How much do you roleplay your civ?

[john]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

I hadn't really considered how much I get into a roleplay mode in Civ3
until a recent session of the ongoing Rise of Rome (C3C) game that my
son and I are playing. He is Rome, I am Macedonia, and we are allied
against the Persians and Carthage (the scenario rules lock Rome into
perpetual war with Carthage, and Macedon into perpetual war with
Persia). I said something to him about "Cartago delenda est", then
translated for him and explained the context - he already knew some
thigns about the Punic Wars from his interest in Rome, but not about
the final destruction of the city and symbolic sowing of a furrow of
salt through it. He commented that he when he finally takes the city
of Carthage he will just turn most of the population into workers and
repopulate the city with good Roman citizens. Sure, that would make
sense from a game point of view, but the idea would not have occurred
to me because I was looking at it from the point of view of historical
Romans and would have destroyed the city just because that is what
"should" be done with such an enemy.

So how often do y'all find yourselves doing something in the game just
because you feel that the leaders of your civ "would do it that way"
as opposed to what makes the most sense by the game rules?

John

 

[Buck]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 00:32:19 -0600, John <reply@newsgroup.please.com>
wrote:

>I hadn't really considered how much I get into a roleplay mode in Civ3
>until a recent session of the ongoing Rise of Rome (C3C) game that my
>son and I are playing. He is Rome, I am Macedonia, and we are allied
>against the Persians and Carthage (the scenario rules lock Rome into
>perpetual war with Carthage, and Macedon into perpetual war with
>Persia). I said something to him about "Cartago delenda est", then
>translated for him and explained the context - he already knew some
>thigns about the Punic Wars from his interest in Rome, but not about
>the final destruction of the city and symbolic sowing of a furrow of
>salt through it. He commented that he when he finally takes the city
>of Carthage he will just turn most of the population into workers and
>repopulate the city with good Roman citizens. Sure, that would make
>sense from a game point of view, but the idea would not have occurred
>to me because I was looking at it from the point of view of historical
>Romans and would have destroyed the city just because that is what
>"should" be done with such an enemy.
>
>So how often do y'all find yourselves doing something in the game just
>because you feel that the leaders of your civ "would do it that way"
>as opposed to what makes the most sense by the game rules?
>
>John
>


I'm afraid that I adopt my playing style to best defeat my opponent.
I play only the AI, so my strategy is to defeat them in the best way I
can. I would only starve out the citizens if I felt there would be a
problem with them and I definitely destroy the city I capture with
negative wonders in them (Playing Rise and Rule).

Buck
--
For what it's worth.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

well under facism govenment, during wars i "move" people around, so culture
can build

IE i capture a city that has 12 pop after some are killed (facism kills some
pop on capture) i then build settlers untill its down to 3 or so.... These
Foreign people are moved to my core cities to boost pop. The now "empty"
city will be flooded with my workers/settlers to boost pop back upto a
managable level, allowing production, and culture to rebuild itself.

--
From Adam Webb, Overlag
www.tacticalgamer.com
CS:SOURCE server now active 😀
"Buck" <iam@this.site> wrote in message
news:30qgt05ot652ub66nrpfq5ofqicsbbq0l8@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 00:32:19 -0600, John <reply@newsgroup.please.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I hadn't really considered how much I get into a roleplay mode in Civ3
> >until a recent session of the ongoing Rise of Rome (C3C) game that my
> >son and I are playing. He is Rome, I am Macedonia, and we are allied
> >against the Persians and Carthage (the scenario rules lock Rome into
> >perpetual war with Carthage, and Macedon into perpetual war with
> >Persia). I said something to him about "Cartago delenda est", then
> >translated for him and explained the context - he already knew some
> >thigns about the Punic Wars from his interest in Rome, but not about
> >the final destruction of the city and symbolic sowing of a furrow of
> >salt through it. He commented that he when he finally takes the city
> >of Carthage he will just turn most of the population into workers and
> >repopulate the city with good Roman citizens. Sure, that would make
> >sense from a game point of view, but the idea would not have occurred
> >to me because I was looking at it from the point of view of historical
> >Romans and would have destroyed the city just because that is what
> >"should" be done with such an enemy.
> >
> >So how often do y'all find yourselves doing something in the game just
> >because you feel that the leaders of your civ "would do it that way"
> >as opposed to what makes the most sense by the game rules?
> >
> >John
> >
>
>
> I'm afraid that I adopt my playing style to best defeat my opponent.
> I play only the AI, so my strategy is to defeat them in the best way I
> can. I would only starve out the citizens if I felt there would be a
> problem with them and I definitely destroy the city I capture with
> negative wonders in them (Playing Rise and Rule).
>
> Buck
> --
> For what it's worth.
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.825 / Virus Database: 563 - Release Date: 30/12/2004

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

John <reply@newsgroup.please.com> wrote:
> I hadn't really considered how much I get into a roleplay mode in Civ3
> until a recent session of the ongoing Rise of Rome (C3C) game that my
> son and I are playing.
[...]
>
> So how often do y'all find yourselves doing something in the game just
> because you feel that the leaders of your civ "would do it that way"
> as opposed to what makes the most sense by the game rules?

Usually one can only roleplay as long as the opponent is weaker, so
there´s some elbowroom to not do it the optimal way any given situation.
Playing PBEM quite often lately, I write battle reports and news in my
civ´s style, or at least, what I think it to be its style. I modified
content and pictures of whitehouse.gov, using it as a weblog template for
American battle reports - at first glance, it looks like the original ;-)
Another time I played the Commonwealth in WW2, using stories and pictures
from the war to flesh out the wins and losses from each round.
Playing the Japanese I use a Japanese trade and conversation style
(having studied Japanese helps ;-) )... and once I had a Samurai fighting
a rifleman, knowing that he has almost no chance - but the battle was
almost historical ;-)
Btw, great idea to play Civ with your son, I like the educational aspect
of the game, too.
ciao

Tomi

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Suddenly, John, drunk as a lemur, stumbled out of the darkness and
exclaimed:

> So how often do y'all find yourselves doing something in the game just
> because you feel that the leaders of your civ "would do it that way"
> as opposed to what makes the most sense by the game rules?
>

I did this more often in SMAC, the leader had more personality than the Civ
leaders. One RP thing I do in Civ is always keep a UU in my capitol even
after it's obsolete. I call it my "Ceremonial Guard"

--
Billy Yank

"Divine Comedy has the hallmarks of a bad fanfic. It's a crossover,
and the author appears in the story as a central character. In fact,
we should all be glad that Dante wasn't into furry."
- Nockermensch in rec.games.frp.dnd

Billy Yank's Baldur's Gate Photo Portraits
http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2xvw6/