Civ Duel Zone - View Single Post

Robi D · 30-09-2009, 03:41

If we don't have barbs on then their isn't an issue with their city placement.

As Stapel said earlier in the previous game with city razing off it added a bit more strategy to warfare since you could not just raze a city and move on to the next one.

Also Stapel took out three of us in the last game, if city placement had been an issue i'm sure he would be against city razing being off. Since he isn't i'm assuming he was happy with the cities he got.

30-09-2009, 03:41	#112
Robi D King Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Adelaide, Australia. Posts: 2,060	If we don't have barbs on then their isn't an issue with their city placement. As Stapel said earlier in the previous game with city razing off it added a bit more strategy to warfare since you could not just raze a city and move on to the next one. Also Stapel took out three of us in the last game, if city placement had been an issue i'm sure he would be against city razing being off. Since he isn't i'm assuming he was happy with the cities he got. __________________ "I'm altering the deal, prey I don't alter it further" Darth Vader "We shall defend what is ours. We shall never surrender" --Kosovo is Serbia!