Are all Conquests like this?

[player1]

Originally posted by alexman
Warpstorm, it's not that the AI thinks it needs money more than workers. They gave me their workers AND their money in exchange for an alliance.

This should not be possibile from 2nd turn and later (just tested).
Something in first turn makes it buggy.

For fair game, skip diplomacy in first turn.

Player 1, the workers are given to each civ in the player setup, so that's not related to difficulty level. This scenario actually gives zero extra AI starting units to all difficulty levels.

Yes, you are right here.

[Buckets]

There are 2 bugs i'm disappointed weren't addressed:
1- sub bug/invisible unit bug
2- 'hidden nationality' unit bug, where the ai can attack cities in peacetime, but the human cannot.

[Alex]

I thought that 1.15 beta had addressed some of the problems regarding AI in the scenarios...

[ducki]

TBS games have lost a lot of ground in the last few years to RTS games.

A large portion of C3C seems tailored to luring the fence-sitters back to TBS.

I just hope C4 isn't a middle-of-the road pseudo-real-time-turn-based strategy game. If I want to play RTS, there are quite a lot of games out there. I don't like them.

Which may explain why I haven't enjoyed the Conquests scenarios.

[Fried-Psitalon]

Unless you're playing MP - and there it only makes sense to play simulturn because you otherwise spend 50+% of your time waiting - I fail to see how Civ is becoming more like RTS? You have as much time in SP as you want to do everything. The trend towards semi-RTS in MP is a simple acknowledgement of the facts of online play and average person's schedules.

[LzPrst]

when I ran AoD as the mayas, the portugese won by getting their treasures and all in the last 10 turns of the scenario (and I would have won cultural when it was my turn again, aaaaargh)
maybe its fixed in 1.18 or maybe you're just über-good.

blarf nargh! my connection is more buggy than an anthill!

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Fried-Psitalon
Unless you're playing MP - and there it only makes sense to play simulturn because you otherwise spend 50+% of your time waiting - I fail to see how Civ is becoming more like RTS?

That's not what ducki is saying; he's saying that he does not want CIV to be an RTS/TBS hybrid just to get a slice of the RTS market.

I just hope C4 isn't a middle-of-the road pseudo-real-time-turn-based strategy game.

As you know, I agree. Like Civ3, I think CIV should be designed as a SP/TBS game, with MP functionality added in later on in development. Else the game as a whole will suffer. The Civ series is exemplary of the TBS genre; it will not do if it turns into something like RoN.


Dominae

[ducki]

Almost, Dominae.
I was, in fact, saying that Conquests was/is partially marketed at the fence-sitters. Those that like TBS but don't have hours upon hours to devote. The Conquests are actually described in similar terms in various reviews I've read. The Conquests are actually given a lot more weight in most of the reviews I have read - or at least a lot more verbiage.

And there's no convincing me that they don't "feel" RTS-esque. Sure, you have all the time you want, F-P. That doesn't change the way they feel to me. Maybe I just don't like the mission-based flavor.

None of my post had anything to do with MP. It was all about the subject line. Basically, the most touted selling point(not the most important for most of us, though) was that there were small missions that a casual gamer could complete in a couple of hours one evening. A great way to win back some of the strays, IMO, but not the reason I bought it.

[Fried-Psitalon]

Originally posted by Dominae
As you know, I agree. Like Civ3, I think CIV should be designed as a SP/TBS game, with MP functionality added in later on in development. Else the game as a whole will suffer. The Civ series is exemplary of the TBS genre; it will not do if it turns into something like RoN.


Dominae

Here is where we fundamentally disagree - I think CIV as a series is destined for failure - and soon - if it does NOT start appealing more to the MP crowd; not because the game is worsening (I think it is getting better) but because the money isn't there. Frankly it's a simple money equation - multiplayer games make a heckuva lot more, and Firaxis isn't blind to that.... and neither is the greedy overlord behind them.

How many ultra-popular, major money-making SP games can you name anymore? For each one, I can name five which claim MP as their fare and made more.

[Dominae]

You may have a point there...but I'm not happy about it.

[ducki]

Just as a counterpoint to F-P.

The fact that you feel you can smother any successful SP title with 5 more successful MP titles suggest that from a business standpoint, for this particular franchise, an MP-focus would be suicide.

So, currently, FPSes are the big thing, and if you don't have MP, you're toast, right? So, someone that traditionally writes SP First-Person Adventure - by your logic - should abandon their bread and butter to enter an already crowded market with another "me too!" FPS. (Edit: But they should go ahead and stick their Adventure brand on it so they can "satisfy" old and new customers alike.)

I say they should stick with what they know and what their fans have come to love over the years. Basically, "Dance with the one that brung ya'."

There's no compelling fiscal logic that suggests a successful widget-maker should start trying to sell knock-off wockets just because there are a lot of successful wocket-makers.

That's my opinion.

[Aqualung71]

A successful widget maker, if he knows anything about business, will continue to make widgets. They are his bread and butter, his cash cow. If he kills the goose, there's no more golden eggs. He may of course try to build a new improved widget, if such a thing is possible. There is likely to be demand for it and the buying public certainly likes to see continual product improvement.

BUT....he may also decide to invest in a new wocket manufacturing business. That's fine, and he can invest his widget profits in a wocket business and start the whole risk and return cycle again.

But he would be profoundly stupid to try to turn his widget business into a wocket business. Not only does he sacrifice his cash cow for an uncertain new business, he also writes off years of experience and intellectual property value, plus runs a real risk of losing key professionals who happen to prefer making widgets over wockets.

There are a lot of profoundly stupid business decisions made every day. Let's hope this won't become one of them.

[LzPrst]

small note. in the ole gamespy game tournament civ3 has dropkicked every game it has been set up against. and that was in most cases before conquests came out which IMO made the game complete. the next game on the list of soon-dead challengers will be GTA Vice City, now before conquests I knew where my vote was going, but this fix, (not expansion) has made the game what I wanted. Point is, the civ series has only been gaining momentum since the day I first played it on a borrowed 24mhz computer in my friends basement, and the fact that civ3 wins these contests proves that there is a huge online crowd liking it and playing it, and I hope most of them have bought it. If thats not a cash cow with staying power I dont know what is.
And I'm doing my job, already got two of my girls hooked on it (not girlfriends, just have one of those)

[Fried-Psitalon]

Originally posted by LzPrst
small note. in the ole gamespy game tournament civ3 has dropkicked every game it has been set up against. and that was in most cases before conquests came out which IMO made the game complete. the next game on the list of soon-dead challengers will be GTA Vice City, now before conquests I knew where my vote was going, but this fix, (not expansion) has made the game what I wanted. Point is, the civ series has only been gaining momentum since the day I first played it on a borrowed 24mhz computer in my friends basement, and the fact that civ3 wins these contests proves that there is a huge online crowd liking it and playing it, and I hope most of them have bought it. If thats not a cash cow with staying power I dont know what is.
And I'm doing my job, already got two of my girls hooked on it (not girlfriends, just have one of those)

No offense, but take a closer look at those numbers, Lz. We may beat GTA (something I wouldn't bet on with 5:1 odds, frankly) but Liberty City was a soft bracket from the start.

Civ's best showing so far in any round has been around 6k votes, and... if I remember right, and I may not, a 65% majority. Compare that to Doom, Half Life, and Quake - all of which have broken the 10k vote mark - more than once in some cases! - and have had such blowout victories as 82% or more.

Don't get me wrong here: Civ is by far and away my favorite game of all time, but I know I'm in a minority. I'm not saying they SHOULD get rid of the Civ franchise - I'm saying they should bow to realism and incorporate MP into the Civ series. I think they've done so rather well with Simulturn; it's still civ, but it gives MP a chance - and hopefully word of the modestly successful Conquests MP experience (it really is quite enjoyable and can be played in short doses) will draw more people back for Civ 4. I hope that for once Civ will be designed with MP and SP as equal partners.

Because while I love Civ, Atari bears it no magic feelings beyond a bottom line, and Atari knows that wickets sell for a buck-fifty, and wockets - though there are a lotta wockets for sale - go for three grand each.

Regardless, perhaps I am alone in thinking - though I suspect Firaxis agrees with me based on Civ3's MP - that good MP and continued "Good Civ" aren't neccessarily at odds with each other. Civ3 was a bold first step in maintaining both realms, IMO - I'm looking forward to seeing what is done in Civ 4.

[ducki]

plus runs a real risk of losing key professionals who happen to prefer making widgets over wockets.

Don't forget the bigger risk - losing their original base market. I know - for myself - if C:IV comes out and is more about MP than SP and more similar to RTS than good old TBS, not only would I not buy it, I would probably not buy C5 or any other future Firaxis game that pretended to be Civ - unless there was a slew of positive reviews specifically about its return to old-style SP TBS .

Yeah, it's hypothetical, but turning off your "faithful" market by trying to enter a new market or hybridizing is a wonderful way to lose your original customers and not attract enough new ones that will view your hybrid product as a half-breed that's not as good as their favorite pure-breeds.

perhaps I am alone in thinking - though I suspect Firaxis agrees with me based on Civ3's MP - that good MP and continued "Good Civ" aren't neccessarily at odds with each other

No, you're not alone. I agree that they are two great tastes that can be great together.
All I'm saying is, if they put the focus and the base gameplay with a decidedly MP or RTS feel, they'll likely lose a lot of these long-time(in marketspeak, that reads "older and with disposable income") faithful(marketspeak=evangelist) customers(ATMs). Once you tick off your strongest customer base, it takes an awful lot of effort to win them back.

This is one of the few cases where "it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission" doesn't apply. A "betrayed" customer is typically an anti-customer for life. (Example - I will never buy any game that has the words "Peter Molyneaux" or "Black & White" or possibly even "Lionhead" on the box. Ever. Never. And I used to be a big fan.)

So, yes, I agree that MP Civ is good, but I stand by my statement that C:IV needs a SP and a TBS focus to maintain marketability. That doesn't mean it doesn't need or shouldn't have very good MP code, but just that if it's MP-Centric, there's probably a lot of folks that'll just stick with C3. Myself included.