Two ways to make Civ3 better, just a thought :)

[TheHobbit]

I would love to see the developers do both of the ideas below just for the pure fact it would immerse some people like me into the game a lot more. I'm not saying the game is bad without it or they HAVE to add it. But it might be something to consider for people who just love to make their own little Earth.

1. The first thing would be to make it possible to name squares. Like The Blue Desert, or the Manchurian Mountains. It'd be awesome being able to make landmarks out of places!

2. Have the ability to name Treatys and all you sign. For example, you have violated the Peach Peace Pact by declaring war on us, You will be crushed like a bug!

Go ahead and post other things that you think fall under the category of immersing the player in a game. The Civ3 developers can always use a ideas, no harm dome . If you want to comment feel free!

[Harovan]

The idea of naming places on the map is really good, I would like it. Also, it would be good to be able to name units and armies, may be even automatically with opportunity to overwrite, like "27th infantry".

[kimmygibler]

Naming units and armies is possible in ctp2...

[Alex]

The ability to name landmarks is in SMAC, so it would not be difficult to add. It would be interesting if you could name special places AND those places could appear on the final replay.

Let us say that you won an important battle that you'd like to be recorded on the history books. So you could open a dialog box that allowed to enter a description for that (e.g., "Greek victory on the battle of Antium"), along with the year.

When the replay is shown, beside those "city x founded on x year", you would also get your "greek victory on the battle of Antium, 155 BC). Just a small touch of glorification for our egos.

[Skanky Burns]

I never used the name landmarks feature in SMAC, and the only effect of named treaties was that I now had a city targetted by my entire army.