more treaties, so that diplomacy actually means something.
After all, who waited long enough to put their spaceship on Alpha Centari...I was done while the years moved by increments of five, unless I was bored.
|
|
|
|
|
June 15, 2000, 16:43
|
#32
|
|
Guest
|
Abuzayd - ROTFLMAO  I must have missed that typo, I was goin' for "shift" not "****". 
------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~
"Oh, they have the Internet on computers now!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 15, 2000, 18:45
|
#33
|
|
King
Local Time: 16:23
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 2,543
|
You should read over your posts Orange
1 word edit
------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse
HappyLand
There is no spoon,
But there is a knife 
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 16, 2000, 00:57
|
#34
|
|
Chieftain
Local Time: 00:23
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Somerville, Mass.
Posts: 34
|
quote:
I think the main thing is, the AI should play like that in the early stages, but gradually **** (sic) to a more peaceful method, like after the UN
|
Would they need the "Sanitation" advance first? 
But seriously, the AI should definitely be smarter as well as more varied. In Civ 2, even though some civs are supposed to be "Perfectionist" or "Expansionist," or whatever, they all end up being untrustworthy bastards no matter what.
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 20:23.
|
|
