Civ Specific Units

[polymths]

quote: Originally posted by Maxxes on 05-12-2001 10:15 PM I think a lot of people asked for civ specific graphics, not units.

I assume though that in some text file, it would be possible to reset the Civ specific units to having identical ratings as the generic equivalent. This should then have the effect of civ specific graphics ONLY.

It sounds like there are enough options such that:
1. Those who like Civ specific units can keep them.
2. Those who hate it can disable it.
3. Those who only want Civ specific graphics can adjust the civ specific unit ratiings to their generic counterpart thereby achieving this effect.

I am satisfied that everyone should be able to customize it to their heart's desire and withdraw my "outrage".

[Cyclotron]

Let's just hope they do it right... I don't want to wade through a text file to do it for them

------------------
- Cyclotron7, "The Rajah of Resources"

[polymths]

quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7 on 05-12-2001 10:51 PM Let's just hope they do it right... I don't want to wade through a text file to do it for them

Editting the A/D/M/FP ratings in a textfile won't be that bad. Should only be 15 min of work. This ought to please the "Civ specific graphics" only crowd.

[Chronus]

"Civilization specific units/abilities/starting techs/etc will be a rule, one that defaults on, but can be disabled."

Thank goodness!

I don't want the game "creating" a unique civ for me . . . I can do the job myself, thank you very much . . . :-)

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS on 05-12-2001 09:44 PM Civilization specific units/abilities/starting techs/etc will be a rule, one that defaults on, but can be disabled.

quote: It will be balanced for both rule settings, since the civilization specific units are based on generic units (i.e. the Zulu Impi is a spearmen unit, but with a move of 2).

Above is good enough news for me. I initially didnt like civ-specific units/abilities/starting techs/etc (my God, they really intend to go full stop with this civ-unique thing). But since this feature can be disabled and the game "will be balanced for both rule settings", its OK.

However, if I nevertheless have default access to this civ-unique feature, I will at least try it out a couple of times in order to compare. Give it a fair chance so to speak. In order to evaluate I would like to be able to switch easily between both rule settings. Therefore I hope they dont just refere to strenuous textfile tweaking, then the player want to switch between specific/generic rule settings. I generally dont mind tweaking the text-files, but THIS particular option should be easy accessible with an all-in-one on/off checkbox-option in some appropriate in-game preference screen.

If you guys can fix above, I no longer see any reasons why they shouldnt add it. Infact once the feeling of "forced upon civ-unique rules" has been replaced with a "have it both ways with a click of a checkbox-option", I might actually want to try it out. Who knows - perhaps I end up playing mostly with civ-unique as default (although dont count on it). Besides; remember most who voted in THE POLL wanted it both ways. Look for your self. Appearently; Firaxis have now fulfilled the wishes of the majority in above Poll, I guess.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited May 13, 2001).]

[Russian King]

quote: Originally posted by Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS on 05-12-2001 09:44 PM Civilization specific units/abilities/starting techs/etc will be a rule, one that defaults on, but can be disabled. Jeff

Thats what I'm talkin' about!
I posted somewhere about this(full tech tree from age of empires) before.

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7 on 05-12-2001 09:56 PM Yes, will the game be balanced both with and without unique units? I certainly hope so... The problem is, if "disabling specific units" means removing things like legions and panzers althogether, the catch-22 of this feature being optional could be that without it, you are playing a stripped-down version of the game... a version that is not designed to really stand on its own two feet.

I assume that the civ-specific units/abilities/etc is automatically replaced with generic counterparts, once I choose the checkbox-option Unique Civs = NO. So there will not be any unit-techs with non-available units in them. Also, everything else throughout the entire game must be adjusted automatically to generic, with a click of that preference-screen checkbox option.

I really hope that Firaxis realize this. Jeffery Morris quote: "I guess you should have thought of that before your requested the preference feature", worries me a bit. I dont want to choose between "Civ-unique" and "Generic - but with halting compromises and non-adjusted interface".

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited May 13, 2001).]

[Sava]

Okay, ppl...

Roman legions were more powerful than other nation's legions. They were better trained, equipped, etc. So stop complaining. Why shouldn't they be more powerful? Each real-life civilization has had their own unique units, I am for anything that makes the game more realistic. The Zulus had no access to bronze, yet in earlier Civ games they could produce Phalanx units like there was no tomorrow. Not only should there be Civ specific units, but totally different units for each civ based on resources. I don't like seeing the generalized "Armor" units. I like the idea of Germans having Panzer's, Americans having Sherman's. They just have to create specific units for each civ. What would Babylonian tanks be called?

I agree with Civ specific Wonders... It's stupid that the Vikings can build the Pyramids. The Pyramids were built using stone and sand adobe bricks from the deserts of Egypt, Where are the f*cking deserts in Scandanavia huh?

[JosefGiven]

quote: ...I agree with Civ specific Wonders... It's stupid that the Vikings can build the Pyramids. The Pyramids were built using stone and sand adobe bricks from the deserts of Egypt, Where are the f*cking deserts in Scandanavia huh?

Well, this is the main arguement AGAINST civ-specific units/buildings, I would say. Remember, most games we play are not on the 'Earth' that we know. Both our, and the AI civs are strung out all over the shop. This leads to things like the Russians starting off on the equator, and the Romans starting off at a latitude comparable to that of Scandinavia.

Given this, why should the Romans be better at creating legions if they have a totally different start-out than they did in our history?

This aside, the fact that Civ-specific features can be disabled has taken a weight off my mind.

Mind you, it'd be nice to see a Civ-specific units/Civ-specific graphics/No Civ-specific effects three way toggle, as has already been proposed.

[MarkG]

yes, Ralf, from what i get from Jeff's post, if you play without unique units, you'll have the generic counterpart instead.

btw, the anti-unique-units people should note that in order to build the special units you need to harvest a special resource...

[Fintilgin]

Actually, from what we've heard, the Civ-specific units just sound like a bit of nifty flavor, not a game shaking change. I can see both sides of the argument, and am glad that we'll be able to choose. I think they seem like a neat idea.


Joe

[Mister Pleasant]

I guess all of the critics of specific units can now have a tall glass of shut-the-hell-up.

And don't worry Cyclotron7, if you don't want to wade through a text file, I'm sure someone will do that and post it in the download section. Of course, if you want to get exactly what you want, as always, you must do it your self. Sorry, such is this world.

[Harlan]

Mmmm! (smacks lips after drinking tall glass of shut-the-hell-up)

Actually, I don't see this as such a great revelation- I would have been very surprised if they didn't include an option to turn special units off.

What would make me really happy, and get me to order a whole case of shut-the-hell-up, is if there was a third option that allowed special units to reach their full strategic potential. Having special units on doesn't do much for strategy- it tends to lock you into a certain style of play regardless of the situation, depending on which civ you choose to play. Turning them off doesn't help deepen the game obviously, and if the special units are tweaked to have the same stats as their non-special counterparts, all you have is a graphical perk that once again does nothing for strategy.

Special units could greatly increase the strategy and the fun of a game if you could control which special units you get, depending on your situation. There have been numerous posts on these forums attempting to improve special unit implementation, and all are based on this idea, of you having some control over which special unit you get, instead of it being fixed. For instance your special unit is based on the terrain around you at the start of your game, or based on the wonders you build, etc..

My favorite solution is to have it based on technology. If Iron Working is needed to trigger the building of Legions, then the first civ to reach Iron Working gets to choose if they want Legions or not (they might choose not if they're angling for some other special unit further down the line that would serve them better). Every civ could only get one, and since there are twice as many special units as max number of civs in a game (as far as we know - 7 or 8 vs. 16) everyone should get one they like.

Whatever the trigger, the main idea is that the players have some control over which special unit they get, instead of having it be fixed thousands of years in advance. What's the fun in having something fixed? Its like having all the spots you can build your cities be preordained, and you have to build them in order, spot one, spot two, etc... Its silly to have that fixed in advanced, and its just as silly to have your civilization's technological discoveries fixed thousands of years beforehand.

Firaxis, we need a THIRD option! You guys are sooo close to having special units be one of the best features of the game, if a strategic choice option is included.

[Harlan]

By the way,
Its great that we're having Firaxian posters here, providing some info. But why the silence on the two biggest burning questions here, how many max civs (7 or 8 or ??) and what years the game starts and ends? These issues have already been revealed in magazine articles, except DIFFERENT ARTICLES CONTRADICT EACH OTHER! So its not like you'd be revealing some great new secret, you'd just be resolving some contradictory info.

For the max civ question, people have been arguing over Firaxian intentions for coming on 200 posts- you could solve that controversy with a sentence or two. Please tell, even if the answer is just "we're still working on that".

[Grumbold]

This thread seems to be overlooking much of the discussion that has been undertaken on this site and trying to make the issue black and white. The choice is not unique civs yes/no, it is how to make civs unique and how far to do so. I am a fervent advocate of allowing civs to become unique because of the choices they make and how they grow. Giving them set specific advantages in 4000 BC to last them throughout history is the antithesis of that. In every game the "Romans" will be exactly the same to play. They won't get a Roman jet airplane because historically they ceased to be a nation in the middle ages. In a multiplayer game first contact with a nation will immediately tell you exactly what abilities you opponent possesses.

Set starting civs is one small step better than having absolutely no customisation at all but no further forward than the concept introduced in SMAC. It is a disappointingly poor second place to having truly unique civs develop during the game so no two "Roman" nations are ever quite the same.

Tip of the hat to Harlan, he beat me to the punch. Gald someone else posting today feels the same way about it
[This message has been edited by Grumbold (edited May 13, 2001).]