c179# THE JOYS AND FRUSTRATING ELEMENTS OF THE CIV SERIES

[St Leo]

Pardon?

The SimCity series is not a rip-off of the Civ series. On the contrary, Sid has admitted that the Civ series is a rip-off of the SimCity series.

[lord of the mark]

Re: Pardon?

Originally posted by St Leo
The SimCity series is not a rip-off of the Civ series. On the contrary, Sid has admitted that the Civ series is a rip-off of the SimCity series.

to be a bit more precise, sid has said that Simcity (classic) was one of the inspirations for Civ 1. But your point is important, simcity was no derivative of civ. Civ has at least some of its roots in the city builder genre, as well as the strategy/war game genre.

LOTM

[Cook666]

?"

There are lots of good ideas here but please could someone tell them (especially those about research and battles) to the guys making civ3 - before it is too late. In all the previews I have seen no indication that they intended changing the combat system too much - 1 unit battles - the combat in CTP was the only thing good in the game and that in CTP2 was even better - please tel Sid MEier and all the other game designers this

[Mech Assassin]

Actually CTP battles had few bad sides in them. Like, Battleship could be sank by large enough archer army.

I propose a fix to this with a new roll, armor, for units. Any troop, that doesn't have firepower stat over the armor rating of the other won't be able to damage the unit (this would also help things like tanks). This way, Archers couldn't touch an incoming tank, like in real life.

[mhaupert]

9 women = 1 baby in 1 month.

Originally posted by Mech Assassin
I propose a fix to this with a new roll, armor, for units. Any troop, that doesn't have firepower stat over the armor rating of the other won't be able to damage the unit (this would also help things like tanks). This way, Archers couldn't touch an incoming tank, like in real life.

I tend to disagree with you on this. If you think in a hypothetical sense, an army of archers could destroy a tank. Sure, it would be a bloody and gruesome sight, but you could bury the tank and it would eventually run out of ammo and fuel leaving it vunerable to whatever whim the attacker could bring to bear. This was pretty much the approach the USA and Russia (USSR) took on WWII.

[Mech Assassin]

There's the fact, that there aren't factors, like bullets or fuel in Civ series, so that technique wouldn't work...

[The Rusty Gamer]

Mostly on the subject...

Speaking of mods, I think CTP2 is pretty flexible with them isn't it?
I was wondering if anyone was going to have a go at creating mod packs for CTP2 to duplicate Civ2 or even Civ1?

[Chronus]

I propose a fix to this with a new roll, armor, for units. Any troop, that doesn't have firepower stat over the armor rating of the other won't be able to damage the unit (this would also help things like tanks). This way, Archers couldn't touch an incoming tank, like in real life.

I don't agree with this either. Make it a million to one chance for the archer . . . but to have the tank win 100% of the time is, IMOHO, less interesting and not realistic.

I suspect the difficulty some people have is that they view the battle with only a few factors such as "armor rating" or "firepower". Try looking at ALL possible factors that can happen. Suppose an earthquake occurs and swallows up the tank . . . or some stuipid neglect on the commander's part causes the tank to run out of gas. Be creative and try to find a possible explanation that works for you. I'm not saying these unusual circumstances should happen a lot; I'm just saying they shouldn't be eliminated entirely.

[Mech Assassin]

Why to modify your own view to match that of the game, when you can hope to get the game modified to mach your view? However, I think, there should be more random events, like

Earthquakes (well, the ones in Civ II were really underpowered and could only occur at cities)

Tornados (why the hell have this been forgotten? Maybe they're just in too short period of time, but they sure as hell can level a city)

Volcanos (if krakawhatever (a volcano at indonesia) was able to dim the sun of the entire world during 530-550 for 10 years, having basically the same effect as a nuclear winter, they at least deserve a place in the game. They don't need to be that destructive, just to have them to spit lava and fire and burn units near it and after the erruption to have the area, covered in lava to have very high food-producion)

Meteor Rain (these have occured in real life over time. They have played an integral role in our past)

Comet (like meteor, except causes more heat than explosions and isn't as powerful, compared to size)

And things like that... Of course have ability to not to have random events, if some want to play a completely fair game with no luck rolls.

[airdrik]

It's been a while since I have visited these forums, but I read the article, and I definetally think that they should include with civ 3 an in-depth customization tool. It would have things in it like toggle between static units and workshop models, choosing static would allow you to design static units with all the stats that go along with static units. Choosing Workshop would allow you to set up chasises and parts that can be added. You can open up and edit existing units files/ai files/mods/scenarios/etc. and easily design your own.

When you open up civ 3 to start a new game, it would have the options of standard game, custom scenario, custom modpack, or mix-and-match (which would allow you to pick, say starwars units on sesame street terrain and have the AI act like Richard Simmons)

In the Editor you could set up random events and what they do (like meteor shower: 1/2500 chance, destroys 20 land/city improovments in a certain area, or meteor strike: 1/10000 chance, destroys one city size <20, or decreases city size by 20 and destroys 90% of all improovments and units in city). You could toggle all sorts of little gameplay enhancements, like simplified combat-civ 2 combat-civ3 combat, road/rr/irr/farm/mine's effects on map squares, what types of improovments exist (ie. road 1move, rr all move points but can continue on track as far as the go in 1 turn, highway 1/3 move, farm +2 food, mine+2 production, fort+25% def, base +50% def and att must have fort).

In this editor you should also be able to tweek the AI, give it a name, have them never sign treaties, but allways signs ceasefires, have them never break treaties, but allways breaks ceasefires. etc. Give them strategies that they will use, like allways make sure that outer defences have been destroyed with artillary before attacking a city with infantry. Wait untill they have 10 top-of-the-line units in each of 10 different stacks before blitzing an enemy. etc.

[LandBuilder]

Nothing can compare with the thrill that I had when I played Civ 1 for the first time. What an experience!! what a game!!
It was almost like becoming a drug addict, every game I play after Civ 1 I hope will give me the same rush that it did. So far, I am still looking.

[Ned]

Landbuilder, My sentiments exactly. Moreover, I tire of every other game pretty quickly and go right back to Civ or its progeny. The concept was revolutionary, IMHO. I only hope Sid got a patent.

Ned