The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Originally posted by SoulAssassin
16 Civ's is retarded... the more the merrier!!!
I'm also very disappointed that the game will not go past the modern age.... soooo gay.
While I agree on the 16 civs problem, I understand why, assuming that the included civs have a high quality, they require a hell of alot of effort for so few artists who also have to design the terrain, units, adivsors, menus, interface, etc. Thats a hell of a lot of work. If adding more civs means not seeing Civ3 till Summer 2002, it's not worth it to me. Diminishing returns
About the lack of future tech...there've been quite a few threads on this, most I think disagree with you, but I haven't been able to find an archived poll on the subject.
Damn. I hope you're wrong about unique units, cause its a massivly stupid idea. In a game covering some 6000 years giving people special units that none of them will be able to use at tem same time will unbalance the game.
So, the Americans would get two modern special units? I imagine the romans get legions, and if they crush the americans, well guess the americans should have advanced faster so they could get their jets, huh? The more I read, the more Civ 3 looks like AOE. I didn't like AOE.
Oh well. More money in my pocket.
By working faithfully eight hours a day, you may get to be a boss and work twelve hours a day.
Intensity and duration are not incompatible provided there is some interesting activity going on regularly. Civ II played on a huge map could go for ages with nothing happening except the routine orders necessary to continue steady development. That was more because it was possible to stay at arms length from all other civilisations and do your own thing than the number of turns passing. From the screenshots seen so far I am more inclined to believe that they have shrunk the map size so that 60 city empires will not be able to exist unless the opposition has already been crushed.
600-650 turns would be very cool . I disagree with civ 3 having less in game civs though, Firaxis have mastered the civs perfectly, you can easily create your own, so i don't see it as a major concern. I agree with not putting in unique units, if all of the civs got their special unit at the same time, then thats fine, but not otherwise .
Originally posted by Kc7mxo
Damn. I hope you're wrong about unique units, cause its a massivly stupid idea. In a game covering some 6000 years giving people special units that none of them will be able to use at tem same time will unbalance the game.
I agree with you. Jets may be stronger than legions, but that hardly compensates for the time when everyone had special units and you didn't. Perhaps there are more than one sp.units for each civ. So it seems that modern civs with military dominance will be so in Civ III in the modern times... (If they make it to the modern times, that is) Do I like this? No! This sounds stupid in both respects.
Suggestion: Have one ancient and one modern sp. unit for each civ. Thanks.
Question: Could someone please list the advantages of a special unit? I think I've missed this point. Like, say I have a Samurai (that's a sp. unit right?) and attack your normal defensive unit. What happens? How is it different from my attacking it with a non-special unit?
'We note that your primitive civil-^
ization has not even discovered^
$RPLC1. Do you care^
to exchange knowledge with us?'^
_'No, we do not need $RPLC1.'^
_'OK, let's exchange knowledge.'
However, it is difficult to believe that 2 times 2 does not equal 4; does that make it true? On the other hand, is it really so difficult simply to accept everything that one has been brought up on and that has gradually struck deep roots – what is considered truth in the circle of moreover, really comforts and elevates man? Is that more difficult than to strike new paths, fighting the habitual, experiencing the insecurity of independence and the frequent wavering of one’s feelings and even one’s conscience, proceeding often without any consolation, but ever with the eternal goal of the true, the beautiful, and the good? - F.N.
Actually the mini-wonders might be the solution to the current problem of CSU's. If civs that build "many ships" are offered "marine mini-wonders", then they will indeed have "unique units" based on their history and experience. Let's hope this is the case...
I'm consitently stupid- Japher I think that opinion in the United States is decidedly different from the rest of the world because we have a free press -- by free, I mean a virgorously presented right wing point of view on the air and available to all.- Ned
Hah. Not bloody likely. Instead the developers will crow about the unique and "historical" special units that the probably 7 included civs will have. Look, I don't play civ for a historical game, if i did i certainly wouldn't let us americans be included as anything. We've existed as a nation and a culture for abrely two hundred years! Good grief.
its just a game anyway. and the more i read the more i think its just a game i won't play.
By working faithfully eight hours a day, you may get to be a boss and work twelve hours a day.
Originally posted by Kc7mxo
Hah. Not bloody likely. Instead the developers will crow about the unique and "historical" special units that the probably 7 included civs will have. Look, I don't play civ for a historical game, if i did i certainly wouldn't let us americans be included as anything. We've existed as a nation and a culture for abrely two hundred years! Good grief.
its just a game anyway. and the more i read the more i think its just a game i won't play.
What I meant was that, coupled with the ability to turn the damn CSU's off, the mini-wonders could act as "bonuses" for the direction your civ has been heading. Depending on what they actually do, and how you get them. I haven't seen any info on their supposed use, just that they're "available to everyone".
I'm consitently stupid- Japher I think that opinion in the United States is decidedly different from the rest of the world because we have a free press -- by free, I mean a virgorously presented right wing point of view on the air and available to all.- Ned
Originally posted by SoulAssassin
I'm also very disappointed that the game will not go past the modern age.... soooo gay.
I admit that the 3000AD concept in CTP was a bit ridiculous, but it seems absurd to play the bloody game for a month, only to find the game stop dead just when you reach the threshold of modern technology!! Surely the chance to go at least one step farther than makind has ever gone is very tempting, to say the least!?!!
I proposed 2100 AD (2150 would do), just so you could use the Genome Project or have a super infantry or something than falls within the realms of current human comprehension?!! How about a bit of forward thinking??
Originally posted by Kc7mxo
Look, I don't play civ for a historical game, if i did i certainly wouldn't let us americans be included as anything. We've existed as a nation and a culture for abrely two hundred years! Good grief.
You are right, and that's the same reason because I don't want to have Italian as Civ while of course Roman are a must (and I'm italian, while my genealogical root probably aren't Roman at all ).
But of course proper old Civs evolved into modern nations, and today USA are relevant.
I always tried to propose a way to save both point of view: let every Civ change name every time a major game event change its power, e.g. after a main annexion of many cities, or a split of the original empire. Of course it shouldn't happen every next turn, or you'll be bothered endlessy, and any human player should be free to keep the name unchanged for her/his civ.
OTOH, you can now change Roman into Italian as time goes by, or have a USA after a split (secession) from English empire.
Is "catching two birds with a stone" the proper sentence in english, about this proposal?
"We are reducing all the complexity of billions of people over 6000 years into a Civ box. Let me say: That's not only a PkZip effort....it's a real 'picture to Jpeg heavy loss in translation' kind of thing." - Admiral Naismith
I admit that the 3000AD concept in CTP was a bit ridiculous, but it seems absurd to play the bloody game for a month, only to find the game stop dead just when you reach the threshold of modern technology!! Surely the chance to go at least one step farther than makind has ever gone is very tempting, to say the least!?!!
I proposed 2100 AD (2150 would do), just so you could use the Genome Project or have a super infantry or something than falls within the realms of current human comprehension?!! How about a bit of forward thinking??
Unfortinantly, Firaxis have anounced that the game will have only 17 modern techs. However it will be quite easy to build more onto the game for developers. . Plus there will be scenarios, i reckon Firaxis created it pretty well.
. I disagree with civ 3 having less in game civs though, Firaxis have mastered the civs perfectly, you can easily create your own, so i don't see it as a major concern. I agree with not putting in unique units, if all of the civs got their special unit at the same time, then thats fine, but not otherwise 
.
but that hardly compensates for the time when everyone had special units and you didn't. Perhaps there are more than one sp.units for each civ. So it seems that modern civs with military dominance will be so in Civ III in the modern times... (If they make it to the modern times, that is) Do I like this? No! This sounds stupid in both respects.
Surely the chance to go at least one step farther than makind has ever gone is very tempting, to say the least!?!!
).
Tweet
Comment