Re: Speeding up the game with 100+ Civs

[ContradictioN]

He's not forcing you all to play with 100 civs. He's saying, give the option to do it.

So anyone out there who wants to wait 3 hours a turn, then by all means do it, f*ck the people who sh*t on you.

I see no democracy here, and even worse, I see many windows closing. It's no wonder this world is f*cked.

[Ribannah]

At the moment, waiting for the next turn on a huge map takes a few seconds even if your computer is not the fastest (I'm not counting messages, those could be selectively suppressed). So in a world that is 100/7 times as big, it would take 1-2 minutes tops. In two years time, it's back to seconds again.

But the 100 civs would not be set on a world that is 100/7 times as large, they would be smaller empires on average. Also, you could opt not to see all moves in sight.

So, what exactly is the problem?

------------------
If you have no feet, don't walk on fire

[jrhughes98]

My friends, realistically the world did not begin with 100+ civs, rather the world began with very few civs and grew to 100+ civs by the time the late renaissance period came about, I think (or was it the early industrial age). Anyway, realistically a normal game should probably begin with no more than 16 civs (including barbarians), and have the tendancy to grow (set by the variables) to the maximum number of civs (set by the player) over a period of hundreds if not thousands of years. Even then there will periods of decline in the number of civs; civs will be conquered, nations will unite into federations (take the former Soviet Union, for example), some civs will "starve" of food and clothing and die out (self-destruction), etc.

However, when creating/playing a scenario, there can be as many civs to start with as the game can handle.

------------------
JRH
[This message has been edited by jrhughes98 (edited November 01, 2000).]

[Adm.Naismith]

Too many times I read about debated game features: "make it an option".

Well, often it can't work! Programming life isn't so easy: every time you consider to put anything IN game, you must build a data structure that can manage it, build functions to cope with them, adapt AI to consider that option if ON (and ignore it if OFF!).

"Option" mean the QA staff must test&debug twice (On and Off), but that's not enough, because every option could grow the tree as power of 2!

Raising the max number of Civ is not simply a matter of personal taste. AI tactics must change because game will change when the number of civ per map square change so widely, mid age diplomatic relations will be too much to be managed easily.

To keep game turns short enough with 100 civ (players will complain anyway, if the game will slow down too much at larger setting, we know ), Firaxis must spend most of the optimization about this aspect, avoiding much more important task.

Don't take things so lighty, options is not a magic word to solve problems, more a source of problems itself

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant

[jrhughes98]

quote: Originally posted by Adm.Naismith on 11-01-2000 06:04 PM Too many times I read about debated game features: "make it an option". Well, often it can't work! Programming life isn't so easy: every time you consider to put anything IN game, you must build a data structure that can manage it, build functions to cope with them, adapt AI to consider that option if ON (and ignore it if OFF!). "Option" mean the QA staff must test&debug twice (On and Off), but that's not enough, because every option could grow the tree as power of 2! Raising the max number of Civ is not simply a matter of personal taste. AI tactics must change because game will change when the number of civ per map square change so widely, mid age diplomatic relations will be too much to be managed easily. To keep game turns short enough with 100 civ (players will complain anyway, if the game will slow down too much at larger setting, we know ), Firaxis must spend most of the optimization about this aspect, avoiding much more important task. Don't take things so lighty, options is not a magic word to solve problems, more a source of problems itself

Someone hasn't been doing there homework again.
Check out the text in bold below.

quote: Originally posted by jrhughes98 on 10-31-2000 05:27 PM ***E-MAIL RESPONSE FROM FIRAXIS*** Subject: RE: Question about Civilization III Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 10:55:47 -0500 From: "Kelley Gilmore" kgilmore@firaxis.com To: jason-hughes@home.com Hi Jason. Well, in our minds the question is not whether or not it's technologically possible for Civ III to support 100+ civs in a single game, but what will make the gameplay most fun. In this case, more is not necessarily better, so the number of civs will be determined by what the development team feels will be best for the game. Thanks for your note. Kelley Gilmore Communications Manager FIRAXIS Games (410) 891-3001 x131 Email: kgilmore@firaxis.com www.firaxis.com -----Original Message----- From: Mr. Jason R. Hughes [mailto:jason-hughes@home.com] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 11:57 AM To: pr@firaxis.com Subject: Question about Civilization III Dear Kelley Gilmore, What are the chances that Civilization III could support up to 100+ civs in a single game? Is it technologically possible? Is this in Firaxis's plans for Civ3? If not, is Firaxis even considering such a thing? Cordially, Jason Hughes Civilization Fan

------------------
JRH

[jrhughes98]

I tried to get this going on an earlier thread, but it went unanswered. I think that this is very important and should be paid close attention to:

quote: Originally posted by jrhughes98 on 10-30-2000 05:53 PM Eh, um! I was going to mention this before, but since I haven't done so, I'll do it now. In the Civ2 Game Options window you are able to turn on/off some the features that slow down the AI, and there is one you can turn on the will speed up the the entire game! They are the following: * Always wait at end of each turn * Show enemy moves * No pause after enemy moves * Fast piece slide For best results, unlike Civ2, Civ3 should have the first two options above turned off and the last two turned on as default. Though being able to see your enemy moves may be important to some, with so many civs it may not be important at all. I mean, think about it, you can always check in on certain civs at when it comes your turn, and who would want to worry about "distant" civs that currently have no impact on your own civ. Haven't you ever heard the saying, "Don't worry about it now, we'll cross that road when we get there." Though the maximum number of civs in one game may be HUGE, the maximum number of human civs should be much less--I would say anywhere from 8-12 human civs and over 100 AI civs would be maximum, and you can always choose less if you want to speed up the game. Time limits for each human player on every turn in multiplayer games can be applied, as in Civ2, but should more customizable, ie., instead of choosing from a list of time limits you can type in a time limit yourself. Because some people have less powerful computers than others, a warning message should be displayed if you choose to have more civs than your computers processing power can handle, thus helping you to experience a more enjoyable game. Think about it.

------------------
JRH

[rremus]

Too many civs are difficult to handle by the player, not by the computer!
You won't be able first of all to distinguish between unit nations (the color will be clearly insuficient). even with 16-24 civs, banners will need to be added to units and they should be easily distinguished.
Secondly, it will be difficult to concentrate to the diplomatic relations involved in the interaction of soo many civs. Who's allied with who? Who's in war with who?

[jrhughes98]

quote: Originally posted by rremus on 11-02-2000 10:25 AM Too many civs are difficult to handle by the player, not by the computer! You won't be able first of all to distinguish between unit nations (the color will be clearly insuficient). even with 16-24 civs, banners will need to be added to units and they should be easily distinguished. Secondly, it will be difficult to concentrate to the diplomatic relations involved in the interaction of soo many civs. Who's allied with who? Who's in war with who?

To me I think the diplomatic relations between the very few major civs in the game is what's important. You can tell a lot by looking at this information. As for the several dozen minor civs, pay them no heed!

Instead of colors, use flags.

------------------
JRH

[JESSVG01]

100+ Civs though problematic is not impossible.

For some reason everyone is on this linear turn idea for starters. I play my turn, then you yours, and Bill his, and Sally hers and then back around the loop again ... this is crappy idea from the get go. Let everyone play/submit their turn at the same time and let the server queue the actions in a logical transaction based way.

As for the AI Shogun Gunner is right, it could consume a great deal of resources if implemented imporperly. But what's stopping there being a maximum number of AI countries? Nothing. Make a max of 16 and let the rest be humans.

Someone mentioned graphics. Once again still thinking in terms of Civ II and the little colored shields on the units ... what's to stop using little flags of say 20x15 pixel flags? It takes less computing power and resources to Bit Block Transfer a little flag than it does to paint a little shield shapped image some color, and even if they didn't paint every little pixel and did use bitblt then a little flag is still as inexpensive.

As for the player experince, confusion about diplomacy and your own forgien policy a concern? That's the whole point! Get lost in the experince, be confused - pray for that one trusted ally and try to survive ... you only need to watch the news to find the truth in that.

[Adm.Naismith]

jrhughes98, I did my homework, thanks! Did you read my post carefully or my bad english shadow it as if it is in dark ages?

On CTP2 forum, Payray, an activision developer, explained the concept about game resources.

The reply from Firaxis, instead, simply try to concentrate about another subject; I spoke about "the magic word option" more in a way like what is described by the cartoon "Mickey Mouse Sorcery Apprentice", if you saw the Walt Disney original "Fantasy"

Look, this is becoming more like a religion war: no way someone can change the mind of someone else.
Enjoy yourself and be happy: let's hope Civ 3 will be good enough to play with 16 or 100 civ.

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant