Announcement

**Rong** · May 20, 1999, 13:00

zaz,

I love that idea! It's just like Philippine after WWII. The US asked them to vote to join US or not. They voted no.

True democracy at work.

**23 Skidoo** · May 20, 1999, 13:02

Apocalyptic Random Events

Migratory Plagues - as in The Black Plague, or the 1918 Flu.

Earthquakes, floods, volcanic eruptions, cometary bombardment (remember Sodom & Gomorrah?), locusts, drought, crop failure (potato famine).

A little natural excitement!

**yin26** · May 20, 1999, 13:06

Rong,

Great opening! I'd like to throw this out to everybody as an inaugural RADICAL question:

How about a public alpha/beta for Civ3?

The main idea, of course, is that rather than relying on a small group of in-house Firaxis people to take the game to higher levels, WE--the eventual source of the money--would be testing the game from VERY early on. This would provide Firaxis priceless feedback before it's too late to make huge changes.

For example, one of the reasons SMAC failed to appeal to more people (or at first sight, anyway) is that "simple" things like color schemes and ability to easily understand the technology, for example, were a result of the in-house testing: The Firaxis team simply got used to their own design and were unable to view the game as a gamer would the day he brings it home. And by the time the game was released (or with the beta testers), it was too late (or too painful) to hear: Hey, the graphics totally blow; and what the hell is a Singularity Engine?

By then, there was nothing for Firaxis and us to do but hope we'd just learn to like it. After giving the game a second and third chance, I finally did like it. But many didn't. Civ3 should be brilliant from day one. No stinkin' "S.O.S." patches. No "user configuration" crash b.s. Just a rock solid game. That, to me, means going public with the game very early on.

Thoughts?

------------------
CIV3 DEVELOPMENT LIST COORDINATOR

**(un)Officially Making Lists for Firaxis Since SMAC Enhancement 3!**

**kmj** · May 20, 1999, 13:21

I think that that is a very good idea, yin. But how do you propose they do it? Do you think they should offer it to anyone that wants it? For free? Don't you think something like this would jeopardize sales? That is why they're making this game, after all. (sales.) Of course, on the other hand, I would love to see this game as it develops and get my hands on an alpha and beta version.

kmj: I'm not sure of the best way. Some other ideas have popped up already here. Maybe they could offer a bunch of us forum nuts the chance. (Yin)

[This message has been edited by yin26 (edited May 20, 1999).]

**zaz** · May 20, 1999, 13:24

True democracy at work.

Hey that's gives me another idea. Ceding the city could of course only be done by certain governments.

**mindlace** · May 20, 1999, 13:42

OSExAI

I love the tribes into cities/Rise and fall of Empires idea, Possibility. Combined with Revolution (OTHER) and Reigons (CITY INTERFACE), it could be fantastic.

it could let megalopoli happen- if cities actually expanded into adjacent squares, in late game you could have the Californiburbia or the East Coast Sprawl routine... nice & cpunk.

i wonder if you could go so far as to be citizen based, where cities are just the area where units pop out?

Maybe cities come when you stack citizens/workers, and at least one gets turned into a specialist... that seems to be historically true...

Imagine: map view, 'citizens' button on, normal units hidden from view... those nice little faces stacked on top of the 3d squares... the top citizens being specialists... high population densities (cities) would just be high elevations from a distance... (see what I'm saying?) pissed citizens would be on the very top, little red beacons of anger.

Maybe improvements in a reigon would just have an area of effect, like SimCity- plop 'em down on any sqare within a reigon(and they'd even have a cool little icon).'psych', 'econ', 'research' and 'production' would each have their own buttons, showing areas of effect and intensity...

Units can only be built once you have agalmated enough citizens to form a city (city=stack with at least one specialist)
The range of squares that the city draws resources from is equivalent to the number of citizens in the central square (would require retooling of resource breakdown, esp. food- but would explain why large, ancient cities (rome) were primarily concerned with redistributing grain).
If squares adjacent to the first square get specialists, they join the 'city'...

in the 'units' view, cities are 3d objects that cover as many squares as above...

it could be incredible. It could also lend itself to a Pseudo-real-time strategy, because your growth would be more organic.

Wow. Thanks, Rong, inspirational thread!

**Fugi the Great** · May 20, 1999, 13:46

Repost from General/A new idea:

Excuse me if I meander a bit below, I'm just writing it down as it comes to me.
The very idea of the CITY producing a military unit is fine in the early to middle game, but in later times, countries BUY military hardware from companys, and TRAIN people at military bases sometimes far away from a city, and no one wants to live near a nuclear missile silo. In the later years, it does not make any sense for citys to BUILD units, all they should do is provide tax money to PAY for all the neat toys needed to build an empire.

As much as I like these Civ games, I really don't know if I want more of the same thing, just better graphics and the need for a faster computer to run it. Be brave and different. I wonder if what I am proposing would actually work. Abandon the city concept all together (Did I read that right?), this is a country/nation not just a collection of citys. The units would be bought by the country, and trained at the capital in the beginning of the game and would in later centurys be moved to military bases for this training (do you really want the military controlling your capital in a democracy? - veteren units). Each square on the map has a population 0-XXXX? and the population of this square will grow depending on what you do to the square. People would then move to the nearby squares when the population gets too high or if there is an incentive to move there to E X P A N D your empire. Your country size is now measured in squares (or hexs), the size depends upon what your military or government could control, some areas could leave the empire if not controlled for a while. Giving away or selling squares to another country would now be possible (Lousiana Purchase). Border could make small adjustments now instead of the huge adjustments you get now when you take over a city. Each square would have a movement factor, and if it was enemy territory, it may slow units down and DAMAGE them for being in them (partisans). Each square has a native population that may or may not wish to join you. You may even have to kill all people of a certain nationality/race in the square to make it peaceful (ethnic cleansing).

All military units would now belong to the country and not to the city that created them, no more citys in revolt for an army away from home (depending on your government and length of war). I could never understand why the America, which is supposedly a democracy would not be able to have the navy it does in real life in Civ 1 or 2, if you would have tried this the cities would be revolting left and right, and what about all our troops in Europe and the 1/2 million we had in Desert Storm - our country understands why we send our military overseas (to keep the wars away from home - civs should also understand this).

You would build the unit - army corp of engineers - to build the roads/railways that makes up your empire. Squares would even start to develope themselves, after all there ARE people living there. Would need trade treaties with other nations, and maybe have a little black market trading going on near the border if trading is illegal.

Factorys would pop into existance (random number possibly) and show up on the map, this is where you military hardware is built. If and/or when you get into war, this area would definitly have to be protected, factories may or may not be able to rebuild (incentive by the government?). Purchasing hardware may be the best for the cheapest price, or not quite so good just to keep them in business ($150.00 toilet seats). When you buy the hardware, it could be sold to other countrys for a profit so that those not quite so technologically advanced nations could get some toys to play with too, eventhough they may not be able to repair what breaks. Could also buy units from other nations, or maybe a license to produce the same unit in my country as in another ally's country. Possible even try competing on the open market for who gets to sell the most.
Would have areas on the map where you would drill for oil, mine for gold, mine uranium... Would not be able to move your military hardware unless you have processed fuel to run them on (the battle for control of oil). Would need processed nuclear materal to build nukes (could be stolen by spy network). Just stealing the technology to build nukes does not mean you can build them, do you have the materials to build them and the means to do it? Pollution may now be a little harder to deal with, maybe have government sponsored incentives to stop polluting or relocate to a less pollution concentrated area.

Have a spy network, not just a SPY unit, with something like the CIA or KGB giving you information as to what they THINK the other nations are upto and have them try to do things to the other nations (steal secrets, steal plans for prototypes, kill leaders, steal plutonium, destroy facilities, cause revolts, plant diseases, plant bombs, bribe officals, kill other spys, infiltrate other spy networks). Would have real airspace, territorial waters (1 square? - depends on how big of a map we get). Airplanes would be tracked by radar stations and AWACS planes, shot at by SAMS and intercepted by fighters automatically. A multilevel or 3d game where aircraft and/or missiles could fly over enemy units to a distant target (possibility of being shot down). Submarines could remain hidden and pass directly below other enemy ships unless detected by sonar, spy satellites could pass overhead showing enemy troop movements.

Be able to design your own special units, and make it so we could do the IMPOSSIBLE units (flying aircraft carriers, submergable Carriers both aircraft and land units). Think of the WHAT IFs! More treaties, cooperation between nations (UN) to get certain projects complete (fix ozone problem). Make it that a warmonger can't just run away with it all with out a lot of penaltys, after all this is a Civilization. Be able to have a REAL population, none of this one unit equal 10,000 people bit. The people necessary to build the armies are taken directly from the population, population is still the same just less people working to pay their taxes.

Some INVENTIONS would be invented by accident when the time is right sometimes long time before they actually have a use for it - it has happened alot. Instead of knowing what you are going to invent, randomise the wording for the next advancment or use blind research. Be able to research several differents areas at the same time. Some discoverys (bronze/ironworking) will slowly expand outwards from where they are invented (traders in information on the border). Building new units from new technology would be by prototype, and several years of TESTING. Just because we know how to make gunpowder doesn't mean we know how to build musketeers. Country can not ask for a certain tech if they don't really know we have it, that's what spys are for. Military is paid a salary, (bribe to stay in military), which may help limit military size.

A truly round planet with poles on both sides (they expand and may melt but not as bad as SMAC) but be able to convert this to a flat map for some scenarios (cannot change after game starts). Should also be able to easily convert the flat map to a space scenario (B5, Star Wars, MOO3). Space only goes out to near earth orbit (satellites, maybe a few space colonies). Maybe several more numbers of units if going 2D, or a unit editor if going 3D (there are alot of artists out there). How about real missile silos, and missiles that would be targeted at certain areas of the map, that would be automatically launched if another enemies weapon hits (or even accidently triggered if an asteroid falls to earth. Actually build SDI. Slow time down, alot of the games we play, the unit that is being built is outdated before it is even built. The Peloponnesion War lasted 27 years, but this is only a single turn in Civ 1 or 2, thats not even enough time to get from one city to another and build additional units to replace the ones that get slaughtered. Most battles/wars were fought aver a period of weeks or months not decades. WWIII is supposed to only take 2 weeks, yet in Civ 1 or 2 this also may be several years. I am not saying we should go week by week or month by month, that would get boring, just a little slower so we can get units up to the front before they are obsolete.

The computer hardware alone may be a bit high to use this program, but I think this would be the most realistic Civ game ever made and if done properly, would be the ultimate CIV game and people will upgrade their hardware to play it. If it is just going to be more eye appealing graphics then it isn't going to sell nearly as well.

--just my one and a half cents worth

The only thing bad about this thread is that we are the only ones truly thinking about Civ3, every other thread in working on Civ2.5.

**mindlace** · May 20, 1999, 13:46

And with the devolution of the 'city is all' approach, being nomadic could be a feasable early-game strategy! Also some more historic realism...

**Druid2** · May 20, 1999, 13:53

re: alpha/beta...

yin:

it would also give the Firaxis coders a very early read on how the game engine would work [more importantly, NOT work] on some PC configurations.

It's done in all sorts of industries. set out an early version of the product to a "focus group" .. turn 'em loose on it.. harvest their reactions.

....

RE: OSxAI

yin: Is there any indication from Firaxis that they would consider doing an Open AI interface? If not, no matter how much *we* might think it would set the world afire, the whold discussion is a waste.

Druid--No indication of anything yet. I do know, however, that Firaxis is a young company that is willing to take some risks. If we can argue our case well enough, we've got a shot. I've got some good arguments just waiting to go...(Yin).

rong: (a) [or more precisely, bingmann]... I've been in the programming biz for more years than I care to think about. What the *bleep* is Python?

(b) There would have to be two major parts to the OSxAI discussion.

(b1) What the scripts should be. The logic of the scripts would change as new users developed them, that's the whole idea, but the game needs a ~good~solid~ set of scripts out of the box. Many players wont want to develop new ones.

(b2) The event driven [I think that's the right idea too!] AI engine itself. What the events would have to be, how to interface them, sort priorities, what parameters to require of the script author.

[This message has been edited by yin26 (edited May 20, 1999).]

**Druid2** · May 20, 1999, 14:05

Fuji ::

I understand your points, but note that there are a WHOLE LOT of people who think the game takes way too long as it is. THEY are making suggestions to speed it up.

Your comment: "I think this would be the most realistic Civ game ever" gets to the heart of ths issue.

There is a game that could turn out to be CivSim .. a realistic Civ Simulation ..
there is CivGame .. emphasis on the playability for humans, sacrificing realism.

I dont see how you could do both, considering we're talking about a time span of multi-millenia.

**Rong** · May 20, 1999, 14:21

Open Alpha/Beta

I like the general idea, but we need to think more how it would work. How about they charge people for it? Microsoft is charging for their <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/windows/preview/order.asp">W2K Beta</a>. I know M$ is not a good example, but this could work out. Let's say they charge $10 for obtaining the alpha/beta. When the final game comes out, you pay another $10. If you don't want to play with beta software, you can wait for the final version for $40 - $50. Any other thoughts?

OSxAI

I guess we'd better use this name. OSExAI is just too obnoxious. For a historical perspective on the original "ExAI" idea, you can read the <a href=http://www.gameai.com/exai.thread.html>gameai.com archive</a>.

A little reminder

It'll greatly help all of us if you can sum up your idea in 10 words or less (ok, maybe 20, but not more than that). You can explain your idea to your heart's content, but at the beginning or in the end, please give a short summary. Thanks!

"OSxAI" and "Open Alpha/Beta" are good examples.

Think of it this way. If you can't explain it in 20 words or less to us civ die hard fans, how are they supposed to explain it in the game manual to new players who has never seen civ before?

[This message has been edited by Rong (edited May 20, 1999).]

**Transcend** · May 20, 1999, 14:25

How about moving away from a totaly turn-based game? I don't mean something like Age of Empires, but similar to Railroad Tyconn. You also have the option to pause the game at any time to give orders, view status screens, and conduct diplomacy. Also you can specify in the game option when you want to be interrupted by events such as buildings completed, armies commissioned, civ advances achieved etc. Once you release the game, your units(or armies) will carry out your orders.

**Rong** · May 20, 1999, 14:34

Transcend,

Interesting thought. But how do you propose to handle multiplayer?

**Thue** · May 20, 1999, 15:03

I really like Transcent's idea too. I hope it makes it.

-----------
How about abandoning the squares? Instead you could use tiles the size of a pixel. This would allow for:
-Unrestricted free movement
-More realistic cities, with circular ressourse zones and varying size.
-The possibility of making the world a sphere(You can't do it with squares, as it is impossible to map them onto a sphere without warping them)

In any event I think it would be nice if the size of squares were decreased (making the cities and city-zones larger, making units move faster). I think that would make it possible to have far more possibilities for game development (It would require efficient automatication however).

Sorry if this has allready been discussed.
-Thue

Announcement

RADICAL IDEAS (ver1.0): Hosted by Rong

RADICAL IDEAS (ver1.0): Hosted by Rong

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment