Desires For Future Civ3 Patches

[Cybernut]

Good point about Spain - but also, what about the Ottomans? But I'll defer to Firaxis here ... I guess they had to make some decisions about who stays and goes.

However, I'm not sure about this random flipping idea. I like the idea in principle of cultures re-emerging, but it would be better if they re-emerged within their new (conquered) context - like the Greek reemergence in the (eastern) Roman context that became the Byzantine Empire. Maybe unique cultural identity can re-emerge within the new context if you treat your new captured civs well?

Howver, if the game were modified to allow captured capitals or whatever to flip, then people will just automaticaly raze the capital ... or any other city for that matter. I only keep large cities when I'm within range of eliminating the relative Civ. If there's a chance that they could randomly flip, I'd raze 'em all ... I hate the idea of razing cities ... its immmoral ... but I just wanna finish the damn game ...

It would aggravate the late game even more for me. I'm already pissed of that it takes so long to play moves during wars because of the ridiculously aniquated movement sequencing that hasn't been improved at all !!!!!

[Lord Blackmoor]

My little idea

I would like to see a return to how CivII handled units in cities.

What I mean is, as it stands now, you either have the units sitting visible on top of your city or (by turning on an option in prefs) you dont see them at all. The problem with the latter option is that you have no way of knowing your cities are even garrisoned without clicking (right or left) on the city in question. I should be able to tell at a glance, even with the option turned on, wether or not there are units in my cities.

I feel there is far too much clutter on the map with the units showing (especially when you get to mech infantry, they practicly cover the whole city icon,) but I feel stuck playing that way just so I can tell if my cities have units in them.

I know I should probably know anyway, but this is my only major gripe with the game. Perhaps there is a way to change it manually, with a graphic edit? Ill look around, but if someone already knows, let me know.

Thanks
LB

[Willem]

Re: My little idea

Originally posted by Lord Blackmoor
I would like to see a return to how CivII handled units in cities.

What I mean is, as it stands now, you either have the units sitting visible on top of your city or (by turning on an option in prefs) you dont see them at all. The problem with the latter option is that you have no way of knowing your cities are even garrisoned without clicking (right or left) on the city in question. I should be able to tell at a glance, even with the option turned on, wether or not there are units in my cities.

I feel there is far too much clutter on the map with the units showing (especially when you get to mech infantry, they practicly cover the whole city icon,) but I feel stuck playing that way just so I can tell if my cities have units in them.

I know I should probably know anyway, but this is my only major gripe with the game. Perhaps there is a way to change it manually, with a graphic edit? Ill look around, but if someone already knows, let me know.

Thanks
LB

If you go to your Military Advisor screen, F3, you'll be able to see what is garrisoned in all your cities at once.

[Kryten]

You are right Cybernut, players would raze capital cities instead of capturing them just to avoid a later 'culture-flip'. But the solution is simple; don't allow the razing of capital cities.

Your point about Greece is a good one. But let's look for a moment at the history of Greece:
- The Greeks form many city states and colonize the coastal areas of the eastern Med.
- The Persians conquer the Ionian colonies but fail to conquer Greece itself.
- Under Alexander the Greeks (well, Macedonians) conquer all of Persia, but the empire breaks-up on his death.
- Later on the Romans conquer Greece and they are (temporarily)out of the game.
- When the Roman empire falls they reappear as the Greek speaking Byzantine empire.
- Much later they are conquered (again temporarily) by the Ottoman-Persians.
- In the 1820's the Greeks rebel and are back in the game.
- In the 1940's the Greeks are conquered for a third time, this time by Nazi Germany.
- After WWII the Greeks return, and become allied to the rest of the EEC.

The Greeks final score --- 2 empires (Alexander & Byzantine), conquered 3 times (by Rome, Persia & Germany), but still existing in the 21st century.

Now I'm not saying that the Greeks of today are of the same culture as the Athenians or Spartans, just as modern Egyptians are not the same people as those who built the Pyramids. It is not posible to make civ3 nit-pickingly realistic I know. But the above example does simulate and give the illusion of the history of the REGION if not the PEOPLE.

I don't want to force players change their game. I hope that this simple facility, if added to the game (and it won't be unless more people support it) would have an on/off toggle just as most of the civ2 features had. So if you want your civ game to be as it is now, with 'eternal' empires, you could switch off rebelling capitals. But if like me (and I hope many others!) you want a more fluid historical game, then I'd like to be able to switch it on.

After all, many of the excellent civ2 scenarios were historical. All I ask is give me (and others better than me) the tools to do the job. With this idea of rebelling capital cities we could make some truly wonderful historical scenarios. But at the moment, if I have Rome in my mod, then the rest of European history stops and Roman Empire is still here in the 21st century.
Just give us the tools and we will do the job!

[sargon2]

having tea with maximo leader

Haven't read the whole thread yet. But I already want to post an idea.
I support a new building which can be built only once per nation, in to this City u can bring caught leaders of your enemies. As long as u keep them do they cost supply, but therefor u get the map of his former Civ of the time u got him.
The building maybe cathegoriezed as a minor wonder should be called GUANTANAMO-BAY

[hoppy39000]

i'd like either sentry command mainly so thatt it lets you know of movement within a units area of sight, and or a tab, such as the "STAR" next to the capitol, having a symbol of a sort next to each city so that you can click it, then see a list of all units within that city....thus not having to switch screens and can all be done by mouse, with list can have sub menu of commands awaken, sentry fortify etccc this would avoid leavind a unit "unfortified" in each city and make it easier to work around the map..

[sargon2]

The idea of flipping cities is no bug - its realistic.
The idea of razzing a freshly conquered city or deporting their population some where to and filling up the new city is no evil trick it's been practizised by the Assyrians they did it with the rebellious Arameans - at the end all the Assyrians spoke Aramean.

Originally posted by hoonak

I prefer settlers to workers for two reasons:
it adds two people of my nationality to the city and
it leaves worker(s) available to improve the city.


The people that are added to the city are not rebelling. This reduces the percentage of rebels and lessens the chance of a culture flip.

In any case, having a city immediately revert to it's former ownership is ridiculous.

So do it its historically legitimaded

[Howling Chip]

United Nations Victory Option

Rather than election assuring victory and end of game, option to refuse to recognize election (AI or human player). Results in 50 turns of no trading (embargo) between AI/human who refused to recognize the election and all other civilizations. At end of 50 years, UN option resets with new election possible.

[Willem]

The whole ZoC, free shot thing really needs to be beefed up IMO. All it does now is take off 1 hit point and, as I understand it, only one unit gets a shot. I could be wrong about that since I haven't put it to the test yet. At any rate though, it should be tied to the Bombard strength, not just given an arbitrary number. It would make Catapult etc. much more useful in a defensive role. As it is now, there's really not much point. And it makes it much more difficult to set up a defensive position, since any unit can now just waltz through the area with little danger of taking damage.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

These are revisions. I have the 1.1.6f patch

Paratroopers-paradrop range of 10
Ships-should have have movement of +1
Nuclear Subs, Subs- Invisible to Ironclads and the likes. Which they are not cuz they are always attacked by the AI, and when I camp them in the AI's water territory, they tell me to leave.
Privateers- 2.1.3
Coastal Fortress- make it work
Fortress- make it work
Nuclear Subs- 4 tac nucs

[joebasstard]

Civ III (exp. pack?) ideas

OK here's my wish list. Not holding my breath for it, but I'd actually pay something for the expansion pack if it had these.

1.) ****Allow barbarians or some other entity to build INDEPENDENT CITIES. Some of these could form into MINOR NATIONS of a few cities. They rarely build a settler, can be traded with, negotiated with, may wish to become a colony or ally of another civ or be absorbed outright. Some might last as neutral nations between larger civs. Create a Diplomatic/Cultural disadvantage toward any civ that attacks a minor nation, allowing some of them to survive. Look at the world map at ay time in the past 1,000 years. There's more than just a few nations; not all of them try to expand everywhere possible.
2.) ***Terrain was more limiting in the real world. Civilizations stopped expanding at major mountain ranges, deserts, tundra, even large rivers sometimes. --Make special Alpine Mountains (or impassible mountains) that only certain units may enter, OR it takes more than 1 turn to traverse, AND/OR entering means a % chance of being damaged or destroyed.---Make Desert similar--% chance of unit being damaged or lost or losing a turn while trying to find its way...except for certain units, or desert with road, or adjacent to city. But allow desert road spaces to randomly be destroyed (sandstorm). Improved technologies help units navigate desert better. ---Great Rivers- a wider version of existing river graphic, river spaces that are in this category take greater technology and expense to build bridge across...cannot be forded by units before some technology, OR chance of units being lost or damaged while fording, OR takes more than 1 turn to cross.
3.)***Patrol radius..Land, sea and air units can be ordered to patrol a radius that is determined by their movement rate. Choose patrol and a radius appears on the screen temporarily, like the city radius your settler gives off.
4.)**Communications/Supply I saw somebody mentioned supply lines and I think it's a solid idea. If your unit can trace a supply line back to a city OR some other source ...it can move and attack. Without supply it is immobile, can only defend, and maybe absorbs damage more quickly. --- ALSO Communications(note: this would alter the game VERY drastically)...as your communications technologies improve, the further from your cities your units can go and still be under 'direct control'. This prevents the whole world from being explored/ colonized in the age of triremes! The Wheel, Horseback Riding, Writing, ....Telegraph, Radio would all be technologies that increase the range of 'direct control' ...Radio, of course would extend it infinitely. Units ordered out of your 'influence' zone would be given advance orders..."explore inland" "explore coastlines" "attack"(pick a location OR Civ) ..."explore" commands would end with the prompt: "return when..." (pick 1)" find coast, find resource, find city, after __ turns" ...If you want to change a unit's orders but it's far away, you pick the unit and give an order. The unit, however, doesn't get the order until x amount of turns based on distance and technology. Now we'll have more realistic nations.

[star mouse]

How to implement Canals

Canals were in the early design for CIV3 but were omitted for some reason.

Here's my design for canals:

Canal Lock

• Terrain improvement, built by workers
• Replaces mines and irrigation
• Construction time is double the time it takes to build railroads in mountains
• Tech advance: Steel
• Must be built adjacent to a sea coast
• Requires Iron
• Upkeep cost is 5 gc a turn

Canal Channel

• Built by workers
• Replaces mines and irrigation
• Construction time is double the time it takes to build railroads in mountains
• Tech advance: Motorised Transportation (because big bulldozers are needed to carve the canal and big trucks are needed to cary away the rubble)
• Must be built adjacent to a Canal Lock and cannot be built next to a sea coast
• Requires Iron

To use a canal, the whole length of the canal must be contained within your borders or the borders of a civ with whom you have Right of Passage.

When passing through a canal, ships must stop at each Lock, so it always takes two turns to pass through a canal.

If a canal segment is destroyed while occupied by ships, the ships are lost.

The maximum length of a canal with this design is four squares.

[hoppy39000]

star your canal sys for things like "panama canal" is great, but most cultures including the egyptiains, and mainly ROMANS had canals they were in fact called aquaducts which brought water in or out of any area , city, or farm...............shoul be able to build a "minor " canal over hills etc...w/ construction....

[star mouse]

More on my canals:

* They cannot be built on hills or mountains

aqueducts are abstracted in CIV as the Aqueduct improvement, and they have always been ...

[hoppy39000]

thats my point....tho ! should be able to 1. irragate hills, either by a worker ability ie civ 2, or thru building a city improvement then a roadlike, (pipeline) irrigation aquaduct, as in oldtimes. this making it easier to irrigate only a single tile rather than being completely stopped by hills or wasting tuns clearing then irrigating jungle, and must be an improvement avail early to mid game not late ie transportation...