Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
In history, it has happened many times that flourishing empires suddenly experience "accidents", which change the course of history that seemed all mapped out.
"Negative" city-states are traps for the AI. Be careful not to complete their quests inadvertently, otherwise you too risk having this trap.
You can also challenge yourself to get there anyway. With them you still have yield gains (culture, faith, etc.).
What was your thinking behind these? I mean, interesting idea, but who would actively go after these negatively impacting CSs? It's this for when I want to pretend I'm an insane drunk emperor or one of those 'I hate myself and want to die' scenarios?