EC3 Fix #16 - MAKE IT HARDER FOR CIVS TO LAST

[raingoon]

S. Kroeze

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>MAKE THE GAME A REAL CHALLENGE!!
My severest criticism of CivII is that the game is too easily won. (And I NEVER ever cheat, not in any way!) After about 1500AD when half of the turns haven't passed yet, its clear who is going to win.
I'm not interested in colonizing Alpha Centauri, and neither does world domination appeal to me. Let just plain SURVIVAL of your culture- not necessarily identical to political power- be the ultimate goal! It would be nice if at the end of the game the earth is still a habitable place.

Most readers will realize that some well-known problems are the cause of the easy wins: the Infinite City Sleaze and the Eternal China Syndrom, both related to the 21-square city structure and the fact that 'heads' are counted instead of people. I think all those problems are the result of one essential flaw in the basic structure of the game.

Civilizations lasting for more than two millenia are the exception, not the standard. CivIII should try to depict the rise and fall of civilizations/ great powers. When a culture is succesfull it will almost inevitably grow conservative and convinced of its own superiority, causing other cultures to surpass the once dominant civilization. In this way its decline becomes inevitable!
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

[Matthevv]

I agree - see the rise and fall of empires idea thread.

[korn469]

S. kroeze

first can you define what the problem is? is it a significant problem? how does your ideas fix that problem specifically? does your fix effect any other areas of the game? if it does effect another area does it upset game balance in those other areas? is there a simpler way to fix the problem? does your idea hurt gameplay? why out of all of the ideas does your fix belong on this list?

though i have one thing, the 21-square city structure isn't perfect, but i doubt that civ3 is going to change this much, it might add more sqaures or take some away but basically i am almost certain that all peope will be contained in cities and think that most of the effort should be to modify and fix the current system instead of throughing it out...because the evolutionary changes are the ones most likely to get implemented

[S. Kroeze]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>
What's the ONE THING in Civ 2 (or SMAC?) that needs to be repaired or detonated altogether in Civ 3?

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

first can you define what the problem is?

The problem is that even on Deity level it becomes highly improbable that an experienced player will lose a CivII-game, which results in decrease of suspence. And you can be certain of your victory before half of all turns have passed! According to my sister who played SMAC a lot more than I did, this game was still more easily won.

is it a significant problem?

Yes, I think so; suspense being one of the essential elements we seek when we are playing a game.

how does your ideas(sic) fix that problem specifically?

The problem is quite complex and I don't harbour illusions about having the final solution to it. Yet by identifying Infinite City Sleaze and Eternal China Syndrom as cause of dimished suspence I got to the very heart of the problem and gave an important argument to reconsider the current 21-square city structure, which causes ICS and ECS, especially as 'heads' are counted in stead of people. A game like Imperialism proves that other structures can work very well.
When nothing is done to remedy those defects I think we might as well play CalltoPower (a worst case scenario!)!

does your fix effect any other areas of the game?

At the moment there is no fix yet, but some connected PROBLEMS TO BE FIXED. That's what you asked for; I don't have a final solution to it. Many people, especially the Diplomat and the Joker, have come with intelligent suggestions to improve the structure of the game. see The ultimate ICS thread!

Apart from demolishing the 21-square city structure I would suggest the following to ensure suspense till the end: better AI, the possibility of secessions and civil wars ,peasant revolts and feudal risings, more random elements like crop failures and epidemics, more influence of religion and economics making it possible to win in different ways, dangerous barbarians able to conquer large empires and create a new civilization, the possibility to start at a later starting date for the advanced player, the introduction of 'decay' factors affecting older and conservative civilizations.

if it does effect another area does it upset game balance in those other areas?

My fix asks for radical changes in many structures of the game. CivIII has to be essentially better than CivII, which is in my opinion the best computer game so far. Realism and suspense aren't mutually exclusive. The very linear, predictable structures of CivII should be broken,
CHANCE EXISTS!!

is there a simpler way to fix the problem?

I really don't think so; makeshift solutions will not solve this problem.

does your idea hurt gameplay?

Not at all! My essential goal is to have a game that is A REAL CHALLENGE.

why out of all of the ideas does your fix belong on this list?

Because suspense till the end is essential to enjoyment of the game; its improbabe that I am the only player who without cheating has a winning position before the game is halfway. Often I handicap myself, building no wonders etc. All humans enjoy experiencing dangerous situations, especially in a game! The higher levels of this game should give us a continuous uncertainty about the future. In the current CivII the computer keeps up a semblance of resistance only by massive cheating and plotting together.

If we will only consider ideas that Firaxis will implement this entire Forum is useless. CivIII should be definitely better than CalltoPower! The relation between ICS, ECS and the 21-structure is beyond dispute. As Doberman said: someday (perhaps in CivVI) a rural population will be created.

[S. Kroeze]

final draft

MAKE THE GAME A REAL CHALLENGE!!!

My severest criticism of CivII is that the game is too easily won. (And I NEVER ever cheat, not in any way!) Even on Deity level it becomes highly improbable that an experienced player will lose a CivII-game, which results in decrease of suspense. After about 1500AD when half of the turns haven't passed yet, its clear who is going to win.

I'm not interested in colonizing Alpha Centauri, and neither does world domination appeal to me. Let just plain SURVIVAL of your culture- not necessarily identical to political power- be the ultimate goal and an accomplishment in itself! It would be nice if at the end of the game the earth is still a habitable place.

Suspense till the end is essential to enjoyment of the game; its improbabe that I am the only player who without cheating has a winning position before the game is halfway. Often I handicap myself, building no wonders etc. All humans enjoy experiencing dangerous situations, especially in a game! The higher levels of this game should give us a continuous uncertainty about the future. Human history was no pleasant picnic in the park! The more CivIII will portray the harsh reality of the 'condition humaine' the more I'll like it. In the current CivII the computer keeps up a semblance of resistance only by massive cheating and plotting together.

Most readers will realize that some well-known problems are the cause of the easy wins: the Infinite City Sleaze and the Eternal China Syndrome, both related to the 21-square city structure and the fact that 'heads' are counted instead of people. These structures ensure that the largest civilization with the greatest number of cities will almost inevitably win. So all these problems are the result of one essential flaw in the basic structure of the game.

Apart from demolishing the 21-square city structure I would suggest the following to ensure suspense till the end: better AI, the possibility of secessions and civil wars, peasant revolts and feudal risings, more random elements like crop failures and epidemics, more influence of religion and economics making it possible to win in different ways, dangerous barbarians able to conquer large empires and to create a new civilization, the possibility to start at a later starting date for the advanced player, the introduction of 'decay' factors affecting older and conservative civilizations.

Civilizations lasting for more than two millenia are the exception, not the standard. CivIII should try to depict the rise and fall of civilizations/great powers. When a culture is succesfull it will almost inevitably grow conservative and convinced of its own superiority, causing other cultures to surpass the once dominant civilization. In this way its decline becomes inevitable!

The very linear, predictable structures of CivII should be broken,
CHANCE EXISTS!

[The Joker]

There I was thinking that Energy would be the thing I would like most in Civ3. And then I see this thread.

This is, by far, the best thing that could ever happen to Civilization as a game. Unfortunately it is also by far the most difficult thing to implement well. But if it is done (which I truly hope) Civ3 would beat every game yet by a lightyear.

The problem is that the problem (and the fix) includes so many aspects that it is hard to do something about. The ICS thread has proven some possible sollutions, but what we need is several new game aspects put together and balanced well. And that is a challenge for every game company.

CHANGE EXISTS!! (maybe I should put this as my signature...)