This Article Brought Tears to My Eyes: "Want to Play. Won't Play It."

[Adm.Naismith]

Re: About play balancing and AI

Originally posted by Father Beast
but then, it has taken years for some of the big play imbalances in civ2 to be realized. the OCC size 1 was only played last year for goodness' sake!

That's not the problem, IMHO.
No complex game can really survive for years before some strategic weakness (or some well hidden bug) ruin it.

My question is: can the game born well and survive at least a year? I don't want a game with so many (and early) limits that I can discover in a couple of months and less than ten half/finished games! SMAC had some playbalancing limits IMO, so after some (mostly enjoyed, to be honest ) games played, I was stuck with some half finished game that I've already win (but I must still play before meeting the game victory condition).

Last part of tech tree was a mere exercize for my scientist, because I almost never used the discovered tech, the most powerful units, etc. Not again, please.

[Solver]

I never had such a feeling avaiting a game. When I was reading the reviews for coming Civ 2, SMAC, and both the CtP's, I didn't feel so excited. Most excited I was awaiting the CtP 1 release, and that was a great game, but now I'm far much more excited. There are new features, good graphics, everything personally I want. If only they will add support for 800x600, at least in any way.
All these questions like:

Will Civ 3 be a great game out of the box? It will take time and interaction with the fans, that's for sure. I can only hope that process will be an open and productive one.

remind me of what happened to Age of Empires 2: The Conquerors Expansion. Ensebmle Studios did some great job there. After they released the game, they have been watching the players and listening to their feedback. There were some problems, the main being:
1) Bugs (go figure)
2) Korean civilization overpowered
3) Castle dropping
4) Some technologies, never getting researched

They released a patch:
1. Bugs fixed
2. Koreans weakened
3. Castles take longer to construct
4. These techs didn't get researched because came in late game, and costed stone and/or gold. Both stone and gold are very precisious and in little amounts in late game, so nobody researched those techs. Ensemble fixed this by making it so that these techs now costed only food and wood, something that is abundant late in the game.
5. Various game-balance changes
6. New map types included

Moreover, they released an open beta for that patch, so that people would play it, and see when it leads to game crashes (happened sometimes).

This is what could be my best expectations from Firaxis and Civ III, patches getting released which not only fix bugs, also making the game more balanced.

[Ecthy]

Re: About play balancing and AI

Originally posted by Father Beast
I recall reading that the makers of Empire Earth have hired a number of experienced gamers to do their playtesting for them.
It sounds as if it would be really cool if they did that with civ3, hire some apolytoners to playtest.

but then, it has taken years for some of the big play imbalances in civ2 to be realized. the OCC size 1 was only played last year for goodness' sake!

I shouldn't worry about this, there seems to be no contradiction. The more Apolytoners they use for playtesting, the less bugs or "imbalances" will be noticed and removed. And I doubt they will find all of them. Don't you think they playtested CIV 2 as well? I think the knowledge about hidden things (like those imbalances) will make it easier to avoid new oens anyway.