Which Aspect of Improvement Is Most Crucial?

UltraSonix · June 19, 2000, 07:27

I just wanted to get a feel of what people here think is the most crucial part of Civ2/SMAC that should be improved for Civ3. I ask this because Civ3 is supposed to mostly completed and so there's only a limited time for implementation of new stuff.

Areas of improvements you think is most important (feel free to add extra stuff!):

*AI (open source / smarter)
*Customisability (ie should be even more user-customisable)
*Diplomacy (more complex / AI made better / borders)
*End game (ie weird futuristic stuff, send spaceship to AC)
*Gameplay (ie interface/commands / multiplayer / multiple maps or production)
*Government Related Stuff (or "Social Engineering" as SMAC called it) (eg democracy & communism and how production etc is affected)
*Graphics Engine (3d)
*Historical Accuracy/Realism (BIG ISSUE eg ICS / religion / migration / slavery / pop- political- models)
*How much the game costs...

*Map (round/flat / terrain / terrain changing ala volcanoes / size)
*Micromanagement, the evil of Civ2 (governors)
*Militaristic matters (workshop / bases / commanders / SDI / Phalanx vs Tank / missiles)
*Multimedia (sfx / music / cut scenes)
*Scenarios (and their ease of design)
*Techs (what - ie should have futuristic ones / tech tree)
*Trade/economics (eg resources available / trade routes / inter or intra civ trade / corporations)
*Transportation (roads / rr / magtubes)
*Types and number of Civs
*Wonders (type / number / what)

I'm hoping lots of people will contribute so that we (and Firaxis!) can all know what everyone thinks!

MidKnight Lament · June 19, 2000, 09:12

So many things... but I'll go with Diplomacy and AI. Get these two right, and the game becomes a whole lot more enjoyable. Plenty of other things I'd like to choose out of that list as well though.

- MKL

CornMaster · June 19, 2000, 13:01

I really don't what to see the programmers wasting their time on fancy 3D graphics, movies, sounds...because then I probably I won't be able to run it.

But seriously the AI, multiplayer, diplomacy and scenario editors will have to be improved

I want to see a simple game that will run on almost any system and is easy to use and will have lots of replayability. Anyway just my 2 cents.

Oh yeah I never build a spaceship and think it's a waste of code but I know other people like it a lot so I won't comment any more than that.
[This message has been edited by CornMaster (edited June 19, 2000).]

June 19, 2000, 17:45

Such a shame CornMaster, you should really upgrade if you like computer games. Here read the civ3 FAQ if you haven't already.
http://www.firaxis.com/Civ3/

I don't think you'd need a powerful system to run 3D graphics anyway, lots of high 3D games can run easily on P200's as long as the programming is done well. Oh also, I seriously suggest people stop saying "They need to spend more time on this and that". I think what you should be saying to yourself is that they'll spend all the time they can to make all aspects of the game great.

I think the most important would definetly be the AI. I like customisability to, but whenever I custom the game, and then play the game, I feel bored because I made it, I know all about it, etc. So I don't know how important that really is, it's nice if other people custom it, even though it's not 'original' still puts me off a bit. Customisability makes the game last a long time tho.

Oh and diplomacy and AI tie together in my mind.

Urban Ranger · June 20, 2000, 00:14

Three areas:

1. Shift from a "city-centric" style to a "civ-centric" style. This involves lots of changes but should make the game work a lot better.

2. Reduction and/or elimination of ICS.

3. Better AI.

Par4 · June 20, 2000, 00:37

Military

Trade

Civians(I made this up, your people have a mind, you like the name?)

Diplomacy

AI

Graphics

hehehe graphics gotta run on a p2 350 so nothing too big firaxis, ok?

------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse
HappyLand
There is no spoon
-The Matrix
Let's kick it up a notch!!
-Emeril Lagasse
Fresh Soy makes Tofu so silky
-Ming Tsai

Tiberius · June 20, 2000, 04:53

My 0.02$:

Diplomacy
AI
"Social Engineering"
Trade
Energy/Resources
Transportation

and ... let's think about it ...hmm ... all the other stuff

Mark_Everson · June 20, 2000, 16:33

1. Better AI... 70% of effort
2. Reduce micromanagement... 20%
3. Open source AI... 10%
Everything else 0%

Yes, I Know it ain't gonna happen...

------------------
Mark Everson
Project lead for The Clash of Civilizations
(That means I do the things nobody else wants to do ;-) )
This Radically different civ game needs your suggestions and/or criticism of our design.
Check our our Web Site & Forum right here at Apolyton...

Steve Clark · June 20, 2000, 17:25

I like the percentages approach:

Better AI: 40%

Alternative ways of winning (gee, I wondered where that came from?): 30%

Robust scenario editor: 30%

Everything else: 0%

S. Kroeze · June 20, 2000, 17:28

Mark Everson,

Are you serious? Or are you 'just kidding'?

Do you really agree with Ken Bregott who apparently thinks CivII is perfect allready as it is now?
I would be truly surprised!
Especially since my impression of Clash of Civilizations is just the opposite. I have only perused the Clash pages superficially, but I have to admit -though I have seen many elements I liked and some impressive models- it was a bit complicated even to my taste.

All newcomers should visit here
We went through it all!

My priorities are:
-more historical realism (like Religion, Domestic Politics, Recruitment, etc)
-a really difficult game to win (which of course needs better AI)

In short: Make the GAME a REAL CHALLENGE!!!

UltraSonix · June 23, 2000, 00:00

Come on guys! We're all giving various suggestions, but the truth is, many good ones probably can't be implemented because of lack of time/people. So give your thoughts on what aspect of the game needs improvement the most.

For me it is:
*Diplomacy (vital)
*AI (equally vital)
*And a good scenario editor would be nice.

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...

Sitting Bull · June 24, 2000, 11:14

CTP is a good model for customizability, but I was very, very dissapointed with the AI. The city placement was so bad it was funny at times. Like sea cities right on the coast inside the radius of a port. Just *had* to have that extra trade good...

Gjost · June 24, 2000, 11:21

MultiPlayer Functionality - Have a PBEM capable engine.

June 25, 2000, 11:16

Going with the % theme...

Diplomacy - 55%
Better AI - 25%
Map layout/size - 20%

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~
"Oh, they have the Internet on computers now!"

St Leo · June 26, 2000, 19:37

*AI (open source / smarter)

Smarter, but not at the expence of customizin g units and stuff

*Customisability (ie should be even more user-customisable)

This is very important and please use *.PNG as your graphics format.

*Diplomacy (more complex / AI made better / borders)

A nice touch.

*End game (ie weird futuristic stuff, send spaceship to AC)

I am not buying anything with weird futuristic stuff.

*Gameplay (ie interface/commands / multiplayer / multiple maps or production)

Some things should be abstracted, some should be given more detail.

*Government Related Stuff (or "Social Engineering" as SMAC called it) (eg democracy & communism and how production etc is affected)

I believe SE is very realistic.

*Graphics Engine (3d)

Perhaps larger tiles

*Historical Accuracy/Realism (BIG ISSUE eg ICS / religion / migration / slavery / pop- political- models)

Perhaps a smoother transition through the ages, but the simpler in appearance (not guts), the better.

*How much the game costs...

Ha!

*Map (round/flat / terrain / terrain changing ala volcanoes / size)

Elevations and reasonable limits on size.

*Micromanagement, the evil of Civ2 (governors)

Imperialism II had good governors while Alpha Centauri had bad ones - please compare the implementations and/or feel.

*Militaristic matters (workshop / bases / commanders / SDI / Phalanx vs Tank / missiles)

CivII is fine in balance, but army based movement would be great.

*Multimedia (sfx / music / cut scenes)

*Drool*

*Scenarios (and their ease of design)

Falls under customizability.

*Techs (what - ie should have futuristic ones / tech tree)

No futuristic ones, please.

*Trade/economics (eg resources available / trade routes / inter or intra civ trade / corporations)

CivII model is fine.

*Transportation (roads / rr / magtubes)

No perversions of Maglev, please.

*Types and number of Civs

Falls under customizability - they can ship with sixteen in the box, as long as I can add a reasonable number (infinite/1024 being reasonable limits) and have them in one game.

*Wonders (type / number / what)

One type and lots of them.

Urban Ranger · June 27, 2000, 03:05

I am very surprised to find out that nobody here other than me cares about shifting the focus to the civilization itself instead of as a collection of cities.

You are all very weird

Tiberius · June 27, 2000, 03:42

You only said "Shift from a city-centric style to a civ-centric style" but you didn't explain yourself what a "civ-centric style" means for you.

yin26 · June 27, 2000, 03:43

Urban Ranger,

I'm with you. I often think it would be cool if after a certain number of cities the entire interface and game-style switches to a macro-level, "big decision" effort. So you go through all the city stuff for a while (which is fun for a few hours but then becomes tedious) and then get "promoted" to a higher-level. I mean, the President doesn't go around pulling workers and making them entertainers, does he? He should be working on intricate foreign policy, domestic economy, elections, war plans, etc.

Alas, this would make Civ3 two games in one, which Sid has forever decided will not happen again (The "Covert Action Rule"). Still, I think it could be done to great effect and might help cure ICS along the way.
[This message has been edited by yin26 (edited June 27, 2000).]

June 27, 2000, 18:59

and the thread became a poll for one more time

final results
[This message has been edited by MarkG (edited October 30, 2000).]

Tiberius · June 28, 2000, 00:34

We can choose ONLY ONE, Markos

?
For God's sake, I want to pick at least 3!
Otherwise .... nice poll

[This message has been edited by Tiberius (edited June 28, 2000).]

Urban Ranger · June 28, 2000, 01:43

quote:

Originally posted by Tiberius on 06-27-2000 03:42 AM
You only said "Shift from a city-centric style to a civ-centric style" but you didn't explain yourself what a "civ-centric style" means for you.

I thought it was obvious, maybe not.

Right now, Civ/Civ2/SMAC/CtP/ToT/etc. play like a collection of city-states. There is no need for a central government, and nobody notices if it goes missing. All you need is a capital and nothing more. There is absolutely no polling of resources -- caravans is a poor substitution -- no national policies, nothing. Every city for its own.

There are many things that must be done to fix this serious flaw:

1. Stockpiling of resources is allowed. If you don't need to use shields up, they can be stored just like food.

2. Building wonders and military units should come from the national stockpile, not the city one.

3. Have separate build queues for national items and city items (mainly improvements).

4. Military units supported on a national level. Use money instead of shields for support.

5. Espionage done on a national level.

6. Research done on a national level. That is, funding of research facilities should come from the civ's own coffers.

7. Military units operating away from the civ's territory under certain political systems no longer cause unhappiness in specific, i.e., home, cities. They cause a general drop across the entire national

A lot more should be done to integrate cities into a civilization.

UltraSonix · June 28, 2000, 01:43

Nooooo - what's wrong with me! The voting thing doesn't want to work for me - in Netscape 4.73 the option button don't even come up, and in IE 5.01 clicking the vote doesn't do anything!

(I was just going through the source code of the page and there were 2 /form tags but no form tags - could that be the problem?)

So I'll vote here
1.)Diplomacy

With AI a very, very close second.

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...
[This message has been edited by UltraSonix (edited June 28, 2000).]

Urban Ranger · June 28, 2000, 01:45

Markos,

The voting script seems to have, er, foobared. It doesn't work when I try to click on the fields to enter info.

UltraSonix · June 28, 2000, 01:51

The idea of a civ-centric style is good, but I not sure the civ3 needs to change a winning formula...

Anyway the voting doesn't work I think it could but the lack of form tags or something.

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...

June 28, 2000, 01:59

darn, I had forgoten something in the code I pasted, and the form didnt work
ok, fixed now

in the future I hope to have the ability to make multiple choice polls...

Urban Ranger · June 28, 2000, 02:08

Markos,

What does it mean when the script asked me to enter a valid username?

Could I jump up and down on it?

Urban Ranger · June 28, 2000, 02:11

Nevermind. It seems to be a random hiccup.

Grier · June 28, 2000, 02:15

My 2pence worth are:
trade/economics - World trade should make the world go round, just like in real life. In civ2 you could quite hapily ignore trading altogeather without any major setbacks. A civ that doesnt trade with other civs should be a poor one destined to faliure.

realistic civ growth model - large civs should fracture after giving large benefit in the short-term, thereby making it beneficial to grow your empire but preventing ICS. One form of beneft from distant colonies would be a large trade boost whilst under your control and possible friendly relations after they have split from your empire.

MidKnight Lament · June 29, 2000, 10:01

Just for the books, the voting worked fine for me. And yeah multiple voting would be nice, but otherwise, top work. You're always trying to improve things, aren't you MarkG?

- MKL

June 29, 2000, 10:52

quote:

Originally posted by MidKnight Lament on 06-29-2000 10:01 AM
You're always trying to improve things, aren't you MarkG?

that goes without saying