Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2nd Anniversary of Source Code Release

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Okay, I said I wouldn't have time for a while but I found some.

    I just want to make a few things clear right from the outset:

    1. I applaud very loudly the work that has gone into CTP2 by the Poly fans. The strength of the mods is clearly evident by a number of facts:
    - Rave reviews in game magazines
    - Some of the highest ranked mods on Poly are CTP2 mods
    - Even now 5 years after release the mods are still regarded as some of the best for any strategy game
    Clearly CTP2 has left its mark on the gaming industry. Maybe not so much on the strength of its gameplay, but on its inovations and moddability. CTP2 breathed life into the Civ-genre with inovations that were sharply different to the Civ-series. This is now obvious in some of the features in Civ4. I believe Firaxis had no choice but to embrace CTP2's inovations and address each shortfalling to create a uniquely Civ game with CTP2 ingredients. Also it's clearly obvious that CTP2's moddability and the genius within the CTP2 community inspired Firaxis to the level of Civ4's moddability. (It wouldn't surprise me if some of the CTP2 modders are beta testers). No one can deny that all of us were a part of that. In fact, I'd go as far to say that we the Poly CTP2 community have shaped Civ4's design a massive amount, second only to the beta testers. This is a MASSIVE achievement for a game with such a rocky history as CTP2. And I'm proud to have been a part of that.

    2. My leaving of the CTP2 arena were for my own reasons. I had a massive design in the original Ages of Man. However my inability to be able to mod in certain key elements led me to head off and start programming my own game. This is still happening, but at a slow rate. It had nothing to do with Civ4. CTP2 just simply couldn't handle my design so I wanted to create an engine that could.

    My interest in Civ4 is simply because I love grand strategy games. TBS or RTS or whatever, I love the depth of grand strategy. With that in mind, of course I'll be drawn in by Civ4, it's the next big release of a grand strategy game.

    However, I do know where my roots originated from. There are elements of CTP2 I'd love to see in Civ4. For example true stacked combat, not pseudo 1-on-1 combat that the Civ series traditionally takes. MAD is another concept that CTP2 brought that I feel no Civ-genre game should be without.

    But I'm also realistic. The CTP2 community is fast dwindling to those rare few highly devoted fans. If I create a mod, I want it to be played. I want to influence the play style of many folks, and try to create a fun experience in a different way. That will not be met in CTP2. Thus my hopes in the moddability of Civ4. If Civ4 is truelly as moddable as they say, then I will be in up to my arms in xml and python. Who knows, when the SDK comes out I'll most likely dive head first into it.

    Barry Caudill said in a Gamespot interview (I think) and Jesse Smith said on "Attack of the Show", that Civ4's moddability is so deep that with the SDK CTP2 styled stacked combat will be possible. Thus I know where I'll be come january 2006.

    I feel the future of modding lies in that direction. Civ4 is appearing to be a massive leap forward in openess within the gaming industry. I would however love to see a complete CTP2 patch, maybe even integrated into AOM. At the very least, Stan deserves that after 2 years on the mod.

    At least give him that.

    Dale

    Comment


    • #17
      Perhaps it's time to start the C4:CTP2 effort

      If you guys want to organize something (other than a news item we'll post anyway ) for the anniversary let me know
      contact Locutus as well
      Co-Founder, Apolyton Civilization Site
      Co-Owner/Webmaster, Top40-Charts.com | CTO, Apogee Information Systems
      giannopoulos.info: my non-mobile non-photo news & articles blog

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by MarkG
        Perhaps it's time to start the C4:CTP2 effort
        That would be CtP3 then. No point in making an exact clone, that would be stupid.
        Administrator of WePlayCiv -- Civ5 Info Centre | Forum | Gallery

        Comment


        • #19
          CTP3 sounds even better
          Co-Founder, Apolyton Civilization Site
          Co-Owner/Webmaster, Top40-Charts.com | CTO, Apogee Information Systems
          giannopoulos.info: my non-mobile non-photo news & articles blog

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Locutus
            That would be CtP3 then. No point in making an exact clone, that would be stupid.
            At least if recreating features of CtP2, there would be no doubt as to what to do. When creating new concepts and such stuff, it is inevitable that conflicts arise regarding what and how to do.
            Solver, WePlayCiv Co-Administrator
            Contact: solver-at-weplayciv-dot-com
            I can kill you whenever I please... but not today. - The Cigarette Smoking Man

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Solver
              I believe, as I always did, that CtP2:AE should include one of the mods. IMO, the perfect mod for this is SAP2 with GoodMod. Why? Because this combination retains gameplay that is very close to that of the original CtP2, but it adds nice touches here and there and, most importantly, makes the AI quite acceptable.
              The graphics are alrteady in and all the other fixes, maybe the AI has to be considered more, but I feel that just using the strategies.txt from GoodMod isn't the best way to do, this Calvitix did some changes that might interfere with it. The only thing we could take from GoodMod is the DiffDB.txt with the stronger AI boni.

              Originally posted by Solver
              That would be CtP3 then. No point in making an exact clone, that would be stupid.
              You mean Civ4: The way it should be.

              So far I have seen some stupid workers improving the suroundings of Hastings, after the release of CTP1 a unit based tile improvement system is out of question, this has to be fixed. Moving hundrets of engineers is a pain, and this is still true if you rename the unit.

              A minor annoyance is missing stacked combat.

              So far I haven't seen anything about the message system, from the screenshots I saw it seems just be again messages you have to answer during the turn, this has to be changed, more to a RTS message system as we have it in CTP2.

              However the most important thing that has to be changed is the required OS, it must run under Win98 otherwise it is unplayable. I mean Settler5 runs on my computer and that is real time for me that means it needs a more powerful computer than Civ4. So I don't understand why Civ4 shouldn't run on my computer. And I already thought of putting it on my Christmas list.

              -Martin
              Civ2 military advisor: "No complaints, Sir!"

              Comment


              • #22
                However the most important thing that has to be changed is the required OS, it must run under Win98 otherwise it is unplayable.
                come on this is ridicullous
                Co-Founder, Apolyton Civilization Site
                Co-Owner/Webmaster, Top40-Charts.com | CTO, Apogee Information Systems
                giannopoulos.info: my non-mobile non-photo news & articles blog

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Martin Gühmann
                  So far I have seen some stupid workers improving the suroundings of Hastings, after the release of CTP1 a unit based tile improvement system is out of question, this has to be fixed. Moving hundrets of engineers is a pain, and this is still true if you rename the unit.
                  Solver has said that you can lock-group and group-commmand workers. So your 100's of workers suddenly become similar to a set of CTP unit stacks. They become manageable. That was the only reason I favored PW over workers.

                  Group them and move them with one click. Issue orders to a stack of workers with a single click. I had some reservations about the tedium factor in civ4 until I heard that tidbet of information.

                  And autopathing holds when you select a stack in transit. No more trying to remember where you have sent your units, and then have to reissue an order when you select it to check its progress. That omission in SMAC and civ3 used to make me grind my teeth.



                  Originally posted by Martin Gühmann
                  A minor annoyance is missing stacked combat.
                  Key word being minor...
                  ...and I really believe that issue will be moddable. I am willing to make a bet with anyone that it will be possible.

                  Remember, somebody was able to mod workers into CTP2. Civ4 appears to have the same moddibility.
                  Yes, let's be optimistic until we have reason to be otherwise...No, let's be pessimistic until we are forced to do otherwise...Maybe, let's be balanced until we are convinced to do otherwise. -- DrSpike, Skanky Burns, Shogun Gunner
                  ...aisdhieort...dticcok...

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Civ4 will surely have stack combat later as a mod .
                    Solver, WePlayCiv Co-Administrator
                    Contact: solver-at-weplayciv-dot-com
                    I can kill you whenever I please... but not today. - The Cigarette Smoking Man

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Martin:

                      I think it's a bit silly demanding Civ4 to support an OS that is: a- 7 years old, and b- not supported by M$ anymore. Remember, Firaxis is an M$ developer partner and as such under those T&C's MUST support M$ supported OS's. M$ doesn't support Win9x, so Firaxis doesn't.

                      Geeze, at our work we only support Win XP Pro, Win2K & Win23K.

                      As for workers, if Solver or Markos can clarify if worker spewing is over, and that automation is sensible, then I'm happy with that. I didn't mind the process behind either method, just that in Civ3 to use the method effectively you HAD to have 100 workers. But if Civ4's new worker method means you only need 10 workers I'm happy with that.

                      Chieftess has also mentioned about a message system in over at CFC, and since there's been no other comments about a msg system in Civ4, then we can't see either way yet. I'm willing to bet there is something like that in Civ4, we just have to wait and see.

                      Dale

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        yes. cIV: the way it should be. perfect name, Martin

                        so workers... how do u make nets and fisheries? and ports?

                        so in cIV, u can place multiple tile imps on a tile, like a mine and a farm?

                        do u disband workers to get a fort or outpost?

                        PW is tight cuz its like a second currency, and the city really controls all the land in its range, so ppl living right there should be paid to do the work, and even if its not in a city range, ppl still live there. Army ppl don't go around building railroads or hiring farmers.
                        Last edited by HuangShang; October 20, 2005, 21:53.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I think Solver has the best plan after code work is finished up and Apolyton patch is added to CtP2 .
                          Is to add SAP2 and Goodmod as both help tp balance things and give the best AI of any Civ game .
                          After 5 years im still enjoy this game (playing MedMod2) and its been a great ride that I hope will not end just yet.
                          CtP3 from a moded Civ4 is that right?

                          CtP2 is aging but mods and code work have pushed it beyond anything the progamers thought it would .
                          But alll eyes are on Civ4 now.I hope its everything we expected it to be.
                          Last edited by Protra3211; October 20, 2005, 22:08.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by MarkG
                            come on this is ridicullous
                            What's so rediculous about that I cannot play it in the case of doubt?

                            It is rather rediculous to buy an operating system and ask big fat uncle Bill whether I am allowed to use my licence on my computer. That's like buying a car and ask the car maker, of course after buying, whether I am allowed to drive my car.

                            Originally posted by Dale
                            I think it's a bit silly demanding Civ4 to support an OS that is: a- 7 years old, and b- not supported by M$ anymore. Remember, Firaxis is an M$ developer partner and as such under those T&C's MUST support M$ supported OS's. M$ doesn't support Win9x, so Firaxis doesn't.
                            To be precise it is Win98 SE is 6 years old. Anyway does these T&Cs include that you must not support that Microsoft does not support? Looking at the system requirements of Settlers5, the game supports Win98 SE, WinME, Win2000 and WinXP. The game was released in 2004, it is real time, it is 3D as well, the graphics card needs T&L as well. The game runs on my computer. Why shouldn't Civ4 run on my computer, if Settler5 runs on my computer. Now why doesn't Civ4 support WinME it is as old as Win2000 and that is supported. So it can't be the aging argument to exclude me from this game.

                            Anyway it seems that the game cannot be modified so that it runs under Linux. And that can be achieved for CTP2. Of course the question is how much time and efforts are needed to achieve this.

                            -Martin
                            Civ2 military advisor: "No complaints, Sir!"

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              If you run Windows Manky Edition (ME) I feel you don't deserve Civ4.

                              In 2004 M$ was still supporting Win98 to a minor degree. However that finished 1-1-2005. So Settlers was able to still get M$ support for it.

                              These are the T&C's supported OS's under the M$ Developer Partner:
                              - Microsoft Windows Server 2003
                              - Microsoft Windows XP
                              - Microsoft SQL Server 2000
                              - Microsoft Mobility platform (Microsoft Windows Mobile software for Pocket PCs, Microsoft Windows Mobile software for Smartphones)
                              - Microsoft Business Solutions

                              Saying that CTP2 supports Linux and that Civ4 doesn't is a bit rich. The ONLY reason CTP2 supports it is cuz you have the FULL source code. Nice try though.

                              ANYWAYS, we seem to be getting way off track here.

                              I would like to see a finished CTP2: AE. It would bring the perfect closure to an extremely rare and wonderful era in community game projects. However I do see the future as lieing along the Civ4 line, not the CTP2 line.

                              Dale

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Dale
                                If you run Windows Manky Edition (ME) I feel you don't deserve Civ4.
                                For some reason I don't have it on my computer. But if it runs on WinME then there might be a chance that it runs on Win98 as well.

                                Originally posted by Dale
                                In 2004 M$ was still supporting Win98 to a minor degree. However that finished 1-1-2005. So Settlers was able to still get M$ support for it.
                                And when they cut of support for WinME.

                                Originally posted by Dale
                                These are the T&C's supported OS's under the M$ Developer Partner:
                                - Microsoft Windows Server 2003
                                - Microsoft Windows XP
                                - Microsoft SQL Server 2000
                                - Microsoft Mobility platform (Microsoft Windows Mobile software for Pocket PCs, Microsoft Windows Mobile software for Smartphones)
                                - Microsoft Business Solutions
                                Were I can find this list?

                                Originally posted by Dale
                                Saying that CTP2 supports Linux and that Civ4 doesn't is a bit rich. The ONLY reason CTP2 supports it is cuz you have the FULL source code. Nice try though.
                                I don't say that CTP2 supports Linux I say that you can port it and Civ4 cannot be ported. That's a fact. And that could be a reason to continue the project. At least for some of us, probably not for me. However this thread is also about the possibilities of the source code and a Linux port is still a possibility.

                                -Martin
                                Civ2 military advisor: "No complaints, Sir!"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X