What needs to be done to make this game great.

[Death's Toe]

Re: Re: What needs to be done to make this game great.

Originally posted by CharlesUFarley


If we we're game designers (that means you too!) we surely wouldn't be in a game discussion forum relating to another companies products. You're just as guilty for being here as we are. So asside from a smartass remark -- do you have a better idea?

Charles.

Believe it or not, I actually am a game designer. Junior class designer, however, so my opinion might not matter much. Either way, I don't know what that has to do with anything.

Anyway...You don't go to the closet and get a deck of cards if you want to play monpoly. You don't get monopoly if you want to play risk. You don't get risk if you want to play sorry...etc. If you don't want to play Civ 3, don't play it. Saying it is somehow broken or flawed is a logical fallacy. Its akin to saying that monopoly should have three dice, or it should use pesos.

Having said that, there is nothing stopping you, or anyone else, from playing with house rules, or mods. For examle, its a common house rule in monopoly to place a $500 bill on the board, this bill gets collected by anyone lucky enough to land on free parking. It wasn't designed to be played this way, and it can easly change the balance and dynamic of the game, but some people enjoy playing it this way.

Firaxis has made Civ3. Its obvious, despite the rediculous claims to the contrary, that they put in a lot of hard work to make this game. They made a game that they think is fun, and no matter how much howling and gnashing of teeth goes on by a wronged few, many people who bought it find it a good game too.

So, if you don't enjoy the way Civ 3 is meant to be played, don't play it, or download a mod for it, or make your own game.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Martin Gühmann
And why than this FLC format and not an own format and release a comfortable editor?

By the way were can I download a demo of Civ3? So I could really stop guessing.

-Martin

Because they did it the way they wanted to do it. Not the way some Johnny-come-lately-twit who couldn't give a sh*t about Civ3 wants it. OK?

No not OK, with you. Your posts are exemplars of ignorance. You attack a game that you admit you have not played. How any criticism could have less value than that is beyond me.

You, sir, are a twit. Pure and simple.

God, I wish I had downloaded a demo of CTP2 before I wasted 50 bux on that cr*p.

Bring it on.

[Harovan]

Very good post, PGM I agree with almost all you wrote, but would like to add:

Multiplayer mode.
Enough said. Beating the AI is too easy.

CTP2-like "Secret service" button in diplomatic negitiations.
If one offers me a MPP, I'd like to see with whom he's allied, at war, has MPP, RoP or trade embargoes, without leaving the negotiations.

Diplomatic overview on large and huge maps.
It's a pain to check all treaties and connections with more than 8 players in the game.

Bombardements can sink naval units.
But not destroy land units.

The number of turns for a city to grow culturally you can easily determine in the zoomed to city screen. There could be added a "Will grow in ... turns", but I think this is not necessary.

PS: BTW, you are not the only one, who loves:

- the combat model (compared with Civ2)
- the corruption level
- the culture flipping model
- the no Wonder Movies model

I would like to add:

- the no rushing Wonders with caravans model
- the trading with no caravans model
- the no terraforming Alps into grassland model

But I am disappointed of the advisors. I want the "I disagree, your excellency" guys back. They were as silly as the advisors in Civ3, but much more funny

[Mark_Everson]

The "Culture Trap" may Severely influence playability of MP

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Multiplayer mode.
Enough said. Beating the AI is too easy.

Hi Sir Ralph:

This may be a bit OT, but definitely not moreso than a flame war

As you say, MP is a must, and its surely a buisness proposition that Firaxis can't screw up on exploiting. My though was "OMG, what are people in MP going to do with culture flipping?" I envision a whole cottage industry of "Culture Trap" strategies. Why destroy your enemies' armies on the field when its so much easier to lure them in with a succulent city, and let the widows and children of the city Slaughter the poor innocent troops before they know what hit them.

I feel that the number of tactical strategies and counter-strategies involving culture flipping will come to dominate the game *shudders* unless someting is done to mod flipping before then.

So I think its Imperitive for Firaxis seriously fix culture flipping Before MP comes out. Otherwise frankly I think it'll ruin the game...


I'm so cutting edge, I registered at Apolyton before the internet even existed

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by Ironikinit
I think it's funny that martin would waste his time with a bunch of guesswork about a game he doesn't own or want.

Actual it is very entertaining to drive into a serious discussion at least I thought I did it.

Originally posted by Ironikinit
Guys like this deserve only one thing, and that's why there's an ignore feature. Whenever they say something extra dumb somebody will quote it anyway.

It would would work if I would just insulting people, don't bring arguments. And the stuff that I say is totally wrong. But it isn't and therfore this button turn into agree button. Then I could maintain now that you agree and have nothing to add, but you replyed and I got your opinion. And I know that you disagree.

Unfortunatly fact is that there are people who thinks that Civ3 is something like Civ1.8. I tried to verify this over the graphics thing and I failed as it would be a copyright violation to use Civ2 code in Civ3. But by the way Markos not only the Graet Library but I also downloaded terrain,, goods and city graphics from Apolyton all of them are 8bit. I just wondered why afterwards I converted the flc's via Animation Shop to single pictures I got 24bit graphics. And Dan gave me the explaination. But actual the graphics stuff is just a minor issure the dot on the i. My main problem is the settler/worker mania, and to know what does it mean you only need to play Civ2.

I wonder why Dan put so much emphasis on the fact that Civ3 probably does not contain any code of SMAC. Is SMAC a so bad game that nothing of it is worth to be used in Civ3? Actual it can be very good for a game if the designers use an already existing engine. Of course the disadvantage are that you have to cope with the limitations of the engine, but the huge advantage is that you have the time to concentrate on gameplay and new features. So it wouldn't hurt if Civ3 a SMAC version, my argument would only hurt if SMAC uses Civ2 game engine but Friaxis does not own Civ2. But they own SMAC or am I wrong on this point. So if Firaxis own SMAC than they have the right to take everything from it what they need and what Civ3 could make great.

Originally posted by
notyoueither
Because they did it the way they wanted to do it. Not the way some Johnny-come-lately-twit who couldn't give a sh*t about Civ3 wants it. OK?

This is a to simple answer they had a reason to do it, if they thought that it was better to do so than they can explain it and if the explaination is good than it is OK.

Originally posted by
notyoueither
No not OK, with you. Your posts are exemplars of ignorance. You attack a game that you admit you have not played. How any criticism could have less value than that is beyond me.

As I already said there is no need to play Civ3 to see the weak tile improvement system if you played Civ2.

BTW you should really avoid swearwords otherwise I can't take you too serious. Note offences are the arguments of the ones who are wrong.

And for the fact that I don't have Civ3, I prefer to play a game in German and not in English. That is another problem on the list, but if you wait long enough it will be solved.

-Martin

[Harovan]

Re: The "Culture Trap" may Severely influence playability of MP

Originally posted by Mark_Everson
I envision a whole cottage industry of "Culture Trap" strategies. Why destroy your enemies' armies on the field when its so much easier to lure them in with a succulent city, and let the widows and children of the city Slaughter the poor innocent troops before they know what hit them.

Good point, but I think every new strategy makes a challenge of the game. And to build a "culture trap" is not so easy. I tried it several times, but succeeded rarely, because the flips are not predictable. As for the lost units, I guess the solution would be to "teleport" all your units back to the capital. Remember, a turn lasts a year or more and the message could be something like "The city has revolted, the high command was enforced to withdraw our garrison to the capital" or something like that. Done.

Originally posted by Mark_Everson
I feel that the number of tactical strategies and counter-strategies involving culture flipping will come to dominate the game *shudders* unless someting is done to mod flipping before then.

As I already said, that's not that easy and can't be compared with easy cheat-like strategies like "Size 6" or "Temp city for pop-rushing" (Credits to their inventors though ).

Generally, I have faith that the game can and will be improved. Civ2 had also flaws in the first few months (be glad you never saw the German localization, it was - and still is - awful!), and ended as an absolute hit.

[CharlesUFarley]

Re: What needs to be done to make this game great.

Originally posted by Death's Toe
Believe it or not, I actually am a game designer. Junior class designer, however, so my opinion might not matter much. Either way, I don't know what that has to do with anything.

Well you said that if we wanted a better game that we should go out and program one that suits our high expectations, or some variation of wording. So you're statement has everything to do with my response.

Anyway...You don't go to the closet and get a deck of cards if you want to play monpoly. You don't get monopoly if you want to play risk. You don't get risk if you want to play sorry...etc. If you don't want to play Civ 3, don't play it. Saying it is somehow broken or flawed is a logical fallacy. Its akin to saying that monopoly should have three dice, or it should use pesos.

Logical fallacy? I'm not about to get into this with you - you've obviously haven't read the 'complaint' threads or paid much attention to the growing list of disapointments throughout the community. Either way they do exist, and the game was engineered with design flaws, Firaxis has admitted openly hence why they designed a 'patch'. Unless you're playing ignorant so that you can escape with a good debate or two. However - I've been a fan of this game since it's birth, I'm not about to turn around and throw my monopoly game out just because I don't like the new Monopoly Gold, and the simple fact that myself and the entire community has devoted so much to this product line (as I said before in other threads) we reserve the rights to discuss, criticise or even complain about it. And until this board goes 'pay' I'll continue to do just that.

Having said that, there is nothing stopping you, or anyone else, from playing with house rules, or mods. For examle, its a common house rule in monopoly to place a $500 bill on the board, this bill gets collected by anyone lucky enough to land on free parking. It wasn't designed to be played this way, and it can easly change the balance and dynamic of the game, but some people enjoy playing it this way.

I don't deny that Civ3 was designed the way it is, but the fact that there were some flaws inspired Firaxis to design a patch to correct those flaws. And I do play other games, but that doesn't perish any rights I have here. And again, you're not very well educated on the criticisim and complaints are you? Judging by you're phrasing and the manner in which you use it, you're either 'un-aware' of the reasons, or you're purposely 'ignoring' them. But kick and scream all you like - they do exist. But basically most of the arguments boil down to - lack of features & realism (based on opinions). So perhaps you enjoy the game the way it is, and possibly take offense to all the criticism -- but you're not going to change anything by adding to the confusion! Let us work our own issues out -- without meaningless interuption.

Firaxis has made Civ3. Its obvious, despite the rediculous claims to the contrary, that they put in a lot of hard work to make this game. They made a game that they think is fun, and no matter how much howling and gnashing of teeth goes on by a wronged few, many people who bought it find it a good game too.

But that's only your opinion - not fact. When I say "not fact" that means for it to be a fact - everyone would have to like it, and that just simply does not exist. There is absolutely nothing utopian about this game. Sure, granted some people enjoy it, but on the other hand - some people don't. And there is no right or wrong, just preference. I agree, they probably did put alot of work into it, game design isn't easy. And fun to some, but not all. You may not agree with people disaproving of the game you like so much, but just because you fail to see thier reasoning for it, does that mean it doesn't exist? Again - you're talking about apples and oranges here, you shouldn't be discussing all this with critics (such as myself) because we don't share you're views, and more importantly (and I had to explain this to a few others who have trouble grasping this concept) no common ground - I could understand if we we're relating to a discussion, but I have nothing (at this point in time) to share with you. I don't like the game, you do. Simple logic.

So, if you don't enjoy the way Civ 3 is meant to be played, don't play it, or download a mod for it, or make your own game.

Well - uh - thanks Dad! But I think I'll make up my own mind where I spend my leisurely moments. As I said above, critics have the same rights fans do! Accept it.

PS. Asside from telling me that you like the game, and attempting to dictate my rights - you still haven't honored the topic of this forum - instead of bi+ching about criticism is there some ideas you would like to share with this forum that could potentially improve this game?

Charles.

[CharlesUFarley]

Civ2 still rocks!

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Generally, I have faith that the game can and will be improved. Civ2 had also flaws in the first few months (be glad you never saw the German localization, it was - and still is - awful!), and ended as an absolute hit.

Civ2 still is a hit!



Charles.

[Comrade Tribune]

Re: Re: Re: What needs to be done to make this game great.

Originally posted by Death's Toe
So, if you don't enjoy the way Civ 3 is meant to be played, don't play it, or download a mod for it, or make your own game.

Excellent ideas. But why not additionally:

-Discourage as many people as possible from buying that substandard game? It serves a good purpose, and it´s fun!

[PGM]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Very good post, PGM I agree with almost all you wrote [...]

Thanks Sir Ralph. You made some good suggestions too, specially in the diplomatic sector (it's certainly boring to request diplomatic meetings with ALL your opponents just to check what you're trading what whom, and for how many turns more; also, a Secret Services button would surely be helpful).

IMHO Firaxis still has the chance and opportunity to tweak civ3 into being a fabulous game.

[Comrade Tribune]

Re: The "Culture Trap" may Severely influence playability of MP

Originally posted by Mark_Everson
I envision a whole cottage industry of "Culture Trap" strategies.

Or Culture may turn out to be an extreme disadvantage in MP, diplomatically. Unlike SP, they won´t be impressed if you have lots of Culture; instead, everybody will want to destroy you.

Great model.

[CapTVK]

Re: Re: The "Culture Trap" may Severely influence playability of MP

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


Or Culture may turn out to be an extreme disadvantage in MP, diplomatically. Unlike SP, they won´t be impressed if you have lots of Culture; instead, everybody will want to destroy you.

Great model.

Seems like we've found some common ground, everybody wanted to destroy you too in Civ2 MP (except in diplogames).

[Comrade Tribune]

Yeah, but the difference is that Culture in Civ III is presumed to make other Civs like you.

It just won´t work with MP.

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune
Yeah, but the difference is that Culture in Civ III is presumed to make other Civs like you.

It just won´t work with MP.

Sure it will. Culture doesn't make you like them. It makes the people in your towns like them. And they'll flip if you don't pay attention to the culture of your Civ.

[Dida]

Re: Ideas

Originally posted by GePap
Realistic: can be done in the next patch

2. Don't allow bombers on carriers, only fighters or jet fighters.

1.Manpower (making population size matter)

2. Private vs. Public sectors

What do you mean by no bombers on carriers? The carriers are already having very limited use. w/o bombers on board, they will be completely useless, same for the bombers. w/o having carriers to carry them to where they are needed, bombers would be pieces of crap. Historically, bombers can always fit onto a carrier, except for the land-based bombers. Go learn some history before making ridiculous suggestion.

As for man power, do they already matter?

The whole private and public sectors thing will do nothing but adds even more complexity to the game.