Sea/Land Boards - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Sea/Land Boards

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Sea/Land Boards

MxM posted 02-19-99 03:32 PM ET
I personally feel very inconvenient that the sea board is separated from the land board. One can just put sea base near lend base of another faction and take all water squares without breaking any treaty.
What do you think?

Prerogative posted 02-19-99 03:39 PM ET
Simple answer:
If you don't get sea tech early, and some enemy begins to clip your shores, get on the commlink and demand that they surrender the bases to you and withdraw from your territory.
It's no bug, but don't expect to get past characters like Yang and Santiago by just being nice and polite and abiding by the laws all the time. Once and awhile you just gotta break out a threat and/or go to war to go foreward.
MxM posted 02-19-99 04:17 PM ET
"�demand that they surrender the bases to you and withdraw from your territory"
The problem is that the see squares of the land base is NOT MY TERRITORY. Even the square that is next to the base.

"don't expect to get past characters like Yang and Santiago by just being nice and polite and abiding by the laws all the time. Once and awhile you just gotta break out a threat and/or go to war to go foreward."
Well... May be I want to play differently, or I am too week to declare war to Spartans just because they putted their see base near my land base. May be I had difficult time to make them pact with me.

"It's no bug"
I know. I just said that this is inconvenient, and I do not see any reason why it is done in such way.
marc420w posted 02-19-99 04:27 PM ET
I agree with MxM here. It may have been a little more difficult programming, but you'd think a land base would set a border out to three sea squares. Or at least a land base on the coast line that is eligible to build naval units.
I'd presume there are fishermen and commercial craft coming in and out of that base
Mexico wouldn't be very happy about the US building a "Sea Base" right off shore and expecting everyone to stay out of the sea zones. It might eventually come down to a contest of military might, but during a time of peace, it shouldn't be possible to do it.
Prerogative posted 02-19-99 04:57 PM ET
"The problem is that the see squares of the land base is NOT MY TERRITORY. Even the square that is next to the base."
I believe the land not reaching sea idea is actually a good one. It makes sea expansion a vaible choice for weak factions which are pinned in by heavy hitters like The Hive and The Believers. Besides, I consider quite a few squares outside my "official" borders to be rightfully my territory.
Being a brutal Hive and Morganite player, let me add a little of my 'diplomatic' advice:
"Abiding by the law is for the weak."
"Well... May be I want to play differently, or I am too week to declare war to Spartans just because they putted their see base near my land base. May be I had difficult time to make them pact with me."
One word: Tough.
If you can't fight off an offensive enemy, well, better luck next time, amigo.
As a long-time Civnut, let me add some advice: Don't be a weakling. The AI, even in Civ I, seems to know certain personality types. If you're very submissive and passive, the AI (or, better yet, a human player like me ) will quickly take advantage. To paraphrase, let me use a revolutionary war qoute: "Don't tread on me."
As I said above, I believe the reason is for oppressed players. It's a "race for the sea" so to speak. Perhaps in your current game someone has clipped your shores, but one day you'll be in the shore-clipping position. It's a powerful tactic, and a viable one.
If you're a pacifist, as I'm guessing you are, then you'll just have to take it in pacifist stride and become pact brother/sister with the other faction or just submit and withdraw.
If you're a cruel drone-stapeling nut like me, you'll break out your shotgun and tell them to get the hell off
It's classic Civ; the ability to take multiple approaches to a situation.
P.S.
Under current law, to my knowledge, every country only owns the water 20 miles off its shores. I'm guessing, atleast in the smaller maps, each square represents over 20 miles. So, lawfully, things seem to work out.
marc420w posted 02-19-99 05:05 PM ET
In terms of game play, I agree with Perogative. If a Faction did this to me, they'd very quickly see my coastal bases building Naval units and my inland bases building air and amphip units. If I didn't have them already. One way or another, I don't think that base would be there very long.
In terms of the game though, you really should get one of those messages that says "under the terms of your treaty with that Faction, you can't build a base here". If you are already at Vendetta with them, build to your hearts content.....just be ready to defend them.
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Sea/Land Boards
MxM	posted 02-19-99 03:32 PM ET I personally feel very inconvenient that the sea board is separated from the land board. One can just put sea base near lend base of another faction and take all water squares without breaking any treaty. What do you think?
Prerogative	posted 02-19-99 03:39 PM ET Simple answer: If you don't get sea tech early, and some enemy begins to clip your shores, get on the commlink and demand that they surrender the bases to you and withdraw from your territory. It's no bug, but don't expect to get past characters like Yang and Santiago by just being nice and polite and abiding by the laws all the time. Once and awhile you just gotta break out a threat and/or go to war to go foreward.
MxM	posted 02-19-99 04:17 PM ET "�demand that they surrender the bases to you and withdraw from your territory" The problem is that the see squares of the land base is NOT MY TERRITORY. Even the square that is next to the base. "don't expect to get past characters like Yang and Santiago by just being nice and polite and abiding by the laws all the time. Once and awhile you just gotta break out a threat and/or go to war to go foreward." Well... May be I want to play differently, or I am too week to declare war to Spartans just because they putted their see base near my land base. May be I had difficult time to make them pact with me. "It's no bug" I know. I just said that this is inconvenient, and I do not see any reason why it is done in such way.
marc420w	posted 02-19-99 04:27 PM ET I agree with MxM here. It may have been a little more difficult programming, but you'd think a land base would set a border out to three sea squares. Or at least a land base on the coast line that is eligible to build naval units. I'd presume there are fishermen and commercial craft coming in and out of that base Mexico wouldn't be very happy about the US building a "Sea Base" right off shore and expecting everyone to stay out of the sea zones. It might eventually come down to a contest of military might, but during a time of peace, it shouldn't be possible to do it.
Prerogative	posted 02-19-99 04:57 PM ET "The problem is that the see squares of the land base is NOT MY TERRITORY. Even the square that is next to the base." I believe the land not reaching sea idea is actually a good one. It makes sea expansion a vaible choice for weak factions which are pinned in by heavy hitters like The Hive and The Believers. Besides, I consider quite a few squares outside my "official" borders to be rightfully my territory. Being a brutal Hive and Morganite player, let me add a little of my 'diplomatic' advice: "Abiding by the law is for the weak." "Well... May be I want to play differently, or I am too week to declare war to Spartans just because they putted their see base near my land base. May be I had difficult time to make them pact with me." One word: Tough. If you can't fight off an offensive enemy, well, better luck next time, amigo. As a long-time Civnut, let me add some advice: Don't be a weakling. The AI, even in Civ I, seems to know certain personality types. If you're very submissive and passive, the AI (or, better yet, a human player like me ) will quickly take advantage. To paraphrase, let me use a revolutionary war qoute: "Don't tread on me." As I said above, I believe the reason is for oppressed players. It's a "race for the sea" so to speak. Perhaps in your current game someone has clipped your shores, but one day you'll be in the shore-clipping position. It's a powerful tactic, and a viable one. If you're a pacifist, as I'm guessing you are, then you'll just have to take it in pacifist stride and become pact brother/sister with the other faction or just submit and withdraw. If you're a cruel drone-stapeling nut like me, you'll break out your shotgun and tell them to get the hell off It's classic Civ; the ability to take multiple approaches to a situation. P.S. Under current law, to my knowledge, every country only owns the water 20 miles off its shores. I'm guessing, atleast in the smaller maps, each square represents over 20 miles. So, lawfully, things seem to work out.
marc420w	posted 02-19-99 05:05 PM ET In terms of game play, I agree with Perogative. If a Faction did this to me, they'd very quickly see my coastal bases building Naval units and my inland bases building air and amphip units. If I didn't have them already. One way or another, I don't think that base would be there very long. In terms of the game though, you really should get one of those messages that says "under the terms of your treaty with that Faction, you can't build a base here". If you are already at Vendetta with them, build to your hearts content.....just be ready to defend them.