Civ III Site Updated

[java4me]

It was a great update to the site, the photos are great and the reasource layout looks great!!!

Anyways, keep up the great work Firaxis!!!

[bagdar]

WHAT IS THIS, EVERYTHING I HOPED FOR!!!

THANKS!!!!

whenisitout?whenisitout?whenisitout?whenisitout?wh enisitout?

[Stefu]

*drooldrooldrooldrooldrooldrooldrooldrooldrooldroo l*

Love the way resources are coming up to be. Those buggers could actually work, I tell you, work! And special units might also not be as bad as first suspected. Still hoping that religion would be in, but it's a long shot, I guess If not religion, then at least bit more formed enemy cultures - for instance, allow me to decide if my state tolerates their existence or tries to actively throw them our.

One quibble. One thing I never liked in CtP was that there wasn't enough "buildable land". To me, "buildable land" is something you plop your cities in, and it means grassland, in emergency plains are also fine. Looking at screenshots, I'm beginning to wonder if land type allocation is more like in CtP, which I didn't like, than in Civ2, which I liked. Will there be huge swatches of grassland for me to colonize?

[Mahdimael]

Hey all..this is my first post, though I've read the boards for many months. After looking at the new update, I was thinking: perhaps the resources dictate what specific units you get? For instance, if I have 3 iron, I can make upgraded Legions, or if I have 2 oil and 2 iron I can make F-16's? Perhaps it's also dependent on civilization, so the latter is only applicable if I'm the Americans?

Just a thought...

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by Stefu on 05-12-2001 03:24 AM One quibble. One thing I never liked in CtP was that there wasn't enough "buildable land". To me, "buildable land" is something you plop your cities in, and it means grassland, in emergency plains are also fine. Looking at screenshots, I'm beginning to wonder if land type allocation is more like in CtP, which I didn't like, than in Civ2, which I liked. Will there be huge swatches of grassland for me to colonize?

Good point! Although I dont think above problem was that apparent in the screenshots. Anyway; NO huge continental-sized areas of "non-buildable" terrain-types. Grasslands and plains should be the base, while terrain-types like jungle, swamp, hills, mountains should be proportionally and carefully sprinkled on top of that - not just layed out in enormous monotone country- or in extreme cases: even continental-sized chunks. Yes, I know about the Amazones, but country/continental chunks of it should be avoided anyway, for gameplay reasons.
Forrests and deserts is a middle-ground terrain-type in this respect. Glaciers and tundras preferbly mostly near the poles. Avoid mixing glacier and tundra side by side with desert and jungle.

Finally, In the Civ-2; mountains and hills seemed to occupie an increasingly over-proportial part of the map, the smaller mapsize you choosed to play on. On standard- and huge-sized map there was no problem. Should be fixed in Civ-3.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited May 12, 2001).]

[Nikolai]

This update is fabulous!! Thank you Dan!
But one thing I would like to know: Will the colonies be able to grow till they are a new city, or will we have to build a city with a settler or wait till the borders grow? If the colony is far away, it would be difficult, if not say impossible to just wait till the border is huge enough!

------------------
Who am I? What am I? Do we need Civ? Well....

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by Nikolai on 05-12-2001 05:27 AM But one thing I would like to know: Will the colonies be able to grow till they are a new city, or will we have to build a city with a settler or wait till the borders grow? If the colony is far away, it would be difficult, if not say impossible to just wait till the border is huge enough!

I dont believe that colonies can grow into to cities. And therefore they can never produce any "hardware" by themselves. They are merely city-area coverage-extensions - no more, no less. And thats good enough, I think. Also, they dont have to be swallowed up later by your growing borders - its enough that they are road-connected with your city through out the game.

One thing Im curious about: How many city-area tiles can a huge end-game city harvest resources from? Any max-limits? In Civ-2 we had the fixed 1-20 surrounding squares, depending how large that city currently was.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited May 12, 2001).]

[kolpo]

quote: Now that we have iron, we can build fearsome Roman Legions, which are the special unit of the Romans.

Grrr I hate unique civs The romans didn't had good legions because some God has said that all who will be called Romans will get good legions BUT they have good legions because they spend much in military, train there troops very well, know a lot about tactics,...

[BeBMan]

GREAT Update, keep up the excellent work!

The ressource ideas are very good (especially that the player has to defend its ressources/colonies), gfx are fine, and I see no problem with unique civs/units.

Someone an idea about the borders? What indicate them exactly? Can units of other civs walk through them, as long as you have peace, or not?

------------------
Civ2000 hosted by CivII Universum

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by BeBro on 05-12-2001 06:56 AM The ressource ideas are very good (especially that the player has to defend its ressources/colonies), gfx are fine, and I see no problem with unique civs/units.

I just hope that they follow this up by tweaking weaker (but still aggressive) AI-civs to concentrate much more on pillagin instead of fruitless HP citywall-banging. They can do much more damage this way. This forces the HP to have counteracting units stationed within strategically placed fortresses in order to intercept, making fortresses much more important then they where in Civ-2.

[Cyberbugs]

Just making a brief statement about the graphics, I think the city view looks great, but I really think the scenario map needs some more work.

Keep up the good work!

[Sava]

Can somebody clarify something for me? Are colonies going to be different from cities in Civ3? If so, borders should be similarly set up as in the 16th century. European nations claimed huge parcels of land while their colonies were quite small. A colony's Zone of Control was much different from the claimed land. Is this what we are discussing?
[This message has been edited by SoulAssassin (edited May 12, 2001).]

[java4me]

I think that you could connect the colonies overseas by a harbor!!! But that is only a guess! And I also had the same question on what you do with resources in the sea that are out of your city limits!

Either way Firaxis is working hard on the game, and the game is looking very good!!!

[Pedrun]

I really hope not Sirotnikov. No overseas colonies are going to be a major mistake in this concept.

[Pedrun]

Unless they are considering that to make overseas cololonies we need to have a city around from where the roads spread. That makes sense because european colonies used to have a Capital where there was habors that sent the products to the colonizers.