Is it me, Or am I living too long? - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Is it me, Or am I living too long?

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Is it me, Or am I living too long?

StargazerBC posted 03-06-99 05:34 PM ET
It has probably occured to everyone here. There's one fundamental flaw/irony with Civ1, then CivII, now, AC--the leaders live too long. Granted it would be kinda hard to play a game if no one, esp. the Player was leading. Wouldn't it make more sense to have new leaders arise out of the civ/fraction? Live for about 60-100 years. Then it would be really cool if we can attempt assinations. Or maybe a group of counselors? Civ II had it (albeit genericly) but not AC? It's kinda funny having a Democracy state and still have one person controlling everything? The only game, I remember, with a neat beaucracy was Pax Imperia where different leaders head different aspects of your empire (ie. espionage, science, exploration, military, etc) and their skills directly help or hinder that department they are leading. And yes, it is possibel to bribe/kill'em. ah well. I like the idea of living 200+ years to see my empire grow but it's highly unlikely. Esp, when a game's trying to be as realistic as possible.
Own Estabe posted 03-06-99 06:22 PM ET
There was an old console game I played a long time ago called Shingen the Ruler which solved the long life problem realistically. At some point in the game your HEIR (son) was born and you had to raise, educate, and teach him the art of war in order for him to take your place upon your death. This was a really nice touch and gave the game a sense of continuity and reality. Own Estabe
BoomBoom posted 03-07-99 09:35 AM ET
Stargazer: when you play SMAC, and in some of the cuttext's involving the Planet, you get told that you are in a longevity takn to increase your lifespan. So they have solved it. As for the democracy thing, I suppose you are probably supposed to be an influential figure in the background sort of person.
Prerogative posted 03-07-99 11:16 AM ET
The idea is, games like Civ and SMAC are trying to be fun. Losing portions of your control of the game over to the *ahem* 'brilliant' managing AI could really cut the game down.
And, as was mentioned before, there is an interlude and a few qoutes that suggest the leaders are taking longevity drugs (and in Lal's case) replacing parts of themselves with cybernetic implants.
Pudz posted 03-07-99 09:19 PM ET
agree with the treatments, at least for the russian guy, oh and stargazer, the game is trying to be fun, not realistic.
yin26 posted 03-07-99 09:42 PM ET
Funny, I thought these were "human beings" who left earth to colonize a planet as a result of problems that sounded vaguely like our own. Strage, too, how the game goes out of its way to promote the "personalities" of these A.I. factions. O.K., it's not real, but this kind of setup begs questions, doesn't it?
I can see how they "solved" the problem of longevity by slapping in a few quotes, but that, unfortunately, seems to be how much of the nod to logical questions was handled.
But I have to admit I don't read the quotes very carefully because they are not an effective hook for me. Some people really enjoy them. But as a means of filling in the game's holes, quotes are an easy and weak fix that are too eagerly ignored by the gamer who can't wait to pound that slug Lal with the new jets blinking at their bases.
StargazerBC posted 03-12-99 05:24 AM ET
Heck! I didn't think people would actually respond. Maybe I was not clear but No, the coucil members in Pax Imperia do not run algorthims. You hand pick them in the beginning for their skills (such as loyalty, ability at certain cabinet offices, agility, charisma, etc) and leave the remaining to replaced the assassinated ones. (ie, an Economic Advisor with a rating of 90$ would decrease cost of buying something by about 15%, 75 is the avg. and an exploration officer would help in such stuff as sensors and ship range, etc.) Thus, high amounts of counter espionage to protect them! Considering this game came out in the mid 80's?, I thought Pax Imperia solves a lot of the tedious loop holes PC games nowadays forgot. Btw, you can design your own technology, ships, and species right down to the planet class they best live in--ie G type, M type class planets. Btw, unlike Orion you can go anywhere on the map instead of just stars, planets have multiple regions of control, 6 resources to worry about. Okay--enough with the useless advertising--suffice to say, the irony is that Pax2 sucks farther than a porn star. And I'm playing a near bug free Pax game against 16 other computer players. Yes, I said 16. yes, came out last decade. . .for a Mac. Sad isn't it?
Beldar posted 03-12-99 12:56 PM ET
Stargazer, wasn't Pax Imperia an early 90's release? I'll have to dig up my copy, but I'm pretty sure it couldn't have been mid-80's.
It was a good game for the time, but too complex for the AI - it just didn't know how to defend planets. I used to let the CPs take planets just to build me infrastructure. Then kill the population from orbit and take over.
As to the original topic - the problem with having leaders be mortal is that wouldn't you have to have different pictures and different speeches for every succeeding faction leader? Unless, of course, you take all the personality out of diplomatic interaction. (You could have had leaders die in Civ2, since you only dealt with envoys - but I don't see how this would have had any effect on gameplay.)
I do appreciate your point on Democracy - isn't it funny how Lal always wins elections? How about this idea: if you're playing as a Democracy, and screw up real bad (lose a war, massive drone riots, something like that), you get voted out of office. Then the AI plays until it messes up somehow. I'd appreciate this, but I don't know if anyone else would.
StargazerBC posted 03-13-99 01:49 AM ET
Yeah, I lost the original box. 1991 for Pax1. The AI wasn't very good but it was great for its time I think. I mean, it would have been nice if there was some sort of council for a Democracy, a type ministry for Police states, etc. The thing is--governments shouldn't just be a numeric modifier. As for being specific and realism of the game--check the last 10 or so pages of your manual. There are more specs and details than necessary--hint hint realism?. What it lacks is credibility (new armor/weapons are just numeric modifiers) Nothing like unique weapons in Master of Orion series. I thought, for a game that revolves around war, it should be more than just a numeric modifier. And, governments should definitely not just be a modifier. The look and feel of each government. . cabinet, council, etc. should all be different.
gpammenter posted 03-15-99 01:48 PM ET
Lal always wins elections? In every game I've played so far, Lal gets elected the first time, and then everyone beats the crap out of the Peacekeepers. Someone else calls a vote, and I get elected! I've even voted against myself, and they still elected me. Its great 'cause then I gets lots of money, lots of units, and then I can do whatever I want.HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Adunct Pammenter, attache to Chairman Yang.
bene4 posted 03-15-99 02:46 PM ET
Wasn't it civ2 that would not allow you to declare war on other groups if you were in Democracy and the senate felt war was not necessary? I remember being very annoyed at that - set up a massive invasion force, got them to the doorstep of my enemy and then my own county decided that well, hey, conquering them completely just wasn't right.
Annoying, but real.
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: Is it me, Or am I living too long?
StargazerBC	posted 03-06-99 05:34 PM ET It has probably occured to everyone here. There's one fundamental flaw/irony with Civ1, then CivII, now, AC--the leaders live too long. Granted it would be kinda hard to play a game if no one, esp. the Player was leading. Wouldn't it make more sense to have new leaders arise out of the civ/fraction? Live for about 60-100 years. Then it would be really cool if we can attempt assinations. Or maybe a group of counselors? Civ II had it (albeit genericly) but not AC? It's kinda funny having a Democracy state and still have one person controlling everything? The only game, I remember, with a neat beaucracy was Pax Imperia where different leaders head different aspects of your empire (ie. espionage, science, exploration, military, etc) and their skills directly help or hinder that department they are leading. And yes, it is possibel to bribe/kill'em. ah well. I like the idea of living 200+ years to see my empire grow but it's highly unlikely. Esp, when a game's trying to be as realistic as possible.
Own Estabe	posted 03-06-99 06:22 PM ET There was an old console game I played a long time ago called Shingen the Ruler which solved the long life problem realistically. At some point in the game your HEIR (son) was born and you had to raise, educate, and teach him the art of war in order for him to take your place upon your death. This was a really nice touch and gave the game a sense of continuity and reality. Own Estabe
BoomBoom	posted 03-07-99 09:35 AM ET Stargazer: when you play SMAC, and in some of the cuttext's involving the Planet, you get told that you are in a longevity takn to increase your lifespan. So they have solved it. As for the democracy thing, I suppose you are probably supposed to be an influential figure in the background sort of person.
Prerogative	posted 03-07-99 11:16 AM ET The idea is, games like Civ and SMAC are trying to be fun. Losing portions of your control of the game over to the ahem 'brilliant' managing AI could really cut the game down. And, as was mentioned before, there is an interlude and a few qoutes that suggest the leaders are taking longevity drugs (and in Lal's case) replacing parts of themselves with cybernetic implants.
Pudz	posted 03-07-99 09:19 PM ET agree with the treatments, at least for the russian guy, oh and stargazer, the game is trying to be fun, not realistic.
yin26	posted 03-07-99 09:42 PM ET Funny, I thought these were "human beings" who left earth to colonize a planet as a result of problems that sounded vaguely like our own. Strage, too, how the game goes out of its way to promote the "personalities" of these A.I. factions. O.K., it's not real, but this kind of setup begs questions, doesn't it? I can see how they "solved" the problem of longevity by slapping in a few quotes, but that, unfortunately, seems to be how much of the nod to logical questions was handled. But I have to admit I don't read the quotes very carefully because they are not an effective hook for me. Some people really enjoy them. But as a means of filling in the game's holes, quotes are an easy and weak fix that are too eagerly ignored by the gamer who can't wait to pound that slug Lal with the new jets blinking at their bases.
StargazerBC	posted 03-12-99 05:24 AM ET Heck! I didn't think people would actually respond. Maybe I was not clear but No, the coucil members in Pax Imperia do not run algorthims. You hand pick them in the beginning for their skills (such as loyalty, ability at certain cabinet offices, agility, charisma, etc) and leave the remaining to replaced the assassinated ones. (ie, an Economic Advisor with a rating of 90$ would decrease cost of buying something by about 15%, 75 is the avg. and an exploration officer would help in such stuff as sensors and ship range, etc.) Thus, high amounts of counter espionage to protect them! Considering this game came out in the mid 80's?, I thought Pax Imperia solves a lot of the tedious loop holes PC games nowadays forgot. Btw, you can design your own technology, ships, and species right down to the planet class they best live in--ie G type, M type class planets. Btw, unlike Orion you can go anywhere on the map instead of just stars, planets have multiple regions of control, 6 resources to worry about. Okay--enough with the useless advertising--suffice to say, the irony is that Pax2 sucks farther than a porn star. And I'm playing a near bug free Pax game against 16 other computer players. Yes, I said 16. yes, came out last decade. . .for a Mac. Sad isn't it?
Beldar	posted 03-12-99 12:56 PM ET Stargazer, wasn't Pax Imperia an early 90's release? I'll have to dig up my copy, but I'm pretty sure it couldn't have been mid-80's. It was a good game for the time, but too complex for the AI - it just didn't know how to defend planets. I used to let the CPs take planets just to build me infrastructure. Then kill the population from orbit and take over. As to the original topic - the problem with having leaders be mortal is that wouldn't you have to have different pictures and different speeches for every succeeding faction leader? Unless, of course, you take all the personality out of diplomatic interaction. (You could have had leaders die in Civ2, since you only dealt with envoys - but I don't see how this would have had any effect on gameplay.) I do appreciate your point on Democracy - isn't it funny how Lal always wins elections? How about this idea: if you're playing as a Democracy, and screw up real bad (lose a war, massive drone riots, something like that), you get voted out of office. Then the AI plays until it messes up somehow. I'd appreciate this, but I don't know if anyone else would.
StargazerBC	posted 03-13-99 01:49 AM ET Yeah, I lost the original box. 1991 for Pax1. The AI wasn't very good but it was great for its time I think. I mean, it would have been nice if there was some sort of council for a Democracy, a type ministry for Police states, etc. The thing is--governments shouldn't just be a numeric modifier. As for being specific and realism of the game--check the last 10 or so pages of your manual. There are more specs and details than necessary--hint hint realism?. What it lacks is credibility (new armor/weapons are just numeric modifiers) Nothing like unique weapons in Master of Orion series. I thought, for a game that revolves around war, it should be more than just a numeric modifier. And, governments should definitely not just be a modifier. The look and feel of each government. . cabinet, council, etc. should all be different.
gpammenter	posted 03-15-99 01:48 PM ET Lal always wins elections? In every game I've played so far, Lal gets elected the first time, and then everyone beats the crap out of the Peacekeepers. Someone else calls a vote, and I get elected! I've even voted against myself, and they still elected me. Its great 'cause then I gets lots of money, lots of units, and then I can do whatever I want.HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Adunct Pammenter, attache to Chairman Yang.
bene4	posted 03-15-99 02:46 PM ET Wasn't it civ2 that would not allow you to declare war on other groups if you were in Democracy and the senate felt war was not necessary? I remember being very annoyed at that - set up a massive invasion force, got them to the doorstep of my enemy and then my own county decided that well, hey, conquering them completely just wasn't right. Annoying, but real.