Open letter to Firaxis...problems with Civ III

[ElitePersian]

Ok i posted up a thread on the Creation Forum concerning this, using my idea and Rakki's.

Hopefully someone will implement this in a mod.

[CubsFan915]

Originally posted by SuiteSisterMary


If civs should get them automagically, why bother putting them in as resources?

What he's saying (I think) is that youshould be able to se them right from the start, so that you can prepare for your future needs.

(Blackie, please correct me if I'm wrong - I'm not trying to put words in your mouth here..)

[SuiteSisterMary]

However, I cannot upgrade any of my previous units (spearmen or pikemen) to musketeers. Is there a problem here linking units in an upgrade line to the special unit? Is there a way around this, a fix I can use?

Are the cities that the earlier units in connected, by road to your capital? Or, if on a different continent, harbours with only water squares your technology can cross in between? It's great fun to cut off an outlying city, then wear down their defences; oops they can only build spearmen, with no supply of iron or saltpeter.

[Your.Master]

Originally posted by TheDarkside
Soren Johnson Firaxis- to tell you honestly, I was invaded during the middle ages by the Romans because I refused to pay him tribute of 13 gold per turn. He declared war and half my cities went into revolt and I lost a significant source fo revenue to making these people happy. These cities were never owned by the Romans, all my military units are within my borders, the Romans do have nicer culture though but that should not [logically] make a difference.

I don't have the game yet, but I have the sneaking suspicion that your civ was being kept happy by the crack...err...spice/silk/other luxuries from Rome. That makes sense, too.

[BigBopper]

just a few notes,

It seems that some people like how restrictive the resources are, and some people hate it. So my suggestion is that resorce availibility is made an option on the world creation screen. So just like barbarian activity, you can choose to leave strategic resources rare (like now) or plentiful. Me, I would love to have more resources available.

Secondly, we should be able to play with the rules ala civ 2, if we want war dicontent to be rampent fine, but we should be able to turn it down, or off.

In the end I say great job Firaxis, but let us play the game the way we want. More options will = more happy people which will = more sales.

I'm sure that some of you will think me a wimp for not wanting to play on Diety with raging hoards of barbarians with one source of each resource, but hey I play my way you play yours.

[Admiral PJ]

An idea concerning trade:
why not make water a tradeable resource , to make up for only rivers being the main fresh water resource early on - if you buy water from someone you get increased food.
There have been wars over water in places like the middle east(ongoing) - I just hope resource types and scarcity factors will be fully customisable so we can take advantage of this amazing feature.
Also, spies could be used to steal resources and Naval blockades could actually STEAL resources possibly ( like how Francis Drake stole Spanish gold bullion from south american galleons) ..

Just some ideas for more resource balancing if its needed.

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

Originally posted by BigBopper
just a few notes,

It seems that some people like how restrictive the resources are, and some people hate it. So my suggestion is that resorce availibility is made an option on the world creation screen. So just like barbarian activity, you can choose to leave strategic resources rare (like now) or plentiful. Me, I would love to have more resources available.

Secondly, we should be able to play with the rules ala civ 2, if we want war dicontent to be rampent fine, but we should be able to turn it down, or off.

In the end I say great job Firaxis, but let us play the game the way we want. More options will = more happy people which will = more sales.

I'm sure that some of you will think me a wimp for not wanting to play on Diety with raging hoards of barbarians with one source of each resource, but hey I play my way you play yours.

I agree wholeheartedly, and the editor gives you the power and flexibility to do this. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before someone creates a "Civ II Rules Mod" which will allow you to play Civ III in a style more similar to Civ II.

Dan

[HalfLotus]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
OK, I have a problem with something which is a gameplay issue regarding special units.

Now you know you can upgrade units to the next by paying gold. Now I am playing the French and I have recently acquired gunpowder and I have tons of saltpeter within my border. So obviously, I can build musketeers in abundance. However, I cannot upgrade any of my previous units (spearmen or pikemen) to musketeers. Is there a problem here linking units in an upgrade line to the special unit? Is there a way around this, a fix I can use?

Thanks.

Were the units in a city with a barracks? Or build Art of War for all cities.

[Barnacle Bill]

The problem is that the resource model is too simple.

Reality falls in two flavors here - stuff you can't build without and stuff you can't operate without.

In neither case is one source enough for all. The sources should be more common, which would make it unlikely somebody would get none at all.

For stuff you can't build without (iron, aluminum, etc...) the number of sources you control would determine the number of cities which could build using that resource simultaneously - one source per city. If you lacked an available source, the units that need it to build would be greyed out.

For oil, you would get so many "oil points" per turn from each source you control. Each time a unit requiring oil moves, it would cost an oil point. This should be a running total, or maybe you would have to build storage capacity if you want to save unused oil point.

Luxury spending should also consume oil points at some rate when you discover motorized transportation.

Coal would work like oil for coal-burning units. Power plants would also consume coal proportional to the industrial output of the city (not nukes or hydro, of course).

You should also consume a coal point for every "x" railroad squares you control. Maybe after a certain time that would switch to oil.

One source of uranium per civilization probably is enough.

More complex, but if you want it to work realistic...

[KnightOwl]

Hmmm.. is it just me or is the terrain generator a lil crazy with the ole Jungles?

[KnightOwl]

btw.. Barnacle Bill.. sounds like maybe a lil too much managing.. ahh what am I saying? who plays Civ and dosen't like managing stuff? heh.. anyway.. that would make one hell of a cool addition.. maybe Civ 4?

[Executor]

Originally posted by samsmithnz
I ahve a question regarding this oil/rubber thing. I don't have civ3 yet, cos i live down under, but what happens when you save just before you research oil? Does the oil resource always appear in the same place, or is it completely random?

All the resources are placed when the world map is created, so every time you load, it will be in the same place. I know, because in the Civ3 editor, you can place resources on the map, and what would be the point if it was randomized later?

[Setsuna]

Originally posted by Executor


All the resources are placed when the world map is created, so every time you load, it will be in the same place. I know, because in the Civ3 editor, you can place resources on the map, and what would be the point if it was randomized later?

Right, just like the starting points.

[samsmithnz]

hmmm, i guess this does make a bit of sense.

Thanks for answering the questions guys.

[Valant]

I posted this on the Civ fanatics forum but since this forum seems to be actively monitored by Firaxis employees will add my info here as well

IMO of course. Feel free to agree, disagree, add, or even flame....hell its a free country. Not saying that all these need to be addressed....or even any of them for that matter, just giving my opinion.

1) Battle system needs improvement
a) Using bombarding units as a whole just plain stink. By the time you
make enough bombarding units to deal some substancial damage, you could of
made the same number of direct melee units which work much better. I have
yet to find a scenario where bombarding units proved to be more worthwhile
than direct melee units.
b) The way that the game calculates outcome of battles should be documented.
Sure it tells you the super simple way in the book, but does not have any
info on where modfiers for terrain, river crossing are plugged in. Plus it
does not document how bombardment calculations are done to determine what
gets hit (walls, population, improvements, units).
c) There is NO bonuses for offensive attacks vs multiple for defensive.
That combined with firepower being removed and unit hp only being effected
by the units combat expertice (used to be based on the units
technology...think it was 10 for ancient units 20 for units that used
gunpowder and 30 for units who used steel from Civ2 if I remember), makes
for a very one sided defensive game and also makes more modern units only slightly better than their 1 age behind counterparts. Well, fortresses give free hits but it
does not multiply a units attack rating. Its usually better to send out
defensive units and fortifiy them on your borders to weaken your opponents
then make offensive ones and send them after the computer.
d) Even with the effects of C, it seems that the computer is luckier than
it should be on the outcome of battles, even on Chieftan difficulty. For
example it is not uncommon for a computer control regular warrior to kill a
defending elite spearman who is fortified on a hill. Plus the computer
seems more able to go through my elite spearmen like a hot knife through
butter while they are denfeding my cities.
e) With C and D, most cases tactics be damned since they seldom work. You
have to make mass number of units and throw em at the computer. Usually
have to make 5 vetran units for each defensive unit the computer has,
reguardless of its skill levels of the defenders.

2) More game info needs to be documented
a) Some might argue it might ruin the gameplay....but remember this is a TBS
(turn based stradegy). So its like a board game....and who here wants to
play a board game without knowing exactly how the game plays.

3) Corruption is WAY out of hand
a) Some people state that its to prevent ICS (infinite city sprawl). If you
wind up expanding too quickly you will not have time to build up their
defences and chances are you will loose em to the computer anywho. I like
playing on tiny maps and in one game after I defeated all the computer
opponents I was able to build over 40 cities on the tiny map and no have
city zone overlap. After researching this more I find out that they coded
an "optimal" number of cities you can make on each map before experiecing a
corruption penalty. Well for tiny maps its only 8 cities! Remember I was
able to build 43 cities on a tiny map with no overlap. At least 1/4 of my
cities were experiencing OVER 90% loss to corruption to commerce and
productio. My empire overall was loosing 60% of its income to corruption
even though I was playing on chieftan difficulty, and I was a commercial
empire (lowers corruption), and over half my cities had courthouses, and I
had the forbidden temple build away from my capital, and I had little
unhappyness, and that I was a DEMOCRACY! So everything I could do to lower
corruption I did but even with this I had of 60% corruption loss empire
wide.
b) Courthouses are weak in their effect to combat loss to corruption.

4) AI Cheating (or at least bending the rules)
a) The computer seems to grow in technology and in number of cities than
what should be possible (even on Cheiftan).
b) Seem to be quite lucky repeatively in battles
c) Can spawn new cities in even though you have them blocaded so their
settlers would have no way of getting through your blocade. I verified this
by comparing game dates with the replay at the end.

5) Pollution is kinda hard to combat
a) Pollution is hard to combat because a number of things. First of all
since research is slower in Civ3 it takes longer before you get
anti-pollution improvements researched.
b) Anti-pollution improvements have been pushed farther down the tech tree.
Unlike in Civ2 where mass transit (mass production) and recycling
(recycling) came in the insutrial range of the tech and solar plants
(enviromentalism) in the modern range....now all 3 are in the modern age
(ecology & recycling). This almost forces you not to build hospitals and
factories until you get to modern age even though you get factories and
hospitals in the middle of the industrial age. If you don't wait and build hospitals and factories right when you get the technology...your
workers will be doing nothing but non stop pollution clean up for over a hundred turns while you wait for the modern era.
c) Plus if you do not have to proper strategic resources you can not make
improvements to combat pollution.

6) Other
a) Research speed needs to be tweeked a bit...seems kinda slow. If
corruption is reduced it will help speed this up since the new commerce that
is freed up by reducing corruption will be diverted to science, tax and
happyness.