v1.17f Reaadme

[TechWins]

Lib, could you just give it a break for once? Your constant stating of your position on Civ3 is starting to get quite repetitive. Every thread you take part in doesn't have to turn into a discussion about your feelings does it? Now I'm not suggesting that you can't post your feelings, in all honesty I could careless, however, I think there is a more fitting place to do that in - OT.

[Zoid]

Originally posted by ACooper
All the time people have spent bashing them and complaining how they were never on the boards answering questions. Maybe they were working on this all along!


I wonder if some people feel silly now?

Couldn´t they have sent a messenger here with some news and answered a few questions. It doesn´t take THAT much time, you know But they have apparently been skulking and picking up a lot of criticism and then acted on it

And no, I don´t feel a bit silly

[Provost Harrison]

I am disappointed that still you can not eliminate the minimum of 4 turns/tech limit, it makes the game feel like it is on rails too much, and makes the later stages of the game drag on waaaaay too long.

[FNBrown]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
I am disappointed that still you can not eliminate the minimum of 4 turns/tech limit, it makes the game feel like it is on rails too much, and makes the later stages of the game drag on waaaaay too long.

You can eliminate this with the editor right now.

[star mouse]

Originally posted by Gramphos
Doesn't seem to involve any changes to the BICs, maybe I don't have to upgrade C3MT after all.

This looks like a BIC change to me:
* Civ-specific units are now part of the regular upgrade chain.

[wervdon]

* Fixed bug which prevented cruise missiles from targeting units with only 1 hit point.

Does that mean cruise missiles can kill units now? (could they already I assumed they couldnt and never really tried) Or are they just going to bounce harmlessly off the 1 hit point units

If they can be lethal that would be cool, my one serious gripe with this game has always been bombers being non-lethal (though I just think it should be an editor option)

In any case, impressive patch list and I see why its taken so long Ill probally dust off the CD and give it a go friday with the rest of you and put the original MOO back up

[player1]

Originally posted by star mouse


This looks like a BIC change to me:
* Civ-specific units are now part of the regular upgrade chain.

Don't forget, in 1.16f there was a lot of chages in bic (costs, culture points, etc...), but is was UNDOCUMENTED in Readme file.
So maybe there are some changes here too.

[ChrisShaffer]

I just hope they've improved the way the governors assign population to work squares. If they haven't done that, I'll be waiting for the next patch.

When I tell the governor to emphasize food (and tell it not to emphasize commerce and not to emphasize production) I darn well want it to use the two food square before it uses the forest!

[korn469]

cruise missiles have always been able to kill units unless they also changed that in the patch

before although cruise missiles wouldn't normally target a 1 hp unit, you could use the infinite range bombard cheat to attack 1 hp units which cruise missiles could kill

cruise missiles however are a ground unit, not an air unit in civ3 and that is why they have the power to actually kill units instead of just damaging them

[rflagg]

Good and Bad of 1.17f

First, kudos to the civ3 team - I really was afraid that nothing was going to come again until the expansion pack in March (we *can* still expect the expansion pack in March, right?) I love the game, and I'm very happy to see all of these fixes taking place, you guys continue to do great work on an already great game.

Now, my complaint. And, before anyone starts to say "Oh god, give it a rest" - I paid my $50 just like everyone else for the game, and I have my right to complain.

WHY has there yet to be no player starting locations or unit/city placement? Do you all want to know what I believe the real reason to be? Because they'll put this in the expansion pack, which means you *have* to buy it, if you want to play any scenario of the slightest bit of value! Imagine all of the wonderful scenarios we could be playing right this second with this tasty game - yet the Firaxis team seems to just want more money for their unfinished product. Will I buy the expansion pack? Of course. Will I be jaded against them, yet continue to support their work? Yes - the game *is* great, afterall. But it's not one I'm playing nearly as much any more, what with Medal of Honor, and other great games on their way out. With Civ2, I had a hard time trying out all of the scenarios out there - and so many were so good! Yet, here we are, months after the game has been out, and we can't do anything with it. Even using someone's map isn't all that great, because you don't start in a defined place, it could be in any of the starting locations!

I really feel that Firaxis turned their back on the scenario community and decided they could make more money on it. Hell, for all we know, they could be sitting back creating expansion pack after expansion pack, planning on selling them for $30 a pop, and just fill them with scenarios. It feels like a big step backwards from Civ2, is all.

The fact that there has been *NO* word from Firaxis on this only proves the point, too. That's the saddest thing. They'll listen to every-freaking other complaint except this, so I know it goes to a deaf ear, but nonetheless, I needed to get it off my chest.

Still, a great game, and another great fix, but please hear our screams!

-rflagg.

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Libertarian

Mark, who owns Apolyton, doesn't seem to appreciate the sort of viscious and vulgar posts that infest the cited thread.

Well, it is kinda my fault. I did bait poor Ironikinit rather hard

[star mouse]

Originally posted by player1
Don't forget, in 1.16f there was a lot of chages in bic (costs, culture points, etc...), but ... was UNDOCUMENTED in Readme file.
So maybe there are some changes here too.

Good point

It does mean I will have to redo my custom BIC file, but I've documented the changes I made so it will only take half an hour to redo.

[Steve Clark]

rflagg, you apparently do not recall Civ2:FW and Civ2:MGE, both $30/$40 products. IIRC, FW was the first with scenarios and the ability to create them, MGE obviously was the first with MP, plus more scenarios. Civ3 looks like they will be following that same path and that is perfectly fine with me since we'll get a better scenario product than if it was some patched stuff.

[Grumbold]

Hmm, interesting patch notes but as it stands I'm not going to bother downloading it. I freely admit there are some great improvements in there. Unfortunately some key parts of what they have included I want the option to turn off (banning pop rushing, random withdrawal) and other stuff like the AI trading during your turn that I desperately want fixed is not even mentioned.

The absence of more significant editor improvements (unless it didn't make the patch notes) just show that they didn't even suggest it should be expanded upon according to Dan's post about why this is 1.17f. It should have been the first thing they improved because the scenario community can't get started without it. At least the average gamer had a playable game.

Lastly, most pettily, but the thing I know would bug me a lot in the course of the game is the new sentry command. I mean, how often in a game to you want one of your units to wake up when one of your own passes by? Yet this is given the 'y' hotkey and the far more used enemy-only wakeup is relegated to 'shift & y' which is a much harder order to give.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

I was as well expecting a few more options available in the editor, but well... I think that the game as is out of the box will play much better since there are ways now which make unit managment easier -the most important stacked movement and settler automation