"Civilization IV"... Confirmed? - Page 16

pvzh · January 17, 2005, 15:40

"It's not more of a challenge, it's more of a headache. One of the main reasons I don't go much higher than warlord either"

Is it sarcasm? Because the level were everything is equal is Regent. Below this level AI has penalties to production, growth, reserach. I do not know exact numbers (like 20% more costs on warlord, and 50% for chieftan)

About chaeating of AI in genral.
I do not think it is fair to compare far simpler game like chess with Civ. In chess only 64 tiles and 16 pre-determined pieces of 6 types for just 2 sides. Theory of playing chess was actively developed for approx. 150 years. In comparison, Civ exist only like 13-14 years has vastly more complex rules (3 sets radically already), was developed by just one company. Designing CivIV will requre like 3 years and you want "150 years" qualities of this game? Get real!

Toby Rowe · January 20, 2005, 21:19

Hi Trip,

Wished I hadn't posted with a broken keyboard- as I've destroyed the readability of this thread, I really am sorry all about this.

Talking of cheating AI, as we were, I noticed that the AI no longer sees submarines on Monarch level, but does at Regent level. I still get the "grab-attacks" on a worker placed exactly 3 squares away from the border- but only if they have (I assume) what they consider adequate defences in each home city.

I'm currently in a war with Egypt, and I left 6 workers on a hill in full view and in reach of the Egyptian Railway system- they didn't go for it, yet had about 6 cities left.

Seems to me the AI cheats less on higher levels, except for technology, which it cheats just as much as Sid Meiyer programmed it to do in the original.

Cheating on troop dispositions knowledge is a very good example of why I dislike the lazy programmers- the defence of your Civ is paramount. Knowing I have one Spearman in a border city (as we often do) and it will take 600 years to produce another, and 200 years to get the nearest horseman upto it is serious cheating!

Toby :-(

Ps; Come on Pvzh, Chess uses a lot more grey matter than Civ. A loss of a single city doesn't finish a game, whilst the loss of X piece in chess might.

SSBLoveU · January 23, 2005, 13:52

Quote:

Originally posted by pvzh
"It's not more of a challenge, it's more of a headache. One of the main reasons I don't go much higher than warlord either"

Is it sarcasm? Because the level were everything is equal is Regent. Below this level AI has penalties to production, growth, reserach. I do not know exact numbers (like 20% more costs on warlord, and 50% for chieftan)

About chaeating of AI in genral.
I do not think it is fair to compare far simpler game like chess with Civ. In chess only 64 tiles and 16 pre-determined pieces of 6 types for just 2 sides. Theory of playing chess was actively developed for approx. 150 years. In comparison, Civ exist only like 13-14 years has vastly more complex rules (3 sets radically already), was developed by just one company. Designing CivIV will requre like 3 years and you want "150 years" qualities of this game? Get real!

To me, Civilization III and Chess are similar because the games are based upon an array. In Civilization IV, I hope men and women can hide behind mountains (and make tunnels). The programming is more complex with the huge map of Civilization III. Yet, most people and equipment move the same. People who are trained in the mountain regions ought to be work and fight better in the mountain regions and so on. Chess makes one to think in an array not spatially. The programming for chess needs little improvement for the most advanced players, and some times, for the new learners. The point is that no game should rely on cheating to make it special because it does not.

JosefGiven · January 24, 2005, 18:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Toby Rowe Wished I hadn't posted with a broken keyboard- as I've destroyed the readability of this thread, I really am sorry all about this.

Now that it's fixed, you could always go back and edit it, duder.

Joseph · January 24, 2005, 22:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Joseph
I think it will be Jan 05 before we hear anything about Civ 4.

Quote:

In Jan 2005 PC Gamer, page 52. I will list the high lights of the article.

Sid himself will lead the development of Civ 4. "Civ 4 has been written entirely from scratch." It will be 3D. The combat system has been completely revamped to encourage players to use different kinds of units together, like ground troops and air units backed by bombardments. Units will gain experience and acquire new upgrades such as bonuses against specific enemy types.
No spearmen defeating tanks this time.

The Tech tree will be free to build whatever and not follow a path. There will be new features, such as 'World Religions and Great People, which will affect your entire empire.

MP will be added now and not later.

The no cheat was in a piece written by Jeff over at CFC forum.

How was that for a guess?

Toby Rowe · January 24, 2005, 22:29

Josef,

I just did, I actually re-wrote the the thing and elaborated.

I also noticed that where I wrote the word (self-censorsed) "c**k-up" it was recognised as swearing, which we both know isn't, so it now seems that a male chicken and an English saying is not allowed- Churchill must be turning in his grave. [c**k up] = a mistake.

Anyway, whilst the post seems okay, I seem to have mucked up P15 permanently, it still needs to scroll.

Toby

Joseph · January 24, 2005, 22:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Toby Rowe

I'm not Keith/kieth.

All,

I heard that company x was hampered by company y over ownership on the "Civilisation" title in a newspaper- I assumed that argument was over.

After Sid and Co. left Microprose (BTW Sid and an USAF Col. started MP), Activision wanted to make Civ Call to Power and there was a law suit between Microprose and Activision and MP won. So the name Civ stayed with MP. I think it was the Co. that made Falcon 1, 2, 3, & 4. that bought MP. However they when broke real soon, and Hasbro brought it(That is how we got Test of Time), and then either sold it or was bought out by Infogrames, and now Atari.

Quote:

I noticed Atari (of the US) rose from the ashes from the strength of owning a couple of names on the old machine.

I'm still annoyed Microprose was ever brought- It was an excellent development house and should have stayed independent at all costs. They were the benchmark in gaming quality for me.

Somehow Sid lost control of MP. So he and others started Firaxis.

Quote:

About Firaxis- AC encouraged you to develop a colony, once done it slaughtered you with pollution- to the point the game wasn't fun anymore.

Trying to educate people about pollution is one thing, destroying your entertainment is another, Civ 3 also falls foul of this. I simply don't build hospitals or factories as I don't have any control over it, unlike Civ 2.

I can't even prompt workers to "only clear pollution and don't bother me again-ever!" If there is no polluted tile-great! Have a tea break and work once one appears!!

I like micro-management, but some features I also want to totally automate, or else I just won't play the game as designed. Progression through the ages and Industrialisation are keys facets of the game.

Colonisation- I'd loved that title, there were some fans making their own Col2 on the net, but work was very slow. Anyone know of their current progress?

Toby

Joseph

PS. Jeff said pollution is gone and so is Corruption.

snoopy369 · January 27, 2005, 00:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Toby Rowe
Hi..Trip.

I think there is a slight difference between the Civ cheat
of "the Egyptians have nearly completed wonder...X" which was utterly random, but they always got the Pyramids, at least it was blantant cheating, using the 4mb of memory Sid Meiyer had to create such a complex, yet simple game.

Given the memory available to the programmers in the second sequel (Civ 3), they decided to cheat instead of programming in an credible AI- and were cheeky enough to programme in different levels of cheating for different levels of difficulty, yet blatent enough for all Civ players to see, on all levels.

After the ****-up of Alpha Centuri, I'm a trite nervous that greedy CO's at FireAxis will also ****-up Civ 4, as, if they muck this one up; Civ is finished, and we'll be left with Civ 2 only, and a once illustrious game AND name will be reduced to a laughing stock.

Toby

Okay, it's that bold part that I have to say you lost all credibility with me. (I admit that I already agree with Trip, but still ...)

SMAC is with few arguments the best game ever written nearly regardless of category. It is still the highest rated game of all time by several major PC Game rating magazines and/or websites, and many would argue that Civ3 was a huge step backwards from SMAC, although still quite enjoyable. Calling that a screwup is blatant ignorance of TBS games and computer gaming in general.

"Cheating" as you say is the only way Civ AI will ever realistically play as far as I am concerned. Yes, I'd love a Civ AI that was forethinking and saw 20 moves ahead ...

... because then I'd win that much easier. Scrap that, I'd rather not see a civ AI that saw 20 moves ahead, that would be boring.

Simply put, a Chess AI has 64 spaces and at most 32 pieces to consider at any one point of the game, and only one piece may move each turn. Seeing 100 moves ahead - the most any computer would even bother seeing, as few if any chess games last that long - is nothing compared to seeing TWO turns ahead in civ. Imagining 100 pieces moving, on two teams, compared to ... say ... 1795 to 1800, say, with 8 teams (one-fourth the maximum possible teams) and 100x100 board (less than half the maximum possible squares) and ... hmm, what, 120 pieces per team, each of which can move an average of 1.6 x3 (roads) squares per turn ...

That's an awful lot more complex for a few turns. Thinking ahead 5 turns would probably take several minutes, per AI ... and 5 turns just isn't enough to be useful.

I don't want the AI sitting there for an hour; I want it to have decent strategy, and am fine with it having better deals with other AI civs, seeing my units, and other things that make the game a challenge in exchange for a game that is difficult and ... fast. Different levels of cheating means that I can have a differently challenging game based on how hard I want it to be. That's the recipe for a good game - who cares how the AI gets to it?

I want the AI to be less predictable - no more strategies that are simple to suss out and can be beat no matter what level you play against... cheating or not, I don't care.

Redstar · January 31, 2005, 11:20

Sounds like the people who did railroad tycoon 2 will be doing civ 4 with firaxis:

http://www.gamers-depot.com/
(posted jan 26th)

Take-Two Gets Civ-Series Discuss
Take-Two Interactive Software, announced that it has purchased certain rights to the multi-million unit selling Civilization franchise, and has signed a long-term, multi-title publishing agreement with FIRAXIS Games, developers of Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, SimGolf, Gettysburg, Civilization III, Pirates! and other critically acclaimed simulation and strategy games.

Kicking off this new partnership will be the highly anticipated Sid Meier's Civilization IV for PC, which will be published by Take-Two's publishing label 2K Games in late 2005, with future expansions and additional PC and console games to follow.

The fourth game in the PC strategy series that has sold over five million copies, Sid Meier's Civilization IV is a bold step forward for the franchise, with spectacular new 3D graphics and all-new single and multiplayer content. Civilization IV will also set a new standard for user-modification, allowing gamers to create their own add-ons using the standard Python and XML scripting languages.

Joseph · January 31, 2005, 21:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Redstar
Sounds like the people who did railroad tycoon 2 will be doing civ 4 with firaxis:

http://www.gamers-depot.com/
(posted jan 26th)

Take-Two Gets Civ-Series Discuss
Take-Two Interactive Software, announced that it has purchased certain rights to the multi-million unit selling Civilization franchise, and has signed a long-term, multi-title publishing agreement with FIRAXIS Games, developers of Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, SimGolf, Gettysburg, Civilization III, Pirates! and other critically acclaimed simulation and strategy games.

Kicking off this new partnership will be the highly anticipated Sid Meier's Civilization IV for PC, which will be published by Take-Two's publishing label 2K Games in late 2005, with future expansions and additional PC and console games to follow.

The fourth game in the PC strategy series that has sold over five million copies, Sid Meier's Civilization IV is a bold step forward for the franchise, with spectacular new 3D graphics and all-new single and multiplayer content. Civilization IV will also set a new standard for user-modification, allowing gamers to create their own add-ons using the standard Python and XML scripting languages.

PopTop did RRT 2 and 3.

Redstar · January 31, 2005, 22:00

sorry. you are right. i have the disks right here.

guess i got a cross linked memory path.

ThePlagueRat · February 2, 2005, 11:04

Wow, I see someone were swearing in the church here regarding SMAC. I just have to say I stick with the congregation and worship the old firaxis folks for that one. Too bad those nonbuggers had to bugger

Boris Godunov · February 2, 2005, 12:22

Quote:

Originally posted by snoopy369
"Cheating" as you say is the only way Civ AI will ever realistically play as far as I am concerned.

Hear hear!

While I don't agree that SMAC is the best game ever (I actually prefer Civ2 to it), it certainly wasn't a "**** up." It was an enjoyable, challenging game.

I'm baffled by the notion Toby offered that somehow blatant Civ2 cheating is okay, but "subtle" cheating ruins a game. Actually, I'd say the opposite is true. I accept that AIs in all computer games will have to cheat to make them challenging. There simply is no way around it when you don't have a human intelligence behind opponents. So it's far more engrossing to have an AI that cheats, but perhaps subtley enough you don't realize it, than have one blatantly and obviously cheating.

The AI was one of the best things about Civ3, and has made it harder for me to go back to the previous Civ games. It's not perfect, but welcome to reality. I've yet to see any strategy game where the AI was.

snoopy369 · February 2, 2005, 21:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Joseph
PopTop did RRT 2 and 3.

Um, I might be confused about what you're comparing to what, but PopTop developed RRT2/3 ... Take2 at minimum own the rights to these games now. I don't know for sure if they originally published them, but they certainly do now ...

Joseph · February 3, 2005, 00:01

Quote:

Originally posted by snoopy369

Um, I might be confused about what you're comparing to what, but PopTop developed RRT2/3 ... Take2 at minimum own the rights to these games now. I don't know for sure if they originally published them, but they certainly do now ...

I look at the box of RRT 2 Expansion and it was published by Gathering. The box of RRT 2 Platinum has T-2, Gathering, Poptop, and Godgames. RRT 3 has Poptop, Gathering, and T-2.

ThePlagueRat · February 4, 2005, 08:56

Any new screenies lately?

Nikolai · February 4, 2005, 09:40

Not that I've seen.

ThePlagueRat · February 4, 2005, 10:03

Hmm... I did a google search. Could not find any either.
Why? they are making the game now and they have an alpha by now, right?

General Ludd · February 4, 2005, 10:09

There where screenshots in a magazine a while back.

Nikolai · February 4, 2005, 11:19

Yeah, but that's old news.

We saw them already in December you know.

ThePlagueRat · February 5, 2005, 21:25

Yeah, and those were totally lame.
Certainly there will be need for a graphic mod if they are going to stick with that. So, why cant they post regular screenies like paradox does when they are developing a game? Instead they serve us those crappy magazine scans...

alva · February 5, 2005, 22:04

Some news: Not sure if it's worthy for a news item though.

http://www.firaxis.com/behindscenes/sidjeff.php

Quote:

Meanwhile, Sid Meier's Civilization IV continues to progress quite nicely. The gameplay is really beginning to click, the 3D graphics are nothing short of spectacular, and the multiplayer game is coming together faster than we expected. We've also been doing a lot of work on the game's internal architecture to allow for easy player-modification (mods) using the industry-standard Python and XML programs, and we confidently expect you folks to come up with some great new maps, scenarios, units and even entire civs!

ThePlagueRat · February 6, 2005, 00:55

Look, I didn't find screenies but I expect them to be posted on this site one day:

http://www.firaxis.com/games/game_detail.php?gameid=6

Quote:

Coming Soon
Screen shots and design commentary from the Sid Meier's Civilization IV team!

So we'll just have to wait and see... Hope for the best!

Toby Rowe · February 11, 2005, 00:33

Hi Snoopy and Boris.

Snoopy- We'll have to disagree about Alpha Centuri, I thought it an awful game- You liked it.

The cheating I was referring to in Civ 3 seems to have taken a step backwards compared to 1 & 2.

In the previous versions the AI made it quite clear when it cheated, to leave you without any illusions as to the current state of play; eg "The Russians exchanged Masonry with the Egyptians for Pottery" then "The Egyptians exchanged Masonry for Map making with...." etc.

My simple point was rather than the Civ 3 programmers viewing the obvious cheats in the first two, they would try to eliminate as many by producing a credible AI. Instead they actually added many cheats, whilst removing the info the AI gave us in little messages when it engaged in cheating- That gentlemen is a backward step.

I was quite shocked to see the defeatist attitude Snoopy has about the limits of AI, I consider Civ to be one of the most highly structured games ever made, making a decent AI far easier to achieve I would have thought.

In RRT3 new industries appear and the AI has to adjust the entire economic model for it, whilst in Civ 3, you have 4 fast attacking units, 4 defensive units, One type of settlement and one type of worker unit.

This is the basis for all board interaction.

What you get is silent cheating on technology, your troop dispositions throughout the map, including non-garrisoned military and workers, attacks on submarines- In other words, the AI knows everything about your nation, before it attacks- and rest assured, some moronic nation on the opposite side of the map will spend 30 turns sending troops to you in order to attack you- for no reason whatsoever, and completely ignoring the good relations you previously enjoyed over the 2000 years since you discovered each other.

What is that all about?

Good AI makes a good game, bad AI makes a bad one.

Toby

notyoueither · February 11, 2005, 03:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Toby Rowe
My simple point was rather than the Civ 3 programmers viewing the obvious cheats in the first two, they would try to eliminate as many by producing a credible AI. Instead they actually added many cheats, whilst removing the info the AI gave us in little messages when it engaged in cheating- That gentlemen is a backward step.

What cheats did the civ3 AI have other than seeing the map?

Toby Rowe · February 11, 2005, 04:19

Mate,

Try reading my last sentence in the post.

ThePlagueRat · February 12, 2005, 15:01

A crap AI has nothing to say if you only play MP. In Civ3 I found the AI so bad that I ended up only using it for MP games...

And for the MP Civ3 turned out pretty good, but not before 2 expansion packs. Now that's sad! However, today it's very fun playing on ladder league and using MP-mods etc. If Firaxis is serious about the SP play in Civ4, they will make a better AI than Civ3.

alms66 · February 12, 2005, 17:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Toby Rowe Try reading my last sentence in the post.

Um... how about you read notyoueither's question and answer it instead...
What cheats are there besides the AI seeing the map?

Toby Rowe · February 13, 2005, 03:40

Hi mate,

I simply can't see the post you are referring too, but I remember his name.

Look mate, if the AI can see the location of all your worker units, the garrisons of every city you have, even every city you have, this allows for the great AI rush we are used to seeing, along with the capturing of your civilian worker units. It also knows the location of all your naval units, including submarines. What else is left in Civ 3?- diplomacy only, which is an utter joke in this game.

I'd say, never give your territory map away, unless you are able to defend it, once a single nation has it, they all do, and then the cheating begins.

Now, if I'm not mistaken, as the entire game is played on the map; the enemy knowing your entire dispositions makes for a very, very poor AI. The map is a mystery to you alone- to the AI it knows everything about you. and the map once it knows all Civ's.

In Civ 3 you are effectively alone against a collective of other nations, if you don't consider this poor AI then god help future games if Infogrammes' idea of AI becomes the norm.

Toby

Joseph · February 13, 2005, 03:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Toby Rowe
Hi mate,

I simply can't see the post you are referring too, but I remember his name.

Look mate, if the AI can see the location of all your worker units, the garrisons of every city you have, even every city you have, this allows for the great AI rush we are used to seeing, along with the capturing of your civilian worker units. It also knows the location of all your naval units, including submarines. What else is left in Civ 3?- diplomacy only, which is an utter joke in this game.

I'd say, never give your territory map away, unless you are able to defend it, once a single nation has it, they all do, and then the cheating begins.

Now, if I'm not mistaken, as the entire game is played on the map; the enemy knowing your entire dispositions makes for a very, very poor AI. The map is a mystery to you alone- to the AI it knows everything about you. and the map once it knows all Civ's.

In Civ 3 you are effectively alone against a collective of other nations, if you don't consider this poor AI then god help future games if Infogrammes' idea of AI becomes the norm.

Toby

HI.
Jeff told us a long time ago that yes the AI know all but because of the Fog of War, can not go directly to your city, until he (AI) removes the Fog of War. So the AI must explore just like we do. Now after he uncovers a way to come after you, watch out .