Ask The Civ Team - 09/14/01 Edition

[Rhysie]

Originally posted by Ilkuul
Thanks for the link, Gramphos; I missed that one. I think much earlier in the forums people were talking about a commercial victory, but it obviously wasn't 'official'.

By the way, that setup screen seemed to lack a Custom civ option, which is quite a blow! Does this mean you can only have custom civs in scenarios etc.?

In the screen the player has changed the name of the roman civilization to 'deltas'... Looks to me like you can edit the text in the box where it says 'Brother Bluto of the Deltas' to give your leader and civilization a customised name.

[Gramphos]

Originally posted by Ilkuul
By the way, that setup screen seemed to lack a Custom civ option, which is quite a blow! Does this mean you can only have custom civs in scenarios etc.?

By Custom, do you mean added (unknown), or just temporary modified names (possible (I think (look at the leader- and civname)))?

[Martinus]

Originally posted by tniem


But this is not the fault of those asking questions. It is the fault of the developer and the publisher. So there is no reason to call they person asking the question a doofus. Plus, I am interested in that screen although I wish they would answer the MP question but it appears they won't.

I didn't say that this is fault of asking questions. And I didn't say calling a querrant doofus was ok.

[tniem]

Originally posted by Steve Clark
I can think of several pointed, yet answerable AI questions. One of them would be something along the lines of how do the AI civs take advantage of the attributes assigned to them under certain conditions. For example, if a civ is expansionistic/scientific, what if runs out of room to expand (due to physical or military barriers), does it resort to becoming militaristic to continue expansion or does it just sit and stew?

Yeah I guess you are correct Steve. But it is not an easy question to answer. Plus in terms of bringing people into the Civ3 tent that have never played - it doesn't have the same flare as we have pretty pictures. But you are right it should be answered.

[Martinus]

Originally posted by The diplomat


Maybe they are not releasing info on gvts, great leaders, etc because they don't want to give everything away. For obvious marketing reasons, they want to keep some details a secret so that people can discover the game when they play it. Do you really want the game "spoiled" before you play it?

How about a conspiracy theory: Maybe they are not releasing that info because they don't know the answers themselves??? Just like peacefull GA trigger - they may change it just in the end. So maybe, just maybe, SMAC-style SE is still a possibility.

[Robert]

about MP,
a question about it got a vague answer indeed,
but they didn't answer that it won't be in the game.
Pherhaps they still don't know. ( I guess they don't know if it'll be ready in time, otherwise they would've answered already)

[Gramphos]

You are probably right CyberShy, or they want to keep it secret, and the day before release tell us about all new cool MP features.

But shouldn't MP be listed as a feature in the game.

[d_dudy]

how come this news hasn't been posted? 2 real site updates and all apolyton has up is the trivia!

[Ralf]

Quote from http://www.civ3.com/asktheteam_091401.cfm

"The domination victory occurs if you control a majority of the world's land surface within your borders. This can be achieved through various means, either by cultural tactics or military ones, or a combination of both."

If "domination victory" optionally can be achieved by military conquering/ controling "a majority of the world's land surface within your borders" - then whats the difference compared with traditional "Military victory"?

[Rhysie]

Originally posted by d_dudy
how come this news hasn't been posted? 2 real site updates and all apolyton has up is the trivia!

I was going to say no news people have probably logged in, but as I type this I see from the menu at the top that it has just been added as a news item

[RobC]

Originally posted by Ralf

If "domination victory" optionally can be achieved by military conquering/ controling "a majority of the world's land surface within your borders" - then whats the difference compared with traditional "Military victory"?

Didn't the original 'military vistory' in civ/civ2 require the complete destruction of other civs? Perhaps I don't remember correctly, since it's been a while since I played...

[Dimorier Maximus]

Originally posted by Martinus

He is not a doofus, but what I (and apparently some people) are frustrated here about is that they seem to be deliberately avoiding answers to material questions (like types and number of governments; more info on great leaders; minor wonders etc.) while answering in great detail questions which are either inconsequential or answers to which are already known/presumed.

It is irritating

Yes! I have asked twice about how many government types there will be in Civ3. At first, I thought maybe I'm the only one who cares. Now I know they are simply dodging those questions. Please Firaxis, tell us about the governments.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Ralf
If "domination victory" optionally can be achieved by military conquering/ controling "a majority of the world's land surface within your borders" - then whats the difference compared with traditional "Military victory"?

military victory is when you kill everyone. obviously if you're going for military victory the domination victory will come first but i guess you'll be given a choice to continue for military victory

[d_dudy]

if you don't have the culture to be in command of 3/4 of the landmass then you'll have to conquer every city.

but i also think what mark said will be an option

[TechWins]

Also...

Quite possibly all of the Civ's city might not cover all 3/4 of the land surface, so you could conquer all the Civ's before you get the domination victory.