Now that we know there are 16 civs and 256 times 256 maps...

Roman · September 30, 2001, 16:59

... do we know whether the other "limits" have also been increased?

For example, I remember running out of the city limit in civ2 many a time and the problem if the 255 limit on cities, as well as the limits on units, etc. stayed, it would be difficult to enjoy the games I long for with 16 civs on 256 times 256 maps.

BeBro · September 30, 2001, 17:12

I really hope they changed the other limits (max. cities and max. units on the map, max. possible slots for techs/units) also. Given the RAM/CPU performance of modern computers, this should be no problem

Roman · September 30, 2001, 17:22

OT - BeBro, where in Germany do you live? I currently reside in Germany (in Schwaebisch Gmuend, a small city of about 65 000) about 50km SE of Stuttgart.

FrostyBoy · September 30, 2001, 17:28

what is that 256 measured in?

BeBro · September 30, 2001, 17:36

Roman, I live in Berlin - my brother lives in Stuttgart

SnOOpy, I think it means a map can have 256x256 squares (or more via the editor?). That would be moe than 65000 squares - for comparison, normal civ2 maps could have only 10000 squares max.

FrostyBoy · September 30, 2001, 17:41

oh of course! LOL

You don't want to know what I was thinking it was - it was so stupid I had to ask, but I just plainly forgot about the diamond squares. diamond squares!? I mean tiles.

Now there's a question for Dan, what are the dimensions of the tiles?

orange · September 30, 2001, 18:37

So it's confirmed that you can definitely play a game with 16 total civs? As long as the map is big enough (I think 180x180)

Earlier speculations put the number at 8.

FrostyBoy · September 30, 2001, 18:57

yeah its confirmed by Dan, and he also said you can play 16 on a small map if you wanted to

orange · September 30, 2001, 19:00

thank God. Maybe this game won't be such a flop after all

PGM · September 30, 2001, 19:16

Quote:

Originally posted by orange
thank God. Maybe this game won't be such a flop after all

Right, without this it would really stink...

Vlad Antlerkov · September 30, 2001, 20:30

Now, we know that we can add custom civs. Perhaps we could have more than 16 civs in a game, then...?

OneFootInTheGrave · October 1, 2001, 07:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Vlad Antlerkov
Now, we know that we can add custom civs. Perhaps we could have more than 16 civs in a game, then...?

noone mentioned that, so I wouldn't think it is possible, but 16 is great already.

On a small map with 16 civs most of them get killed of in BC and 16 civs will be enough to fill quite a big map, and give scenario makers much more flexibility comparing to 8 civs. 32 limit does not improve gameplay as much as a move from 8 to 16, there will surely be many occurences when people will want more, but to get 16 from the initial fear that there will be only 8 as before, is great.

Roman · October 2, 2001, 12:02

How about we ask about the city and other limits in the next set of "Ask the Civ Team"?

Fiera · October 2, 2001, 12:22

Now that 16 civs in a game, I think it's fair we remind that some "conservative" Civ players were arguing that the game would be too slow and only super-computers would be able to handle more than 8 civs...

Sava · October 2, 2001, 12:33

I think the idea that 16 civs will only run on supercomputers is absurd. We're not talking about a game that will require lots of power, its not going to be a 3D 10 billion polygon per second game. Whoever suggested that is probably a newbie.

Anything above the minimum system requirements will be fine, that's why they're called "Minimum System Requirements"!

BeBro · October 2, 2001, 16:46

Quote:

Originally posted by SoulAssassin
Anything above the minimum system requirements will be fine, that's why they're called "Minimum System Requirements"!

Well, if I learned something about computer games in the last years, then this: Do not trust the so-called "Minimum System Requirements"!

They only say: Perhaps your computer will be able to start the game, but, in most cases, it will be sloooow as hell, especially on large maps/more then 8 civs...

Roman · October 2, 2001, 20:59

Actually, in my experience of using inferior computers, games almost always run on machines with significantly less than the minimum requirements, albeit the speed can be frustrating.

java4me · October 2, 2001, 23:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Roman
Actually, in my experience of using inferior computers, games almost always run on machines with significantly less than the minimum requirements, albeit the speed can be frustrating.

I think that Civ3 will run fine on most computers, the only ones that would have trouble are the ones that have less than the required resolution!!!

Lung · October 2, 2001, 23:45

Quote:

Originally posted by SoulAssassin
I think the idea that 16 civs will only run on supercomputers is absurd. We're not talking about a game that will require lots of power, its not going to be a 3D 10 billion polygon per second game. Whoever suggested that is probably a newbie.

They're probably using their CTP experience to come to that conclusion

Then again, after waiting 15 minutes for the AI to play it's turns, they could be forgiven

Roman · October 3, 2001, 07:52

Quote:

Originally posted by java4me
I think that Civ3 will run fine on most computers, the only ones that would have trouble are the ones that have less than the required resolution!!!

Fantastic encouragement - I only have a resolution of 800x600.

Adm.Naismith · October 3, 2001, 08:42

Quote:

Originally posted by SoulAssassin
I think the idea that 16 civs will only run on supercomputers is absurd. We're not talking about a game that will require lots of power, its not going to be a 3D 10 billion polygon per second game. Whoever suggested that is probably a newbie.

Anything above the minimum system requirements will be fine, that's why they're called "Minimum System Requirements"!

Nah, you (and Fiera) can dig a bit with the "search" and find quite a bunch of motivated feared post about game (mostly AI) performance with 16 civs (but many think that a number from 10 to 12 can work fine), assuming a complex AI at work.

Usually they wheren't posted by newbies, but experienced programmers; some post refer to CTP 2 team member explanation, some time before the release of the game. You can laugh at him, still he is a professional programmer in TBS games, and probably understand a thing or two about increased magnitude of difficulties to manage a large number of factions, also from a playability point of view.

Of course I'll be happy to see Civ III AI greatly manage 15 Civs while the human SP still enjoy the game waiting her/his turn...

Now the first gold rule must apply: play first, applaude later.

OneFootInTheGrave · October 3, 2001, 10:15

And you can always play with 8 civs or less if your comp. specs are not up to the task.

Anyway we cannot expect civ IIII in less than 5 years .

in that time a XY 5GHZ 64bit CPU will be as cheap as todays duron. Surely that will be enough to run 16 civs on the biggest map

faded glory · October 3, 2001, 10:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Lung

They're probably using their CTP experience to come to that conclusion

Then again, after waiting 15 minutes for the AI to play it's turns, they could be forgiven

Lung, could you imagine 16 people in a PBEM

Will there be enough land for all of our collective egos??

I can already see the awesome world wars

Even better, the Pollution and nuclear buildups

this game is going to awesome