Pondering....

[Locutus]

Ben,
Actually, for gold and happiness you can use SLIC (AddGold, mod_CityHappiness/AddHappyTimer), for production, food and commerce you can (using SLIC) terraform the terrain around the city or add tile imps, ala the GoodMod (would require adding some new terrain types/tile imps of course), so only science requires you to add new buildings...

Dave,
I'll be expecting something back when I get around to making my own mod

[Immortal Wombat]

Actually, for gold and happiness you can use SLIC (AddGold, mod_CityHappiness/AddHappyTimer),

As I said in my first response...

for production, food and commerce you can (using SLIC) terraform the terrain around the city or add tile imps, ala the GoodMod (would require adding some new terrain types/tile imps of course),

Yeah. Still not pretty. I guess tile imps would be easiest.

Have you tried the other 4 mod_ functions?
Do they work? In Joe's post, he says he will include them, but he hasn't yet...

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Immortal Wombat
Yeah. Still not pretty.

"dumbass workaround for dumbass design flaw"

Have you tried the other 4 mod_ functions?
Do they work? In Joe's post, he says he will include them, but he hasn't yet...

Tried (briefly), but not succeeded. One day I'll get around to giving them proper testing, one day... between now and eternity

[Locutus]

*bump*

So, Vel, did you ever get around to picking up this game? We would still love to hear your thoughts...

[hexagonian]

You know, I was wondering the same thing...

Anyhow, I'm still playing civ3 at the moment. Generally, there are some good features in it that I wish could be implemented in CTP2. Many features are still preference-based, and for the most part, I will not bring them up here.

IMO, the good features in civ3 (compared to CTP2) are...

1. Diplomacy - Very good, compared to CTP2. One feature that really stands out is that when you ask a civ to ally with you in a war, it will do so by sending troops and actually assisting you in that manner. (Works on the flipside too - if you are the target). This makes the game very enjoyable. Also, there is no need to send out a diplomat to establish an embassy with another civ. And the counter-proposal format is very well-done, in that you can cut your deal to the exact dollar that the AI will accept.

This feature alone saves civ3, and is the only reason why I could see me playing it long-term. This is what makes the game a challenge - the need to manipulate alliances to keep the AI off your back and to take out strong AIs.

2. Strategic Resources - I fought a 2 stage war with the Americans - first to grab it's oil, and having taken it, I can now finish them off with my tanks, since they cannot build tanks themselves.

3. Civs with unique abilities and UUs - allowing for a player to pick a civ taylored to his own strengths, and to even pick a civ that does not play to his playing style for a little more challenge. Adds personality to the game.

Now for the bad...
1. The interface takes a great deal of getting used to, but the main weakness of the interface is that it makes getting in-game info hard to get at.
A. For instance, the tech tree in the science advisor provides pics of the unit/city improvements/wonders that each tech enables, but does not give a descriptive of what those pics are.
B. No short descriptive on what a particular city improvement/wonder does when selecting it in the build queue.
C. Units that have used up their movement and are part of a large stack could be greyed out in the unit list, so I could avoid selecting that unit when trying to move other units in the stack.

I could go on about other weaknesses related to the interface too. Couple this with the unwillingness of Firaxis to provide a poster that provides vital info, and a player has to work harder than necessary to play the game. So many things could be fixed here with a minimum amount of effort.

2. Combat - I do prefer the quicker resolution of battles with the CTP2 setup, which uses unit stacking. I believe Firaxis did not set up stacked combat because it seems to be more difficult to program and effectively implement too. Related to combat is the question concerning info that could be provided by the programmers regarding the time needed to completely assimilate a captured city into your empire. I understand the need to garrison a newly conquered city with enough troops, but for how long??? Even a general idea of the length of time would be nice.

3. PW vs Workers - Actually this has not been as bad as I feared, but overall, I do prefer the PW system. Adding different levels of irrigation/mines would certainly add another level to the tile improvements in civ3, as well as adding sea-based improvements, such as ports and fishing nets. However, the main weakness of the tile improvement setup does tie into the following...

And now for the ugly...
1. Railroads are a blight on the game - they clutter up the map, and more importantly, eliminate the need for a whole level of strategic thinking. Infinite movement allows a player to quickly marshall a defensive force from any point in the empire, and act as a safety valve when taking a city, because you can then shuttle in the necessary troops to maintain order in that captured city without committing them to the actual battleforce. Once you get the ability to build them and have a network, the game loses all strategic thought whatsoever.

By simply adding another level of Tile improvements (Advanced Mines/Advanced Irrigation) and limiting Railroads to movement bonuses only, you would reduce the map clutter, and make for strategic decisions (build either movement or shield/food/commerce boosters) and reducing the movement benefit of a railroad would allow for a lot more forethought in military matters.

On the flipside though, the game does still hold a good level of military strategy pre-industrial age, mainly due to the diplomatic angle.

2. ZOC - The lack of a ZOC further erodes any conventional strategic thinking. Other at chokepoints, why bother... You are much better off keeping your forces in stacks rather than wasting time setting up a screen. ZOC allows you to set up a screen, which may be vunerable, but also serves a valuable purpose to buy some time and prevent movement. The lack of a ZOC is not so much a big deal in the Ancient/Medieval Age, but once you get Railroads, that lack becomes a huge game flaw. The only strategy at that point is to have the biggest stack...

3. Tech Whoring - The game is structured to encourage tech trading, to the point where you are better off setting science to (0-10%) and raising the cash to buy the tech instead. This runs counter to the idea that a player should be rewarded for focusing on science. The AI manages to do well in tech mainly because of its willingness to trade techs with the other AIs, which forces a player to adapt to that same strategy.

[centrifuge]

Originally posted by hexagonian

2. Strategic Resources - I fought a 2 stage war with the Americans - first to grab it's oil, and having taken it, I can now finish them off with my tanks, since they cannot build tanks themselves.

This is a very good part of Civ3. Another thing that is good about this setup, is that you can bombard tile improvements with bombers, artillery, battleships etc. This give the player the option to cut off an enemies supply of oil(by destroying the roads leading to it). This adds an awesome strategic aspect to Civ3 that I'd love to see in CTP2 as well.

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by centrifuge
This is a very good part of Civ3. Another thing that is good about this setup, is that you can bombard tile improvements with bombers, artillery, battleships etc. This give the player the option to cut off an enemies supply of oil(by destroying the roads leading to it). This adds an awesome strategic aspect to Civ3 that I'd love to see in CTP2 as well.

That's a very interesting idea and in addition a very possible idea, too. I guess it is possible to make it so that you can bombard just a plain tile with improvement on it. And if not than it is possible to make it so that if you bombard a unit on a tile with improvement that the tile improvement will be pillaged. But the best thing of the first idea is that it is possible to teach the AI to use it. The only problem here is a problem of time I am afraid.

-Martin

[Velociryx]

Hey guys! Apologies for the looooong delay in writing again here....was called away from my normal routine by the necessity of flying to California, getting off the plane and straight into a car to make the cross country drive back to SC. Three thousand miles and ten states later, I'm bushed, and going to bed for some much needed sleep!

But!...I do indeed plan to get a copy of Ctp2, and will post more 'bout that as soon as I get the chance to give it a thorough lookin' over!

-=Vel=-

[Solver]

Do it Vel, do it, and while I'm here, my recommendations: one game of CtP 2 as-is. On the "impossible" level. Crush the AI to death, and see that it's in alpha stage. Then download the mods, and play with them. My personal favorite is MedMod, due to lots of stuff it adds, but Cradle seems to be a bit tougher in warring, though some things about it I don't like.

[Tamerlin]

There is a life after Civ3

I have been deeply dissapointed with Civ3.

In my own opinion, in spite of excellent concepts, clearly summed up by the previous posts in this thread, the game is spoiled by the AI behavior and especially the way it is crudely cheating. I'am not upset by the fact an AI is cheating, but I can't stand it when it is in such a blunt manner you don't feel the AI is bound to any rule. How to build a strategy when you don't know what can do or can't do your ennemy ? I'am perhaps too accustomed to tabletop strategy games in which the players have to respect the same rules.

The CtP2 AI is certainly cheating but it is almost "invisible".

Shortly after my last Civ3 game, I decided to test the Super Apolyton Pack v2.0. Without any hesitation, I urge you to play CtP2, but as it has already been said before you will only enjoy it if you are ready to discover another game, not a different Civ2 ou Civ3, another game with a different philosophy and thus different concepts.

Enjoy !

If someone want some infos on EU2, he should perhaps ask Immortal Wombat. If I'am not wrong his new avatar is partly made with a EU2 graphic.

[Immortal Wombat]

It is, but only because I liked the shield, and stole it from someone else's avatar... I haven't got the game at all (yet...) - I think hexagonian is the person (here) to ask on EU1/2.

[Dinner]

EU2 is a great game; the graphics are a little crude but the, like CTP2, the programers put a lot of thought into the layout and functionality of the game. To bad Firaxis spent all there time making graphics and didn't put much thought in to the design of the game.

Oh, well. Back to CTP2.

[hexagonian]

EU/EU2 has a steeper learning curve than the civ games, and can be overwhelming once you start, but the game is actually simplistic in nature once you get the hang of it. Just a few basic things to do.

Stretches of it can be boring...Still, it is a very immersive game, and it does have a great deal of depth to it, especially with the scripted events.

I recommend it highly!!! I haven't played it for a few weeks though...

[Dinner]

I hate to admite it but I've been playing more EU2 then CTP2.

[Harovan]

Re: There is a life after Civ3

Originally posted by Tamerlin
I have been deeply dissapointed with Civ3.

In my own opinion, in spite of excellent concepts, clearly summed up by the previous posts in this thread, the game is spoiled by the AI behavior and especially the way it is crudely cheating. I'am not upset by the fact an AI is cheating, but I can't stand it when it is in such a blunt manner you don't feel the AI is bound to any rule. How to build a strategy when you don't know what can do or can't do your ennemy ? I'am perhaps too accustomed to tabletop strategy games in which the players have to respect the same rules.

Would you care to bring up some examples of these blatant cheats? For a person with your experience, this can not be hard.

There have been some very good threads about suspected cheats, made by some excellent brains, not parrots. They found 2 real cheats:

- The AI knows the location of all troups in the discovered part of the map.
- The AI knows the location of future resources; even though it doesn't know what it is, it knows that there is something.

All other suspected "cheats", brought up by parrots (AKA whiners), were carefully analyzed and considered non-existent, because simple explanations were found. In fact, the AI in Civ3 is even very predictable and bound to strict rules.

So, examples please, not mere statements.

The CtP2 AI is certainly cheating but it is almost "invisible".

Yes... the AI in CtP2 is indeed... invisible.