The Essentials

[Mister Pleasant]

Yes - units should be supported nationwide. Public Works is definitely the way to go - its close to a buy/not buy issue for me. I can't stand hearding settlers to the point that only a kick-ass AI would get me to buy it if settler hearding is mandatory. (of course, a selection feature for game set up will make everyone happy - but that might overtax the AI which is the single most important feature). Can't stand building irrigation, followed by farms. Yes, Civ3 needs to steal all of the improvements made by activision (activision stole the whole concept - and fair's fair). On the other hand, SMACs SE system (one of of the few things I liked about SMAC) needs to be incorporated. Maybe I want a police state with a free market! CtP2's "classical civ" govenment switching just seems so hackneyed. Oh yeah, the SMAC diplomacy system is the best - more features than CtP2 - and those features actually worked.

[Grumbold]

I can see we will have to agree to disagree, MarkG. I never have a problem supporting one settler/engineer per city specifically for the purpose of improving tiles. If they ever run out of jobs to do building roads, forts irrigation and mines then they can always go and aid the colonisation effort. Usually though engineers pop just in time and railways, farms and terraforming becomes the order of the day. Finally there is the frantic rush to keep pollution down below critical mass before the eco friendly techs kick in. At that point I either disband them or wait for endgame to build cities in places that I would not ordinarily use. It's just a matter of which playing style appeals, I guess.

[MarkG]

btw, speaking of playing styles, in ctp2, when you're geting close to discover railroad, it's extremely fun to keep your pw and then upgrade your roads in one turn with a few clicks....

[Grumbold]

I entirely agree. For making sweeping changes or concentrating a lot of effort into a small area PW is the best. Settler units are better at dispersed effort, although you can almost feel the growth of the railroad when you have four engineer units leapfrogging each other building your transimperial main line.

[MrFun]

I do not prefer an army of Settlers for tile improvement purposes. I would hope (don't think it's likely though) that Firaxis will avoid Settler-mania.

By the way Markos, now that a few people have agreed with some of my viewpoints, will you bow to me and and beg for forgiveness? (sorry - had an ego-spasm)

[bagdar]

In most of my Civ sessions, the game soon turns into
"Sid Meier's Engineers" However, I don't like the CTP system either. Let's hope for clues in the next "ask the civ team" installation.

[Bubba]

Mr Fun wrote:

"3) Do not allow cities to grow beyond three square radius like Activision did. Four square radius I feel might be too much. If you want to increase it, increase from the present two square radius in Civilization II to three square radius."

I agree and would actually enjoy the city radius shrinking to what it was in Colonization (8 I believe). I always felt it strange that a standard Earth map could not easily support New York, Boston, Montreal, and Toronto. Or that in CTPII London overlapped with most of Western Europe.

Given most peoples' processor speed and the maps that can be realistically expected, a smaller city radius would make the game more historical and allow for small powerful nations (Netherlands, UK) and densely populated regions. I fail to see how this accuracy would come at the expense of fun.

Any Thoughts?

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 01-24-2001 12:54 PM the increased city radius was one of the things i liked in ctp2. it's not only a visual thing, but also a measure against ics

Not all civers seemed to be convinced about that anti-ICS prevention. Read the following "can of worms" thread:
Column # 139; By St. Switchin

I e-mailed above link to Chris Pine, Firaxis, with the comment: "Im not sure that city-area related anti-ICS prevention is going to be enough". He responded with...
"I didn't say anything about city-area" and "I think we have a better set of solutions. Want to know what they are? (chuckle)".

Its seems to me that expanding city-areas in Civ-3 - in any form - is extremely unlikely. Good! For any further comments about the subject, check out the The pitfalls of expanding city-areas in Civ-3 thread.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited January 24, 2001).]

[MarkG]

i said "a measure". not "a solution"
i didnt say it was enough, and that is what chris pine seems to wrote to you too

further more, that thread you linked("Column # 139; By St. Switchin") is not about ics and the expanded city area, but about ics and the new model of how the tiles in the city area are worked


so take off these glasses and read again what i wrote
[This message has been edited by MarkG (edited January 24, 2001).]

[Grumbold]

I'd like to build a resource network that did allow your Capital and other key cities expand their size/sphere of influence but unlike CtP2 I do not believe it makes sense for them to be able to do it on their own (which allows all cities to grow this way.) Something like nominating 3 cities with factories to allow a 4th that is connected by rail to build a manufacturing plant. Ditto 3 with schools allowing a 4th to build a university. Really get the feel of all the centres co-operating with each other to make the nation stronger, not just working to make themselves individually better.

[MarkG]

the increased city radius was one of the things i liked in ctp2. it's not only a visual thing, but also a measure against ics
with the recent mod which adds the feature where cities actually grow to more than one square, the map justs becomes wonderfull!

as for london having a city area that reaches large parts of france, this is just a matter of the size of the map. there are bigger worlds maps for ctp2 than the official one, as well as other big maps that cover smaller areas(a 210x210 map of the north atlantic for example)

and since today's computers can handle these kinds of maps, the 2002 computer will certainly handle bigger ones