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

[Kull]

Map Editor: If you could toggle directly into the map editor from within a game, that would be most useful. The map editor would be available on the menu, and selections would include
- "Normal" = The default selection. The standard game view with all manmade and natural terrain features visible but WITHOUT the terrain editing menubar.
- "Hide Manmade" = All man-made entities would disappear from view, and the map edit menu bar would appear. This would allow you to make vast changes to the terrain without any impact on the manmade overlay. Enhanced by using small symbols to represent the man made items, none of which would be affected by the editing tools.
- "Edit All" = All features are visible and terrain editing wipes out the manmade items too.
- "Visibility" = Allows you to edit the portions of the map which are visible or unexplored for each civ. Should be able to select and edit this view for every civ. Not terrain editing per se, but perhaps a good place for this feature.

Barbarians: If Civ3 is going to retain Barbarians as a "differently abled" civ, it would be nice if a single toggle could give them ALL the capabilities of a typical AI civ.

Scenario Design Experts: With a few exceptions, most of the best and brightest Civ2 scenario designers continue to focus their efforts on the Fantastic Worlds release of Civ2. These are the people you MUST attract to Civ3, and yet they've almost ignored the MGE and ToT releases. There's a lesson here for Firaxis, and the sales of ToT certainly bear it out. If you want Civ3 to truly replace Civ2, you'll have to convince this corps of top designers that it's worth their while to make the switch. Those are the people who's innovative scenarios breathe new life into an early 90's game, and without their commitment Civ3 will never approach the success of it's predecessor.

[Salvius]

Some things I'd like:

1) If there is 3D elevation in the maps, the ability to import heightmaps would be nice. This would make it easy to edit (can be done in a paint program) and, perhaps more importantly, to use real-world data (by grabbing USGS DEM data). SimCity 3000 allows this, though not very easily (requires entering a "cheat" code). A better example might be Myth II. I realize that there may be issues to work out with regard to using a rectangular heightmap in an isometric view (assuming it's similar to CivII in that respect)...

2) "In my dreams" feature: Random map generation that (optionally, since it would take time) actually runs through a few million years of plate tectonic and climate simulation. See if you can't entice Greg Costikyan to design it for you -- I saw some Designer's Notes somewhere where he was proud of finally being able to use his geology degree for just this purpose in the little-known "Evolution" game he worked on for Discovery Multimedia (in fact, I sent him an email suggesting a utility to export Evolution maps to CivII, and he said it was something they'd actually thought about doing -- Evolution ends at pretty much the point where Civilization begins -- but decided that since the games use radically different map styles that it would be too difficult...).

3) Civ-specific technologies, or some other similar method of granting special abilities to certian civilizations. This would probably require the ability to designate technologies as untradeable, unstealable, never appearing in "goodie huts", etc. (that is, only acquirable through research), then allowing us to add them to a civ's known techs at the start of a scenario. For example, in a fantasy scenario, an evil civ might be the only one able (or willing) to research necromancy. There could then be an entire sub-tree of "evil" tech, all designated as "research-only", and the evil civ(s) in a scenario could be given the first tech in that branch in the beginning. I would classify this as "must-have", given that it would provide great flexibility/customizability, and doesn't seem too difficult to implement.

[StormLord]

Hi,

A scenario should be a single file/folder that can easily be installed. This should include graphics, sounds, texts, map, everything...

And like the other guy said, no artificial limits like the 'only sea units can transport' limit.

I once wanted to make an alternate history scenario, with a balloon unit that can transport ground units, but I couldn't.

Another example of an artificial limit would be the fact that I can't stop certain civs from getting certain techs or certain units. Let's say I want to create a humans vs. aliens scenario. If the humans steal the aliens' guns they shouldn't build alien units, but human units with the new type of gun.

A simple way to add this would be to give one unit more than one prereq tech, and create a 'civ-type' tech which is not stealable, but rather defines the type of civ. (Human-Tech and Alien-Tech for example)

Also, graphics MUST be modifiable. I couldn't figure out how to put in my own graphics for SMAC units, so I couldn't make any scenarios.

[Ralf]

I have already suggested this in a e-mail to Chris Pine, but because this idea fits so snugly under this particular thread, i might as well recreate a rehashed version of it here:

Im not sure if this is 100% workable, but it would be absolutely great if the Civ-3 map-editor had the ability to allow map-constructing players to manually pin-point invisible AI-city locations on hand-made maps (locations - NOT to be confused with placing visible scenario-cities - thats a different thing).
The AI could then ONLY found cities on these pre-designated squares, carefully hand-dotted all over these maps. The human player can (of course) found hes own cities anywhere he wants.

In order to expand, first AI-city have produce the equivivalent recourses of an settler-unit (no cheating). If an AI-city location is perhaps 6 squares away from that first city - the AI simply have to wait 6 turns: then the second city pops up automatically on that pre-designated square/location. During gameplay yet "uninhabitad" AI city locations are of course all invisible from a human player viewpoint.

The invisible programming-benefit:

The hopeless task of effectively trying to navigate AI-controlled settlers to promising city locations on an unknown map, just under a few short in-between-turns seconds, is totally bypassed!!
This is already taken cared of by the map-constructor. All the AI-civ have to do is to regurlary check up if these originally empty locations isnt already occupied/overlaped by any other AI-player (or by the unknown "wild card" here = the human player), before expanding himself.

The visible human player-benefit:

More efficient AI-controlled civ-expansions, on more effectively utilized islands and continents.

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 11-23-2000 09:57 AM ARE YOU SAYING THAT UNITS IN CIV3 ARE STILL A SIMPLE GIF?

Well, based on what I've said before about the goal of this game to be the absolute best Civ game ever, I think it's pretty safe to assume we're no longer using single-tile images for the units a la Civ II. =)

What I was specifically making mention of in my post earlier was that "sprite editors" that are included with games are usually just flimsy little apps whipped up in a few minutes to satisfy that "OK, now they we can say that sprites are editable" requirement. In most cases, that "sprite editor" is rudimentary at best and horribly awkward to use at worst. I would tend to think that mod developers who are serious about creating new graphics for a game would prefer to use professional-level tools like Photoshop or even shareware apps that are more feature-rich than a simple "draw and erase" type editor.

Dan Magaha
Firaxis Games, Inc.

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

quote: Originally posted by Ralf on 11-23-2000 03:30 PM For this particular game (main game + map-editor) i actually prefer standard MS Windows-style interface with standard Windows controls. Now, stop there! Are you serious, Ralf?? Are you talking about MS Office-graphics? No! Like everybody else (i believe), i want some customized game interface-ATMOSPHERE. But *why* not start out with "naked" 100% MS Windows-style - and then let the player have the free choice between different "clothes" (= custom Civ-skins). (snip)

Ralf,

I don't disagree with you, and this idea has been tossed around in the office, but let's try to keep this thread specifically on-topic regarding editor functionality. I'd like to keep this thread from becoming just another reincarnation of a general Civ III wishlist for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is my own sanity.

Thanks,


Dan Magaha
Firaxis Games, Inc.

[zyxpsilon]

If anything is is to be suggested for the editors, then that's what i would ask;

1) External, WITH precision over parameters limitation.

2) DarkReign's style but sticking to FW options.

3) Waypoints manoeuvering on multiple fields, nothing i would like more than to really intercept for example; by pathing my planes, a bomber endangering a city limits defensive towers. Tectonic, ground, sea, atmospheric, space levels.

4) You could also refer to a letter i sent in April 98 to Todd Cioni.

As long as you think it's FUN... burn it on the CD.

[Salvius]

RE: Types of scenarios I'd like to be able to do.

Discworld (based on the Terry Pratchett books) - this would require the ability to designate a terrain type as being totally impassable to all units (to use for the "space" that would surround the edges of a disc-shaped world in a rectangular map), or perhaps that would *destroy* any units attempting to traverse it (ie, falling off the edge of the world), and possibly an option like the one in CivII that let you specify that there is no "wraparound" (an option that appears to be missing in CTP2, grumble grumble). Both of these options would have wider application -- a scenario covering only Europe, for example, wouldn't wrap around, and impassable "wall" terrain would allow things like an all-underground scenario.

Historical scenarios - Again, "no wraparound" is a must. Other options that would be useful: Setting particular squares/cities/units/etc. as victory point objectives. Setting entirely new victory conditions, for that matter (e.g., establish a trade route with China, discover the Northwest Passage, etc.). Specifying start points for every civilization, such that even if only a few are selected when starting a new game, they will appear in their historical locations (and perhaps even if they pop in later to replace destroyed civs). Named terrain (see below). The ability to place special resources by hand in their historical locations.

Other editor features:

Named Terrain - It would be neat to be able to name landmarks (even if it would have no functional use). For example, a historical scenario could have "Mississippi River", "Lake Superior", "Rocky Mountains", etc. labeled as such. It could even be set up so that whichever player first discovers a landmark, they could have the option of giving it their own name ("Bob's Mountains"), though that's beyond the scope of an editor discussion.

Linked Maps - I believe HOMM3 allows you to do this, to have a surface map linked to an underground map in specific locations. Without having bought it, it looks like Civ2:ToT also has something similar.

Special Abilities - I mentioned this in my earlier post, I just wanted to expand on it a bit. An example: In a fantasy scenario, the dwarven civilization might have the ability (or an untradeable tech allowing improvements) to derive food from mountainous terrain. This would effectively encourage dwarves to settle in mountains (where you would expect to find them), since it would be more difficult for other civs to compete with them in that niche. Or, Japan might be able to construct samurai that are slightly stronger than swordsmen of other nations, due to the higher-quality steel available to them (at least partly because the ore there was better than most other places).

[ContradictioN]

No longer using single-tile images eh?

Icedan's happy. :]

[Wazell]

As others have already mentioned, the linked maps feature is very important. HoMM3 has two map levels (surface and underground), Age of Wonders has three and ToT has four levels. Civ3 also needs this system, though I'm not sure how it should work. Is it so that if you make a multi-level scenario for ToT, you need to make all four maps separately, then linking them in-game? Or are they in single map file? Best way could be integrating map editor and scenario editor so it's possible to make built-in caves and teleports to maps (like in other games). Players should also be able to build their own transport systems like in TOT.

Scenario presentation - As you might know, some scenario designers include large html files within their works to tell the player what's this all about. Wouldn't it be cool if this was a built-in feature. I don't mean any 3d-presentation like in Hidden&Dangerous before each mission, but a simple tool with which you could give your players a look to different parts of scenario and provide text messages before game starts. Not essential though.

And events editor must be a lot better. For example we have DESTROYACIVILIZATION function, which is neat but not enough in most cases. Say that I play against an evil civ and they have taken half of my cities. Now I get a lucky chance, attack to their capital with few units and manage to kill the evil leader. And what happens? Yes, all their units and cities are wiped out immediately. There goes my old cities and all. Better way is AoW's "Leaders on map" feature: when you kill enemy leader, their side falls, and all their units and cities become independent. Fair enough. More event triggers are needed too. Such as unitattacked and cityattacked, which tells the game that specific unit or city has been attacked (not necessarily captured), wardeclared and madealliance, and so forth.

[Ralf]

My experience was that the TOT-style linked multi-map feature divided and diluteted the overall game-experience, and it seems also make map- and scenario-editing even more time-consuming then it already is.
Even the CTP-concept of "cities floating around in the stratosphere" was dropped in CTP-2. They had probably solid reasons for doing that.

Anyway: i like El hidalgo´s idea of cropping and enlarging existing coninent-shapes.

Also: then i played Civ-2 WW-1, WW-2, Napoleon war-scenarios, the AI-civs often "lost their objectives" and started to found new cities instead.
I realize much can be done with triggers and such, but dont forget simple stuff like having the ability to block out non-relevant units and improvements for that particular scenario, thus saving the AI from itself.

[Uncle Sparky]

PLEASE have simple Window's based editing a la Civ2.
I have no programming skills what so ever, but can still create scenarios with the Civ2 MPG that I can't with any other game. Please adhear to the KISS principle.

------------------
There's nothing wrong with the dream, my friend, the problem lies with the dreamer.

[Drakenred]

in order of priority

1) Drag and drop Special resorce Tials, to beter recreate real world maps(also the ability to modify the values individual tial types and Special terains alow in that scenario.

1a) also the ability to select more difering special tial types for use by the random genorators, and to Exclude specific types(IE Excluding Tundra-glaciers in a African-style map, or having more forest terain with no oceans in a Mid-america style random map.

2) Ability to include or exclude units-buildings-WotW-tial inprovments-alowed tec advances, AI personality types ect with a on screen Menu(simular to the Unit selection-exclusion in CTP3s editor) and to alow/disalow or scale the Tec progress to the time alowed in scenario

3)External Scenario-map Generators.

[Ralf]

While the player can create any scenario to be either historic, modern, futuristic or even fantasy, the MAIN GAME, by comparision, should ONLY concern itself with historic and modern eras (upto 2040 AD) - just like Civ-2, basically.

The reason for this is that with a powerful SCENARIO-EDITOR you can, besides making historic and modern scenarios, also tailor-cut exactly how you want these futuristic (or fantasy) scenarios to be - including chosen value-systems and overal existence-conditions.

The problem with expanding the MAIN GAME horizon beyond 2040, is that Firaxis then easily build themselfes in a corner. As long as we are dealing with prior 2040, then we are dealing with mostly known value-systems and realities. Unless something very drastic happens the next 40 years, the historic and modern facts and conditions of mankinds existence here on earth are likely to stay, mostly the same.

However, then we are looking beyond - into the distant 2100-3000 AD future, then our indevidually subjective (and often narrow-minded) pre-conceptions about our future begins to rear its ugly head. Someone wants "market- and mega-corp" to be the most advanced future government, while others wants "Tecnocracy" (what ever that means). A third wants a "humane world-peace and economical justice" government.

These future made-up governments and value-systems felt perfectly OK in SMAC, because the Alpha Centauri world was so totally strange and different. But, know we are talking MOTHER EARTH here.
Personally, i feel almost repulsion about the idea of "Market- and Mega-corp" being an so-called "advanced", and still viable future 2200-2500 AD government alternative, while likewise; someone else feel the same about some unrealistic "social paradise" type of "true Utopia".

Even though such a utopic government-type could be implemented in the main game, its almost unavoidable that we have narrow-minded ideas about the limitations of such a futuristic humane utopia-society.

The truth is WE DONT KNOW what our future is going to be. We can only believe strongly (or vaguely), or perhaps not believe at all.

Why not let a powerfull, easy-to-use and reasonably newbie-friendly SCENARIO-EDITOR overtake the responsibility of how Civ-3 2041-3000 AD future is going to look like? Those who wants a Bladerunner-style Civ-future can tailor-cut such a scenario. Why not sell the game with some alternatively different future-scenarios included?


Final principe-ideas about the editor:

Some civer´s want a backdoor open in the scenario-editor in order to get down-and-dirty with the under-the-hood mechanics. That perfectly OK, but also try to make a more user-friendly drag-and-dropish and intuitive point-and-clickish scenario-editor this time, for the rest of us. Even some basic script- and event-triggering should be (reasonably) more userfriendly.
Lastly, the .txt tweak-files should also undergo some userfriendly owerhaul, as much as (reasonably) possible, with easier-to-read format and with more explantations and examples.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited November 27, 2000).]

[Maccabee2]

If external map/scenario editors will make them
(1) easier to use
(2) more customizable
then I am in favor of external over internal editors.
I want customizability and ease of use, in that order.