Civ3 editing tools: what do *you* want to see

[Ribannah]

Just a small addition: it would be nice if the effects of the wonders could be edited, or alternatively if there would be a long list to choose from, ie many more wonders or at least wonder effects available to the editor than there are in the basic game.

In my dreams: a fully programmable AI.

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

[CornMaster]

My scale for importantance....
1-not too important
5-Very important

1) I would prefer an external editor with the windows interface. I want external because then you can edit the scenario/map and then load it up in the game and try something without loosing your spot in the editing process. Just found the Civ 2 one too hard for doing this. (4)
As well the scenario editior should either be the map editor or be able to edit maps. Trying to tweak maps with the cheat menu was such a long process!!!!! (5)

2) A paint brush type editor would be easiest to use I think. But any editor should be better than Civ 2's. (2)

3) The Starcraft editior was excellent for making triggers. Although everytime I made the Zerglings appear they ran away from my massive defensive line and I couldn't get any money to upgrade my defences until the main force came. AND THE THE SLAUGHTE..... Anyway. (3)

4) I would like to beable to make scenarios where you have to defend a certain area and if the other players take it over, you loose. Things like this are really hard to do with the Civ 2 editor. (4)

5) I would also like to see independent terrain. What I mean by that is that I can put a big rock on the map and it would have a special icon and attributes, but not have to waste an entire terrain type. (For example....what I do now is take tundra and redraw it to a big rock. Then I have to put it in the map. It works ok but I lose 1 entire terrain type) If we could make independent terrain types, landmarks, and unmoveable units this would be great. (4.5)

Well there we go! I don't think any of these features are too far out of reach. If all this got put into the game you would have at least one happy camper!!!

------------------
"I'm too out of shape for a long fight so I'll have to kill you fast"
"The best meats' in the rump!"
I AM CANADIAN!
CornEmpire Index
My Civ 2 Scenario Page.
[This message has been edited by CornMaster (edited November 21, 2000).]

[BeBMan]

Ok, some more details:

"Must-have" functions:

-all options from Civ2 FW, without limitions (as long as possible)

"Would be nice":

-Cut/Copy/Paste/Undo/Redo operations, but not only in the map editor
-Improved events, e.g. events that can create more than one unit on one place with one event,
-events that can create or destroy a city completely
-events that can create or destroy
improvements/wonders of a city
-events that can not only display textboxes, but also pictures (or both combined)
-events that can change some things DURING a scenario, like unit values, or disable negotiations generally, but also at a special point (time) at the scn

"In my dreams":

-Programmable AI, yes!

I´ll finally add one point: the editor should be NOT TOO complicated. I also admire the work of experts like Nemo and others, but in my opinion as many people as possible should have a chance to make their own scns. But that doesn´t mean that the editor can´t be very powerful, it should be possible that everyone can make simple, quick changes while the experts have the chance to make deep changes on the game.

------------------
Civ2000

[Snapcase's Temporary DL]

As a vocal advocate of decent scenario editors, I'm certainly very happy that FIRAXIS has taken such an active interest in this vital pliece of Game Design. I will try to make a (long) post about this now, but for more I suggest looking at (a) Everything under scenario design in the Relevant Threads area, (b) At the list suggestions from both forums, and my summary in the Essential Civ3, which albeit limited in length is more, er, consise.

To me, it is plain that the best type of editor for this sort of game would be an External one. An external application will be more easy to use for a couple of reasons: (a) It will allow the interface to be significantly different from the in-game one. I personally think that the in-game interface, with slower non-standard menus, tricky placement, bad scrolling and painting functionality, no scroll-bars, etc. is far from ideal when it comes to designing a map or scenario. The map design aspect of SMAC, especially, was a shambles, as there was barely painting of areas, and the elevations needed to be placed in a very cumbersome and imprecise way. Units had to be selected from lists, and many parameters were difficult to reach inside nested menu systems. While creating a basic scenario with just starting points was okay, a fully-fledged one was a nightmare to build because units and tile improvements were so hard to place.

My suggestion is that you try to keep the functionality of the editor as easy and familiar as possible, and that this is best accomplished by a standard Windows-type interface. However, I also acknowledge that some people find in-game scenario building useful, as it allows them to create "natural" civs that seem to have been played in a sensible way. For this, I see no other difficulty than implementing a way of loading and saving scenarios as if they were save-files, and hotseat them as a single player. Still, most functionality needs to lay outside the game for it to be intuitive to use.

As for the interface, I suggest a mix of several styles. For terrain and improvement tiles, a "paintbrush"-style painting system is good. This was sucessfully implemented in WarCraft 2 and StarCraft. What is needed is, beside small single-tile paintbrushes: a few more sizes of paintbrush, a fill capability for quickly turning areas into a certain terrain type, and a line-drawing capability for doing straight lines (not vital in most scenarios, but damn annoying not to have when you need it... Trying to draw a football pitch in Civ2 was a nightmare). If elevation is to be included, I would greatly appreciate if the different levels were just tile types rather than the unweildy Raise Terrain option of SMAC. One omre thing that would be intentely useful when drawing lines (and maybe rectangles, if possible) would be a size indicator in the status bar that tells you the exact size of what you're drawing.

For units, cities and landmarks, I propose a click and drag system similar to that of the Heroes of Might and Magic 3 editor. A sidebar would contain a list of objects (which list it is is selected using a combo box (aka pull-down menu) above this sidebar). Also, a list of coloured radio buttons would select which civ it belonged to. These objects could then be pulled across onto the map. Custom sidebars could be created through simple cut-and paste operations (in case you wanted to place, say, a city of a certain size with certain improvements several times). All of these objects' properties could be located via a simple right-click menu where you could set the status of various things relating to that object.

So far, so good, that's the scenario editor. Still, the real power in CIV editing lies within the rules/units/technologies/macroes editors. The files for all of this should lie, in non-proprietary formats, outside the editor itself so that they could be edited by outside applications. Graphics are going to be a bit tricky since the chances of CIV3 actually using 2d sprites are pretty slim. However, with the standard Civ "fixed perspective", implementing an option (at least) for 2d bitmaps would not be hard. My suggestion is that each unit would have its own graphics file and ini file, A bit like the Ego's in RoBOT. This would allow the scenarioes to contain as few or as many units as they'd like. The in-game editors should be acessible through the menus, as before. For most things, the editors in fantastic worlds were fine, though I'd like a tree-view for the techs and a "clear all techs" option.

However, several things spring to mind when it comes to the editors, and they are mostly about the macro language. Firstly, it is not nearly strong enough. No counters, variables, no manipulation of most of the games' objects? StarCraft's trigger options had all of these. As a test for when the Language is just powerful enough, you could set about describing each improvement or wonder in the macro language (say, the pyramids are equal to civ().improvements().granary(1) or something). If you can, it's powerful enough. Now, let each improvement or wonder actually be defined this way in the text files, so we can edit them as well. Two birds with one stone, I'd say. Oh, and governments could be defined this way, too.

The ultimate (dream-like) scenario would be one where the game is based around a proprietary scripting langauge a la QuakeC or UnrealScript. Only as an underlying layer, mind, for those who wish to venture that deep.

Finally, complete documentations, tutorials, wizards, etc. would be of great help.

Three scenarioes to give you an idea of the required/desired/ultimate level of the game:

Scenario 1, Required: A standard historical scenario with a few custom units, custom civs, custom techs and slightly different terrain attributes.

Scenario 2, Desired: The Marxist Mod. A scenario fully implementing an experimental approach to historical materialism, several fundamental game rules have been edited slightly. The governments represent economic systems now, and do different things. Revolutions can only be brought about at certain key points in the game where the Means and Relations of productions are incompatible. The citizen lists have been replaced by class lists, and revolutions will generally change them in a radical way. The victory condition consists of achieving pure communism. Improvements, wonders and techs have been edited heavily.

Scenario 3, Ultimate: Civ3 football (soccer to you). The game runs in real time, and all of the AI has been adapted to this new purpose. The fundamental game rules are gone, replaced bya totally different set.

[DarthVeda]

Yes, snap directly illustrated my point of having a language and then a possibility of extending it into the bizzare... while real-time may be hard to convert the civ engine to for a scenario designer, there certainly needs to be a timer function that can be used for turn limits, game limits, or an amount of time until an event happens no matter what...

A multi-command macro language ala slic(2) and civ2 is mandatory. A way to extend that macro language and play with the "guts" of the game is in my wildest dreams (because I'd be in heaven...)

[Panda]

I have thought of one GUI editor I would like to see, and that is an easy to use tool for creating tech trees. It's probably the hardest part to edit for total conversion. I seem to recall the Civ2 manual regaling us with the anecdote of how the civ2 tech tree was made with cards placed in their proper order. Solution: make them virtual cards.

MGE allowed us to see the tech "tree" in the civilopedia, and it would be great if there was an interface program that could open the tech tree up entirely. You would have x number of boxes, one for each tech. You would drag them around and create links between them. You could double-click on them and edit their names and attributes, plus include a description for viewing in the civilopedia. The main window would be scrollable in all directions. If it was really smart, and the tree sufficiently linear, you define eras by drawing lines through the tree. The editor would then translate how the tree looks and store the values in the text file.

And, for the cream, it could then generate a reference picture of the tree in a graphics format.

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by Andrew Livings on 11-20-2000 08:04 PM You did what?! I agree scenario editing in civ2 was awkward because of the limited editors, but it wasn't that bad.

Andrew, i must confess that the ability to add units, improvements and change other stuff through the scenario-menus in Civ-2, completely slipped my mind than i wrote that piece. Its never been *that* awkward as i described it.

-----------------------------------------------------

However, having said that, i am having a hard time trying to understand why some here seems to instinktively dislike the idea of an easy intuitive drag-and-drop as much as possible from a palette, type of map/scenario-editor.

Why?

Does this conficts with "heavy stuff" such as scripts, triggers, hex-editing and whatnot, in any way? Cant this not be added as well?
Does an "only for the active programming propellerhead civer" approach, always guarantee FUN scenarios? On what basis do you guys assume that?

Not all scenarios is about rewamped graphics, tweaked rules and changed tech-trees. Personally, i often prefer standard-units and standard-rules scenarios (or setups) - and these should really be much easier and inuitive to create, than it is in Civ-2 and SMAC.
Look at the CTP-2 map/scenario-editor. I havent tested it yet, but it seems to be something in the right direction: click-and-paste tile-improvements and drag-and-drop units, improvements and even cities, from a multi-paged palette. Nice!!

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited November 21, 2000).]

[BeBMan]

Ralf, I can understand what you mean with

quote: Does this conficts with "heavy stuff" such as scripts, triggers, hex-editing and whatnot, in any way? Cant this not be added as well? Does an "only for the active programming propellerhead civer" approach, always guarantee FUN scenarios? On what basis do you guys assume that?

I don´t think that we want to limit scenario making to an elite group of designers, but the editor for Civ3 should definately a step forward compared with the Civ2 FW editors and this means that a scenario maker should have more options to customize the game.

This should of course include the changes you mentioned (like:click-and-paste tile-improvements and drag-and-drop units, improvements and even cities), but these things seems like standards for me and for historically accurate scenarios (and these are the best scns for civ2) they aren´t enough...



------------------
Civ2000

[Mike the Nuke]

KISS (Keep it simple stupid). In other words, make it easy for everyone, not just the experts. Allow us to modify and add resources (ie silk and oil, etc). CTP I wasn't bad in this area, but not always easy to create maps (took too long). Allow cut and pasting of large areas as well as small areas, so maps could be faster to create. Everything should be simple. Include the editor as part of the program but not part of the game. Once you are playing the game, you must exit the game to get to the editor (minimize the cheating). Nothing yu do will stop the cheaters, so really, Why bother? Make modified maps available in all game modes (uploading to internet, PBEM, Hot Seat, solo).

Most important...

What ever you do, provide good documentation with examples, so all of us can utilize the tools.

The documentation on how to modify units, except for how to create unit icons (graphics) was excellent in CIV2 and TOT. Little was discussed on how to do the graphics (no examples). I, personally, don't have time to research everything for a game. I had to resort to using other peoples graphics for my add on units and they didn't always have exactly what I wanted.

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by BeBro on 11-21-2000 03:34 PM but these things seems like standards for me and for historically accurate scenarios (and these are the best scns for civ2) they aren´t enough...

I agree on that, BeBro. I certainly dont think "drag-dropping from palette" is going to be the Holy Grail, or anything. I just think we all should be carefull not to reject ideas, that dont *have* to be rejected in order to give place to our own ideas. These different ideas can most often COEXIST under the same umbrella.

I am certainly not *against* advanced editing-options and powerfull script-languages - such features could easily coexist with the drag-and-drop from palette -idea.

Likewise, people with more advanced needs shouldnt instinctively be *against* the easy/simple drag-and-drop -concept. Such a feature could easily coexist with much more advanced editors and tweak-options, you see. They really dont *have* exclude each other.

[Jon Miller]

Be able to scan in maps. Have the editor (for both map and scenario) be externalbut also loadable into a hotseat editor's mode.

Jon Miller

[DaddyCool]

I read through the posts, and this has been pointed out a few times, but I think it's *very* important, so I'll point it out too.

Obviously you guys'll want to make the graphics better than civ2, and even though most of us TBS guys don't really care about that, you'll probably do it anyway.

But at least store all the graphics in a non-proprietary format, and in a way that's easy to change, and add to. That way, even though not all of us may be able to make new graphics for the game, at least make it possible for those of us with a bit of skill in such things to do so.

[UltraSonix]

Part 1:

Well the first thing I must say is that I was never a good Civ2 scenario designer. But that was because I've found it so labourious to do anything. The fact that you couldn't copy units/cities annoyed me no end because contructign an army took ages!

And here are some threads from the past on this very issue (though it's been implied that they've been read by Firaxis):
*A Scenario Builder's Request
*Scenario Design in Civ3
*Scenarios that should come with the package?
*Game-editor
*Scenario editor - What does it need?
*scenarios, scenarios, scenarios!!!!!!!!
*A faster scenario-editor could save the day

quote: You guys are making the assumption that the triggers should be contained in a text file like it has been. I think that Civ3 should change and follow starcraft instead - ie the scenarios and all its info (rules.txt events.txt graphx) should be contained in a single file. And the triggers stated above (which would be very useful) should be implemented through a scenario editor (once again, like Starcraft's), which is much more user-friendly. The advantage of this is that newbies would be able to pick up scenario design much more easily, because you'd actually be able to see all the tiggers available, and you can see how the syntax works.

quote: Originally posted by UltraSonix on 10-17-2000 04:50 AM quote: its [the scenario editor of civ2] so damn roundabout to us You're damn right! Stuff that's been said before on this issue: quote: Originally posted by UltraSonix on 05-23-2000 04:18 AM I was put off by the scenario editor being integrated with the actual game in Civ2 and SMAC - it's like putting IE with Windows, and we all saw what happened to that! Instead, a sophisticated and dedicated scenario editor should be available, with abilities such as copy-paste (eg drag a box and copy and paste a bunch of units that you've spent ages pefecting the hit points etc, so you don't have to redo the samething over and over again if you're designing an army. Same thing goes for copy paste of cities.) quote: Originally posted by UltraSonix on 08-14-2000 01:28 AM I agree with Gord McLeod - who cares if they don't even ship a single senario. Shippind a powerful/easy-to-use scenario EDITOR, now THAT's far more important. Looking on the web, you'll find lots of scenarios available for Civ2, and the method for creating them was stupid (integrated into the game). quote: Originally posted by Mad Lord Snapcase on 08-14-2000 04:55 PM Oooh, I've made three summaries already on my thoughts on this subject, so maybe I shouldn't reiterate everything I've already said. If you want to look at what I wrote, take a look at Column #99, The "Comprehensive Scenario Editor" suggestion for the Essential Civilisation 3 list, and about 75% of the stuff in the Customization/Scenario Editor section of the Firaxis Forums appendix of the List v. 2. Suffice to say I agree with Ultrasonix that the StarCraft one is the best editor created to date. Yet where that had ease of use and a good trigger system, it wasn't really as powerful for the common user as the civ2-FW editor was. There was no changing unit graphics and attributes, terrain, names, techs... You know, the reason Civ2's editor was so fun to use. Here are the points I'd most like to see in an editor, in order of importance (this is of course assuming that what's currently available for edit in civ2 remains intact, otherwise #1 would be keeping all of those things editable and easily acessable. I used to think this was obvious, yet SMAC was definately a step back.): 1. Ease of Use. It doesn't matter how powerful an editor is if most users never get to see any of it. What I'd like to see is an editor with a good click-n-drag interface, proper documentation, a tutorial and so on so that anyone can get right in there and start working. 2. A scripting language. Ever thought about why Mods for Quake (1/2/3 as well as Half-Life) and Unreal (and Tournament) seem to be the most popular? It's because these games have proper, proprietary scripting languages, similar to C (They are called QuakeC and UnrealScript respectively), that allows the user to manipulate ingame objects in whatever way she choses. Neither of them are horribly difficult, yet both are immensely powerful. If we could get such a powerful language in a Civ game, together with a really instructional help file or text file, it would do so much. 3. A better Macro Language/Trigger System. Counters, Other events, manipulation of all game objects from within the game with maintained ease of use. 4. Edit the stuff we cannot edit today, chiefly wonders, city improvements and special properties of techs. This could be done very easily if each wonder (or whatever) was described using strings of code from the macro language. quote: ============= A trigger system like the StarCraft editor has would be nice. ============= In fact, the WHOLE Civ3 editor should be based on the Starcraft one. Not only was the Starcraft trigger system good, it was also EASY to use. And it goes without saying that I think the scenario editor whould be separated from the game itself (ie no cheat menu ). It was really cumbersome because while trying to design a scenario, I'll accidently continue the turn, spoiling all my hard work...

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary... (And no, koalas don't usually speak!)
[This message has been edited by UltraSonix (edited November 22, 2000).]

[UltraSonix]

Part2:

To me, what is most important about the scenario editor is that it should be powerful, and yet also very easy to use.

By "powerful", I mean that if Civ3 is to go down CTP2's path of having a sophisticated diplomatic system - which it surely must - then there should be a trigger system that is capable of manipulating it. The trigger system must be capable of causing civs to exchange units/cities/try to steal tech, that sort of thing.

Of course, all this assumes that there is indeed a trigger system - and since Civ2 has this, I assume that it's also going to be in Civ3. The best way to implement it would be through an external scenario editor, in a very similar way the way Starcraft's is done (as I have quoted above).

And like I have said also before, the most annoying thing was that to get the units "just right" took me ages in Civ2. A copy/paste system is a must for laying down units. It is also vital for cities - recreating the improvements in each city was extraordinarily boring! However, to me personally, the creation of terrain is adequate in Civ2 - but that's probably why my maps were no good...

And please excuse me for telling you guys what to do... but to way to implement the editor could be something like:
*You can predesign some cities - small, medium, large - in a different screen.
*In that screen you create the default population, improvements, and units present at the city.
*You then right-click a tile and select "Place city (large)"
*You click then city and at side, a taskbar is brought up that allows you to further manipulate the city.

(Maybe I'll add more stuff when I actually read this thread! )

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary... (And no, koalas don't usually speak!)

[N35t0r]

Ok, i haven't read all of the replies..

I would like in-game editors, but don't leave the editable text files out either.

Personally i find it much more easy to do my rough work in the text files (much quicker) and then fine-tune them using the in-game editor.

also leave the menu-editing text files (in order to make spies uncapable of bribing cities, to completely eliminate the cheat menus, etc.)

Definitely in-game terrain editing, esp. for rivers.

The triggers of StarCraft's editor are++++, but i've experienced many difficulties using it.(a teleport booth which requires units on both sides to work)

As for unit-creation-following-trigger, a lasso-like tool (of PSP) would be great. (not having to plot down all the coordinates... As well for the rectangle in the go-to command.

Of course it would be impossible to create a perfect scenario in less than around six months, but make the actual changing and editing easier for us goddamn perfectionists. A drag-and-drop unit-moving-around system for editing scenarios would be nice, and maybe a right-click menu to alter it... -just thoughts-

Map visibilty editing tools! It is just tiresome to pop out helicopters and then disband them for early scens. where the entire map can't be revealed.

Definitely cut-and-paste map editor.