v1.17f Reaadme

[ACooper]

Originally posted by Libertarian
Well, the pot was banned for much less. What happens to the kettle is up to Mark.

I am (and was) right there with you. We got banned for much less. Especially the personal attacks. I have never called you a c^&ks$^&#r even when I wanted to.


Anyway, get this thead back on topic!

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Libertarian

I must say, Kamrat, that group movement and sensible unit activation sequencing have completely shifted the balance, in my opinion, toward making the game worth another try. I'm going to try it, anyway. (Though first, I might await reports of wild crashes and whatnot... Don't forget patch before 1.16f.)

Yes, well it *looks* quite impressive, and I´m actually quite pleased that Firaxis has listend to complaints in such extent. But I still don´t feel that "YES! Let´s play some Civ3" Maybe I´m just tired of the whole Civ-genre, and that thought actually makes me sad, ´cause I really do want to enjoy this I have played Sid Meier games for the better part of a decade, so...

But then again, I´m playing SMAC right now, and I´m enjoying it immensly so who knows? Maybe I´ll give it a go. I HAVE payed 45$ for it after all

[Libertarian]

That's pretty much how I look at it. It's paid for. Most of our complaints were allegedly addressed. I'm not all gung-ho about it, but I'll be interested mainly to see whether those of us who held fast to our criticisms were right. If we are, the game should be more enjoyable in the modern age.

The Domestic Nag was an oversight on their part, but they took care of quite much.

[Guynemer]

One thing I didn't notice was mention of the disappearing foreign advisor lines that some of us experience.

Other than that, the patch looks terrific on paper. Let's hope it is even better in practice.

to Firaxis!

[bloodysmurf]

Single Remaining Ship Crash-Bug

Originally posted by Mike Breitkreutz FIRAXIS


Do you still have this save? If so, please post it and I will look at it.

Mike, I've experienced this bug (twice) myself. It is discussed in some detail in this thread at civfanatics (see page 2 post by Brocky and thereafter): http://forums.civfanatics.com/showth...threadid=12173

I was one of the folks that offered up a savegame in that thread, but I deleted it after a few weeks. I'm sure someone from that thread must still have a save though...

-ollie-

[dac]

One very minor bug that I didn't see fixed in the readme. When playing the game on anything other than 1024x768, the borders around the City Name boxes were drawn in the wrong place after you had visited some of the advisor screens. I wonder if they fixed that, or has a workaround type thread come and gone on this form that I missed. I would really like to play on higher resolutions, but the boxes just bothered me too much.

Other than that, the patch has stacked movement (drat, my carriers are still going to get outrun by their escorts) and less idle workers while there is work to be done, I'm pretty happy. My girlfriend won't be.

[Alex]

Originally posted by Ralf


Huh? I sure hope not. If this is true, then they havent solved anything at all. One should be able to move mixed stacks within each military branch. By "type" I think (well, I HOPE) they mean land, sea and air-type.

Ralf: I'm with you on this issue, I surely HOPE that they mean land, sea and air-type... Otherwise, as you say, the patch will not solve anything at all. I had not seen your earlier post about this, so I did not even think about this possibility when I first read the readme content.

Well, let's hope it means what we think it means...

[August Borms]

Originally posted by Kamrat X


Yes, well it *looks* quite impressive, and I´m actually quite pleased that Firaxis has listend to complaints in such extent. But I still don´t feel that "YES! Let´s play some Civ3"

I feel exactly the same way but I'm playing Civ2 right now and looking forward to CTP 2 (and, eventually, the Civ3 scenario editor)

[Steve Clark]

Originally posted by Libertarian
The Domestic Nag was an oversight on their part, but they took care of quite much.

I have heard, second-hand, that casual civers (that ain't us) loves these messages and want more of them. It apparently helps them to be reminded and in thinking that they are interacting with a sim-like person. Maybe it should be an option, like what Sid is doing in SimGolf by completely turning off all comments (one of my primary suggestions). But then one has to decide which messages are important and which can be turned off.

[Libertarian]

My problem isn't with the messages, but with the modality. It just seems incredible that important messages, such as pollution notices, resource disappearances, and the like, fly by too fast to read, while petulant nagging about a trivial matter — even if you're nearly finished with a wonder, she'll ask if you want to build a hospital! — is forced upon you, and the game halts until you respond.

For each city. One at a time.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Libertarian
I'm not all gung-ho about it, but I'll be interested mainly to see whether those of us who held fast to our criticisms were right.

Most of us who criticized "the whiners" have NEVER had any problems with added functionality; like added stack-movement, sentry-command and so on. At least I was under the impression that the whining type of criticism, was much more about fundamental Civ-3 game-design decisions - mostly from people that was disappointed with the lack of CTP- or SMAC-features in the game, and why Civ-3 enemy-civs wasnt as easily conquerable as they where in Civ-2.

[Venger]

I sure hope they quantify some of this stuff, such as exactly HOW many military units it takes to quell culture flipflop nonsense. I also hope the "stacked movement" thing works. But as someone else mentioned, if they've left armies as unupgradable unreloadable unusable items, I'll be a bit disappointed...

Venger

[Libertarian]

The record will show that I have consistently praised Soren and the AI, which I believe is on par with the game's value. All my criticism has been about the clumsy interaction between user and game — i.e., the interface. I have also criticized Firaxian PR, which is utterly Neanderthal. But I've never had a problem with the game's design, per se, merely with how the interface made it exceedingly difficult to play the game the way it was designed.

For example, to build an industrious empire, you need workers. Lots of them. And yet, handling these was tedious beyond reason. Now it won't be.

[TechWins]

Ralf: I'm with you on this issue, I surely HOPE that they mean land, sea and air-type... Otherwise, as you say, the patch will not solve anything at all. I had not seen your earlier post about this, so I did not even think about this possibility when I first read the readme content.

I'm assuming it's the actual unit type and not genre (meaning knight, tank, galley...). In fact, not only am I assuming that it was done this way, but I'm hoping it was done this way. Now hear me out on this: Lets say you have 7 units in a city, 2 swordsmen, 2 pikemen, and 3 horsemen. You only want to move the 2 swordsmen and 3 horsmen, though, but that is no problem because you don't have to move all of the land units, you only have to move a certain type of unit. If you would have to move all land units then you wouldn't even be able to use the stack function in that case because you don't want to of your units moving. Not to mention, that it would create a lot more programming work to make it be all land units, because there would have to be a system created for the various movements. So more than likely Firaxis took the better route in adding stacks, which would be only moving a specific unit type.

Also, I'd like to give a big thanks to Firaxis for listening to the fans ideas for the creation of this patch. Many of the additions/changes/fixes for this patch were all listed in the "Future Desires for Civ3 patches" thread (by the way I was the one who was editing the list, however, I didn't edit the list for quite sometime). Thank you Firaxis for continuing to support Civ3 and the fans, even though, at times it may seem like quite the contrary.

[Steve Clark]

That was the one, thanks Tech.