Random Off-Topic

I was also always seeking asia, and if I could america. America, South America, and Africa. You get those three and you get a ridiculous amount of troops. Plus great for defending. I'm not liking the sound of nukes.

Ah Risk, and how much I hate the bottlenecks. I just try to take over whatever continent I have more troops on.

I need to read the rules for this future one. Nukes in Civ are bad enough but Risk makes them sound even worse.

There are heroes, 'money', space stations, and cards in the future one. Heroes allow for movements in either land, moon, or water, and provide bonuses and the ability to purchase certain cards. So for example, a 'land' card may provide you 5 extra units in response to an attack by an opponent. There are two forms of nukes in the game.

1) Initial nukes, 3 nukes hit the map based on random drawn country cards. Those countries are removed from the game, both for use and movement.

2) Card nukes, these range from assassinate bombs (the ability to kill opponents' leaders), nukes that wipe half of all units on a country, and super nukes, which kill half of all units in a territory (continent) based on a dice roll. To make it worse, the Armageddon card allows all nuke cards of everyone to be played at once without costing money.

The nice thing about the game is that the use of water territories act as straight lines connecting continents, preventing a lot of bottleneck issues. Also, the cards help to add a level of strategy to the game that help reduce the impact of the snake eyes spree issue that can occur in the game.

Yeah just read the rules and saw the map, it seems like quite a leap. My roomie has huge board game collection, I imagine he has it somewhere.

Never played civilisation -_-

Haven't played the more recent civs (think I stopped at II or III), but one time in the original I had a computer enemy's 1 attack strength sailboat cruise up to my advanced, walled coastal city, attack it and destroy a defending tank unit, and then land a basic spearman in it and capture it all in the same turn. Don't know how it works now, but in that version if you lost a city for even a turn most of its improvements got destroyed and like 1/2 of its population. It was like having NYC get flattened by a bunch of hobos on a raft.

Befowler...This needs to be a movie now.

From the makers of Hobo with a Shotgun, "Battle New York: The Hobo Revolution!"

Oh my god that is awesome. I completely agree that should be a movie.

I'm not sure what to do about England, I am just barely managing a ground war, but it's hard to fight them on equal terms. Throw in that they have stocked up on long range artillery and started picking off my units as I try to make headway. Their landlocked navy is dealt with, I dropped atomic bombs in the waters and for the most part land and cities were not effected. This is why I hate nukes, they make the game way to easy and really screw up land and cities, taking literally many years (turns) to clean up and bring cities back to their former glory. I extremely hate that the AI will use them without care, and even raze cities to the ground when captured.

Weird, that is the opposite of Civ 4, I have never seen a nuke used in that game, and the AI rarely raises cities :|

Well I do play with conquest and diplomacy being the only ways to win, with no city states it's practically impossible to win via diplomacy since everyone wants to win by conquest. I have read in a few sources you can liberate other civs, I know you can liberate city-states and then they will vote for you, so if I go against Iroquois and bring Rome back into the game, and possibly Songhai since I wasn't the one that eliminated them from the game, I may have a chance for diplomacy if I can capture whatever city the U.N. is located in.

Then again I only need to capture capital cities to win. I'm right next to Englands but they have a large army blocking it, and artillery behind that, with no real way to get close. The Iroquois capital is somewhat close to the ocean, but I haven't done enough planning to know how easy it would be to take considering they practically have one military land unit for at least one of every three squares of land they control, and they have alot of land...

Sorry Serious and any other British folk who lurk here, but England is totally screwed. After decimating their navy I've learned they actually have no other form of AA power (Aside the 3 darned destroyers that didn't sink and were a thorn in my side for many turns), nor do they poses an airforce, another thing I had invested in. Needless to say my WW2 era bombers and figher planes, modern fighters and stealth bombers use aluminum and I don't have much of that resource but I have a few in the skys, are wreaking the English armies and slowly my 5 front war has turned into 2. London has fallen into my hands so only the Iroquois capital remains for me to win, but unlike them I won't wipe England off the map. They still have strategic resources I require to fight the Iroquois effectivly so there are several cities I am forced into having to take, but I have noted several cities that are not strategicly important and would even be protected by me from the Iroquois in the event they ever decide to launch troops across the bay. I may turn over other cities back into English hands that I deem as not being worth the strain it puts on my own economy, but considering that most of their cities are port based and I don't want to get a dagger into my back with another navy attacking me while mine is engaged.

Whknight you single handedly killed off my thread, and that post you put whenever does not make it any better

lol.

So whats up?

Was wondering why a thread that usually gets 3 pages a day got nothing for a week.

Serious has stopped pushing it forward me thinks

I haven't noticed him posting much lately, maybe he died?

By the way, I'm going to feel awful if he actually did. I know he didn't, but I'll be damned if by some chance this is the case.

He posted a few times about an hour ago, I would say that your safe

Who knows, Serious may have died the way he lived. Walking across the street while posting on the Dark Souls forums via a mobile device.

Vanishing_Much where are you?

I don't care where he's gone, as long as he isn't Dead_Much, come on Serious, Live damnit!

Busy_Much?

You're a bunch of Crazy_Much people
*walks slowly backwards towards the door hoping no-one will notice

I didn't kill the thread, the fact no one was really posting in it besides 2-3 people did. So, opinions on the next generation consoles? It seems both MS and Sony are trying to impliment anti-priracy measures by not allowing used games to be played, and not allowing backwards compatibility. I foresee another gaming crash, or if Nintendo plays this really really smart they can make a crapload of money.

Screw those two, I'm getting a Wii-U if I can get the money! It's kind of funny, that Dark Souls is my most played game, but I actually like the Wii the best out of the current consoles. I was raised on Nintendo after all haha...I was raised by Nintendo really.

Exactly, Nintendo has held strong for all these years. I really wish they pull a smart move and crush MS and Sony, seriously why are companies thinking that such things are actually good moves when it's obvious they are going to get hurt in some form by it. If anything people will work harder to crack the consoles and pirate games just to screw with them even more.