What's in Civ4. Just the facts, ma'am.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
Personally, I think that sort of 'dumbs-down' the game and instead of making it seem like a wargame/TBS-builder makes it appear more 'kidzy-and-cuddly'... It does add something, I will admit- but it adds more distraction than epic flavor... Instead of making civ epic, it makes it sort of trivial

Well, that's the sort of thing I'm talking about. Obviously, you can argue the mood being conveyed, but the point is that there is a mood being conveyed (whether you agree with it or not ), rather than something that serves no point.

[Max Sinister]

The 3D terrain in SMAC was ok for me. What I didn't like was the fact that the tiles looked so similar... (and my eyesight wasn't the best before either)

[VetLegion]

The fidget animations on Civ 3 units and stuff like that is fine.

Personally, I think that sort of 'dumbs-down' the game and instead of making it seem like a wargame/TBS-builder makes it appear more 'kidzy-and-cuddly'... It does add something, I will admit- but it adds more distraction than epic flavor... Instead of making civ epic, it makes it sort of trivial

I somewhat agree. Obviousely abstracting a unit with one guy of the type is prettier and easier than showing them all, or a few, but given the level of detail they gave to this fella in the latest products, he is hard to see as an abstraction because he became so REAL.

It's almost easier to imagine my Civ III warrior unit as a huge giant walking the land killing stuff with his club than a symol representing many little guys down below.

Doesn't really hurt the gameplay, don't get me wrong, I'm just stating my impression.

[VetLegion]

Originally posted by Max Sinister
The 3D terrain in SMAC was ok for me. What I didn't like was the fact that the tiles looked so similar... (and my eyesight wasn't the best before either)

The problem with SMAC 3D map is that it is Ill suited for describing earth geography. It was set on an alien planet so it was easy to dismiss its total unrealisticness.

But imagine SMAC map of earth. Did anyone do that btw? I have doubts.

[DarkCloud]

What I didn't like was the fact that the tiles looked so similar... (and my eyesight wasn't the best before either)

I'll agree- the game was a bit too dark.

The problem with SMAC 3D map is that it is Ill suited for describing earth geography. It was set on an alien planet so it was easy to dismiss its total unrealisticness.

How was it unrealistic? just wondering?

[VetLegion]

I think that elevations as SMAC represents them don't scale well for earth.

First, SMAC engine is very unsuitable to show realistic geography. Typical SMAC landscape of rolling hills models them pretty to the eye but way too huge in relation to planet size. Earth's largest mountains are tiny in comparison.

I think we can agree about that - SMAC 3D map is not good for realism. There is the first problem - expectations on realism are much higher for earth than for.. ugh, whatsitsname

So if we can't expect realistic proportions between planet and elevation from SMAC engine, can we at least show realistic proportions between different elevations? Yes, but...

You have to show extremes like Himalayas and sea level ground, and everything inbetween so that it makes sense.

So Alps have to be half as high as Himalayas. But Alps are some serousely high mountains, it's silly to show them as merely slopes. So you have to use SMAC max elevation for them, or near max, they have to look steep, and then you have to be able to double that to show the Himalayas.

All in all, it is fairly easy to accept Civ II tile graphics as abstractions for mountains, but 3D engines simply suggest to the player that objects they show are in proportion.

I don't think it can be done well in SMAC, but I am asking for the earth map in AC-Creation to see for myself, someone probably built it.

[DarkCloud]

So Alps have to be half as high as Himalayas. But Alps are some serousely high mountains, it's silly to show them as merely slopes. So you have to use SMAC max elevation for them, or near max, they have to look steep, and then you have to be able to double that to show the Himalayas

Well, it depends on the amount of detail that the maps have.

in all honestly, crossing the alps mountains and the himalayas should be much harder than crossing the Urals... and movement costs should reflect that.

nevertheless, there is little need to model Mt. Everest, etc. all you need to do is get a computer terrain maping program and zoom out, then average the mountains' heights and model the terrain at 100 miles=1 square, or something of the sort.

[VetLegion]

I've just downloaded an earth map for SMAC, so I'll see how it looks.

[Adagio]

I'd be more interested in seing Earth graphics for SMAC

[Max Sinister]

Maybe it would be enough to make the Himalaya bigger than the Alps to reflect that an army going through it has a harder way?

[VetLegion]

DarkCloud et al, I've started another thread solely for 3D map discussion. I think I've explained it better there.

[Robovski]

I'm not so worried about 3D as it's a group I think I'm better off trusting until I see evidence of suckitude, basically, give them a chance. They tried 3d with SMAC, and while that might not be the best for Earth it has been quite a few years since SMAC and technology has continued it's forward march. As stated above, a well implimented change to 3d will be more than welcome, as it will make the game more enjoyable, and help with competeing in the marketplace.

I can see the point about simplification, but that is the more worrisome point. Civ3 is simpler - almost too simple. Cutting pollution and corruption and such isn't neccisarily the way to go.

[Method]

I liked the SMAC graphics a lot, and I think they worked well for SMAC, but I'd agree that something similar isn't suitable for Civ. Much better to have a terrain type labeled "Mountain" than a 3500m, rocky, arid tile.

Anyways, what I'd like to see in Civ4 is a combat system that resembles that in SMAC. At the bottom of the screen, it gives a summary of all the bonuses and penalties each unit receives, and tallies up their total strength. In order to do something like that though, you'd have to devote the bottom of the screen to a console-kinda thing like SMAC has, and people complain about clutter when they've got something like that.

Then again, if I had my way, the whole game would just be SMAC on Earth, with different graphics and a better AI

[marcuspeddle]

I'm curious to know how they will implement religion. I assume they will include real religions like Islam and Buddhism but perhaps they will use abstract religions to avoid offending people. And I wonder what sort of benefits and disadvantages the religions will give the civs.

As for 3D, I qould love to see the battles done a la Total War but this wouldn't work for PBEM, which is what I play mostly.

[Paddy]

Originally posted by Solver
Oh, and if Civ 4 was to be released this year, it would have a ton of problems. The main thing to do is to make sure that the game is not hurried or under too much time pressure, which means not releasing it this year, obviously.

well said old chap

and thanks Locutus for the thread and powerpoint show.