March 9, 2000, 06:40
|
#1
|
Guest
|
Should players be allowed to build cities on Mountain hexes?
I think this is ridiculous, especially in multiplayer games.
------------------
Founder of the People's Republic of Off Topic (PROT)
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 08:07
|
#2
|
Guest
|
You think building on a mountain is ridiculous, A.H.? How so? Why would it not be allowed? Actually surprised to see this from you.
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 08:59
|
#3
|
Prince
Local Time: 17:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 334
|
I would like to think of mountain settlements as being akin to crusader castles being built in very rugged terrain (Krak de Chevalier springs to mind). This still doesn't stop an enemy from pillaging the surrounding land, however.
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 09:04
|
#4
|
Retired
Local Time: 17:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Mingapulco - CST
Posts: 30,317
|
Just deal with it. Building cities on mountains at key choke points is just solid defensive planning.
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 12:38
|
#5
|
King
Local Time: 18:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: USA - EDT (GMT-5)
Posts: 2,051
|
I would rather see my opponent build a city on a mountain than a fort, since the city can be taken out by bribery. You don't have that option with a pair of units.
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 17:07
|
#6
|
Emperor
Local Time: 14:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: I live amongst the Red Sox Nation
Posts: 7,969
|
Although mountains are almost impossible to siege early in the game...... a nuke will work just fine. Mountains are just a part of the game  go around if you dont' want to war
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 17:28
|
#7
|
Emperor
Local Time: 14:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Civ2 Diehard
Posts: 3,838
|
If you don't like seeing cities on mountains,hills and forests then play 1x production.These cities are not nearly as viable on 1x
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 17:32
|
#8
|
Guest
|
My point is its not realistic or sporting.
------------------
Founder of the People's Republic of Off Topic (PROT)
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 17:40
|
#9
|
Emperor
Local Time: 17:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Yongsan-Gu, Seoul
Posts: 3,647
|
It's very realistic...Gibraltar, Lhasa (the Potala), the fortress-cities of Central Asia..
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 17:49
|
#10
|
Prince
Local Time: 22:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Fort Worth, Texas, USA
Posts: 691
|
It's very realistic: look at all the fortresses in Greece and Asia Minor, and all the trouble people went to to laying seige to them...
If you want to take a mountain city, by all means, use bribery. Or, if you'd rather, fortify a whole bunch of units around their city, doing nothing else, and they'll starve out.
Whining about people building well defended cities is on par with complaining about the existance of city walls, or phalanxs, for that matter. If you can't take a city, beseig it and take the surrounding lands...
"Sic semper pax mundis"
-KhanMan
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 18:31
|
#11
|
Guest
|
I'm not whining about it, I'm sayings its wrong, almost a form of cheating in multiplayer games. Single player games, I don't care. And look at the examples - LHasa, Gibraltar, wow!
------------------
Founder of the People's Republic of Off Topic (PROT)
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 18:51
|
#12
|
King
Local Time: 23:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dilbert
Posts: 1,839
|
Just stop whining about it. Like people have said, it`s possible to get rid of such a city (albeit late in the game, with more powerful weapons). Look at the facts:
A)It`s clever tactical planning.
B)No-one`s stopping you from using the same tactics.
C)How would you enforce such a rule?
D)Stopping people from building on mountains is like asking them to surrender without force. You might as well ban the building of military units altogether.
E)It is realistic...one of the main rules of military planning is to take control of the high ground if at all possible.
F)It is sporting...no-one`s forcing you to attack such a city. You could get rid off everything else and force them to give up.
------------------
D`oh!
Homer Simpson
Choppa
Briton Villager, AOE II
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 19:10
|
#13
|
Guest
|
yep, all the city/mountain builders are coming out. I say sure, build on hills, build on forests and rivers, but build on mountains? Get real!!!!
------------------
Founder of the People's Republic of Off Topic (PROT)
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 19:18
|
#14
|
King
Local Time: 23:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dilbert
Posts: 1,839
|
Why shouldn`t people build on mountains? Give us a list of good reasons why not, and then we might start listening to you.
And the reason that all the city/mountain buildes are coming out is because the people that don`t do this sort of thing are perfectly content to let others do it.
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 19:34
|
#15
|
Guest
|
1. Cities are not built on mountains.
2. See point 1.
Lhasa for example is not built on a mountain, it is built in a mountain valley (like most so-called mountain cities). Gibraltar is a town not a city.
Sorry but I find it hard to justify the bleeeding obvious. I am not opposed to building forts on mountains.
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 19:42
|
#16
|
Warlord
Local Time: 22:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Up North
Posts: 252
|
Just because a game square is represented as a mountain on the map does not mean that every inch of represented territory is mountainous. It means the majority of area in that representative square is mountainous.
Therefore, building a city on a mountain square seems totally reasonable to me, as it would include such things as valleys. If we are tying to be reasonable, very few single squares, and all the land they represent, could ever be comprised one single land feature, with the possible exception of ocean squares.
[This message has been edited by Glohithia (edited March 09, 2000).]
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 20:26
|
#17
|
Guest
|
Damn, noone is taking my side
------------------
Founder of the People's Republic of Off Topic (PROT)
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2000, 21:13
|
#18
|
Emperor
Local Time: 14:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: SF, CA don't call it frisco... Striker!!
Posts: 3,617
|
Players shouldn't build cities on mountains
At least not all of their first four cities in single production 'cause they will be hungry and that isn't nice to the little computer people...
|
|
|
|
March 10, 2000, 01:21
|
#19
|
Guest
|
Guam is a rock.
|
|
|
|
March 10, 2000, 01:24
|
#20
|
Guest
|
It's a hard argument to grasp, A.H.
Really, you think their are no mountain cities in the world? Heard of skiing?
|
|
|
|
March 10, 2000, 01:48
|
#21
|
Emperor
Local Time: 14:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Civ2 Diehard
Posts: 3,838
|
Herod's Masada also comes to mind.A fortress city.Sounds like someone lost a small army against one of thses recently
|
|
|
|
March 10, 2000, 02:28
|
#22
|
Prince
Local Time: 22:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Fort Worth, Texas, USA
Posts: 691
|
I just find it really hard to believe that you want to force other people, specifically, the whole civ2 mp community, to ignore mountain squares as city sites.
You said that there aren't any cities built on mountains, yet, in the same sentence, you say that Gibraltar was a town, not a city.
So there have been small cities built on mountains, but you will only allow us to build on mountains if we can name a metropolis that was?
Okay, smart guy, if ya wanna get technical, the entire chain of Hawaiian islands is a mountain, when measured from it's undersea base. Thus, Honolulu is technically a city built on a mountain.
Do you really want to keep pushing this point on us?
-KM
|
|
|
|
March 10, 2000, 02:31
|
#23
|
Prince
Local Time: 22:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Fort Worth, Texas, USA
Posts: 691
|
Furthermore, if you want to take the idea that your view of history should dictate what civ2 mp players can and cannot do, then why not say that no person playing the Romans can successfully fend off a player playing the Germans? Or make a house rule that, from now on, the Mongols cannot build any ships.
Or better yet, why not say that each civ is forever restricted to one government, and start whinying when they switch governments...
Or say that the Egyptians are the only ones who can build the Pyramids...
:P
-KM
|
|
|
|
March 10, 2000, 06:02
|
#24
|
Guest
|
AHorse - you got rocks in ya head mate!
------------------
*THE DEITY*
#8388924
|
|
|
|
March 10, 2000, 06:06
|
#25
|
Guest
|
AHorse - you got rocks in ya head mate!
It is a lovely little strategic decision to build a horse on a mountain... you miserable little turd  LOL 
I'm gonna get you.... Watch out
------------------
*THE DEITY*
#8388924
|
|
|
|
March 10, 2000, 20:54
|
#26
|
Guest
|
Oh yeah, kick a horse when he's down why don't ya. Gang up on me too. Typical civ player mentality! I still think its stupid!
------------------
huFWEYFLWS sdbcSIB;BIU,N wnbuUHEW;hnb hFFPfpi IUHPISufhhufWPEIUFHPUH DPIhhf[ FSIUEWIFPI n2f879hfgb hw8098gf-98hj *(G-9-8h wpfg3q-[9h4-hfe [0eqridkji]kEW ;J[VENSDQK eijfqeioeiqgr ajvnq[oa'fdiveqioijifvbjw 087ef0q vswvb[qj9 fs9igbw9qwui 09jvbqe99jv09q9 vjawndggqw'[i
|
|
|
|
March 10, 2000, 21:30
|
#27
|
Emperor
Local Time: 17:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Yongsan-Gu, Seoul
Posts: 3,647
|
Howabout YOU start not doing it, and then see if you start a trend...
Besides, it's not something I see a lot of. Maybe one or two at chokepoints.
Go around. Forget about them.
|
|
|
|
March 11, 2000, 07:28
|
#28
|
Guest
|
I never build cities on mountains. What's the point? It's ridiculous and I have greater confidence in my army than some.
------------------
huFWEYFLWS sdbcSIB;BIU,N wnbuUHEW;hnb hFFPfpi IUHPISufhhufWPEIUFHPUH DPIhhf[ FSIUEWIFPI n2f879hfgb hw8098gf-98hj *(G-9-8h wpfg3q-[9h4-hfe [0eqridkji]kEW ;J[VENSDQK eijfqeioeiqgr ajvnq[oa'fdiveqioijifvbjw 087ef0q vswvb[qj9 fs9igbw9qwui 09jvbqe99jv09q9 vjawndggqw'[i
|
|
|
|
March 11, 2000, 12:08
|
#29
|
King
Local Time: 16:37
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Kansas City, MO USA
Posts: 1,460
|
I will build a city on a mountain when it looks like a good spot for defensive purposes. BUT, there had better be some "special" squares nearby or the food/production output is doomed.
Having said that, I'm surprised no one mentioned Machu Pichu as a city on a mountain. That is THE best example of all time. And it did flourish for centuries, n'est-ce pas?
------------------
Frodo lives!
Better dead than "Red"... or green... or blue... or yellow... or orange... or purple... or white.
|
|
|
|
March 11, 2000, 12:45
|
#30
|
Guest
|
No building cities on mountains is pointless, you build forts on mountains and stack Alpines up there.
------------------
Webmaster---Come to the Civworld Forums
"If you cannot beat them, don't join them, instead corrupt them, make them join you, then throw them off a cliff."
"Those who achieve greatness have backstab to achieve it."
|
|
|
|
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 18:37.
|
|