What needs to be done to make this game great.

Dis · January 31, 2002, 00:39

we'll include realistic and unrealistic changes. Just label them as such.

all my ideas are unrealistic for Firaxis to implement except the pollution and corruption options.

wonder movies. I don't care if I turn them off. I want the respect I deserve for building them

real advisors. gives life to the game. cartoon figures don't do this

fp/hp: just kidding...kind of

options to adjust pollution and corruption to our liking. We shouldn't be forced to endure pain in the ass features because the designers felt we needed the challenge.

get rid of the french

yin26 · January 31, 2002, 00:49

Change the title to Civ 2.5 and release the True Civ3 sometime late this year?

General Ludd · January 31, 2002, 00:51

is a working, and accurate, world map.

notyoueither · January 31, 2002, 01:16

Group movement. Not attack, mind you. Just able to assign a number of units to a group. Select group. Assign movement goal. They all go towards that goal. Not as easy as some assume. What does one member of the group do when it encounters a trigger to stop for player input (like, Hey, there's an Aztec Warrior, we're at war with them ain't we? Better call this in.) Does the unit stay a part of the group? Does the whole group stop? Does...? ... Oh yeah, an imperative of this is that general orders are followed by all members of the group (ie clean this patch of pollution up, or Fortify for instance). In other words, it does away with the worker tedium many have noticed (me included).

Aircraft can sink ships, but ships from DD up can shoot down attacking Aircraft. It would be best if this was accompanied by the advent of Naval Attack Aircraft. Land Based Air should have penalties in attack against ships. Bombers? Forget it (big penalty). Fighters? They're OK (no penalty) but they don't have a big bombardment to begin with.

Group movement.

I second the easy access for users to adjust corruption (and pollution). I believe I have seen a Firaxian actually state that this was in the cards for corruption. Yeeeaahhh!

Group movement.

Ancient units auto upgrade to Militia at start of Industrial Era, regardless of presence of Barracks. Same strength as Spearmen, but it would stop the *Anti-Tank Spearmen* complaints.

Group movement.

Subs should have Precision Bombardment option against stacks of vessels (pick your target) but weak bombardment strength maybe.

Group movement.

A more complete editor for the more creative among us. I'm not one of them, but I would love to see what some of them could do with scenarios, new units, blah, blah, blah. Some of the most compelling reasons to continue to play Civ2 were the products of the fans. Would this increase sales? You betcha. In fact, it's almost a no-brainer. I personally do not require a Firaxian statement about this, I think that it is coming is a given.

Did I suggest group movement? Just thought I would in case Lib isn't paying attention.

Oh man, oh man, there are so many things and so few resources for the programmers to do them (I fear).

Still, good idea for a thread though.

Salve

yin26 · January 31, 2002, 01:36

I forgot one. Group movement. I had to say that because nobody else has.

Capt Dizle · January 31, 2002, 01:41

I really believe that the design team doesn't understand what makes a game fun so there is no hope of greatness with them involved.

However. Group movement.

Is a very good idea.

It is a shame that Sid didn't get involved in this project. He would have accidently created more enjoyment in this game than most designers could make on purpose. But I know he is just tired of the series. That is understandable but so sad.

notyoueither · January 31, 2002, 01:41

Oh, and lack of resources should not doom a civ to failure.

The following would benefit the AI more than the player (I think).

There should be weaker versions of units that require a resource. If you don't have Oil, you should be able to build a Light Tank. Same shield cost as a Tank, but lower A/D rating and it costs 2 or 5 or 10 gold to initiate in production.

Likewise RR. You want to build RR in a square, but you don't have Iron? Pay 5 gold. No Coal? 5 more gold. No Iron or Coal? 10 gold.

Nations can always obtain needed materials, whether they have an agreement with some other government or not. About the only exception to this might be Uranium.

I would just be glad to never see the Longbowman regression ever again. You know how when you take your oppo's Oil and Salt Peter with your ModernArmour, you start to see Longbowmen showing up?

Salve

yin26 · January 31, 2002, 01:51

These days when I play SimGolf and find myself saying "Damn, Sid is so good he can make Sim+Golf actually pretty fun!" ... a tiny tear forms in my eyes in expression of the countless broken dreams discarded like so many fallen leaves at the corner of Civilization and Third.

(...sorry, wanted to see if I could make myself gag -- it worked! LOL!

)

notyoueither · January 31, 2002, 01:54

Did I mention group movement?

salve

Dis · January 31, 2002, 02:34

who in the hell wants group movement. yeah it would be nice. but fixing the game is more important

naval combat. there already is a thread on this. I don't expect all that stuff in naval combat. If I wanted extreme realism I would play Harpoon or a sub simulator. But naval combat in its present state is pathetic. And I want a dive bomber and torpedo bomber unit that can sink ships. Of course AEGIS ships and modern carriers have phalanx and sea sparrow launchers to virtually eliminate this threat. So the length of time those air units are useful are limited.

notyoueither · January 31, 2002, 02:36

Get rid of the French! After all, they're just Romans with a bad accent.

Salve

OneInTen · January 31, 2002, 02:47

Get rid of the Americans. After all they're just overweight, fast food gobbling brits.

yin26 · January 31, 2002, 02:58

Hey, buddy: Americans are overweight, fast food gobbling people from all over the world!

notyoueither · January 31, 2002, 03:16

Get rid of the Brits! After all, they're just Huns who dream of being Roman. And who have atrocious accents.

Salve

Archaetus · January 31, 2002, 03:25

Set a release date AFTER the game is finished.

Add an abandon city option.

Add more Civs.

Bring back real advisors. Why can't that military advisor ever keep his hat on?

Terraforming . . . even if just a future tech.

Kill those #$@! workers.

WolverineD12 · January 31, 2002, 04:06

I'd like to see the bombarding option kill military units when done on a city, or in a field or something. Just cause they got a gun and some training doesn't make them invulnerable!

Dis · January 31, 2002, 04:24

I would kill to hear my favourite line from the general. "we are doing great sir, and we have you to thank for it"

Yes I clicked on the advisors just to hear that.

Dry · January 31, 2002, 06:29

Scenarii.

Just give us scenarii. This whole game is just perfect for scenarii. Struggle for resources and UUs especially (Why the hell should a WW2 German try to rush for the Caucasus?) But also culture in a lesser extend (I am still unsure on how can be used in a scenario).
And I was about to forget the possiblity of 16 civs!!!
All this great, great, great... for scenarii!!!!!

I start to get bored by the game already (scenario is +/- always the same), so get us scenarii, pleeeeeaze.

Be Quicker · January 31, 2002, 06:33

-adjust the speedbump techs

-include movies for all victory condition (only a pop up ZUIGT!)

-make swordman/longbow upgradable

-implement score bonusses for a peaceful win

-remove most small annoying bugs

-include a couple of fun scenarios

-improve the modern age

DrFell · January 31, 2002, 09:35

I'd like the to do a few things to offer more strategic options in the game. Like scrapping the ages system, making monarchy a useful government, toning down despotism, add a way of rushing wonders perhaps, tone down corruption and make governments/buildings have a more pronounced effect on it, making techs slightly cheaper on the whole and removing the minimum tech cap, and perhaps a few other things I've forgotten right now.

Zachriel · January 31, 2002, 09:45

Put the CD in the computer and click "start game".

warmachine · January 31, 2002, 10:28

1. Combined units instead of armies, including combined attack. Leaders would enhance combat - not reaslistic as it requires a game mechanic overhaul.

2. Espionage missions must be cheaper - realistic.

3. Food trading, both national and interntional - realistic.

4. Resource quantities, rather than counts. A resource site produces an amount that only supplies a limited number of cities/builds a limited number of units per turn. A single oil well may not supply your entire empire - realistic.

5. Airbases - realistic.

6. Sharing space, including citie squares, with a foreign unit that has right of passage - unrealistic as there are problems with attacking multi-nation occupied squares.

7. Animations or symbols for aircraft on standing CAP and recon missions - realistic.

FrantzX · January 31, 2002, 12:52

SMAC/X only had one victory movie, for transcendence. I don't remember any complaints about the lack of movies for economic, conquest, or diplomatic victory. I don't think Civ II had any, but I might be wrong. Civ III doesn't need any.

Mark_Everson · January 31, 2002, 13:14

Quote:

Originally posted by warmachine
4. Resource quantities, rather than counts. A resource site produces an amount that only supplies a limited number of cities/builds a limited number of units per turn. A single oil well may not supply your entire empire - realistic.

Hey warmachine:

Coding this might be not too tough, but the AI would require a Major overhaul to handle it... There are expansion direction, military conquest and diplomacy ramifications each of which are moderately complicated. Good luck on them listening!

Azrikam · January 31, 2002, 13:14

-Speed the game up
-Fix crippling corruption
-No more Culture Flipping
-Bring back Wonder Movies
-Bring back Spies!
-Bring back Terraforming
-More Winnable Strategic Options
-Scenarios
-Scenario Editing Tools

Hey, wait a minute.

This is all in Civ II. Nevermind, I think I just saved myself 50 bucks.

Hehehehe...

Encomium · January 31, 2002, 21:48

Quote:

Originally posted by yin26
Change the title to Civ 2.5 and release the True Civ3 sometime late this year?

Yea, if only.

Maybe Firaxis can tell us this under-developed, non-playtested, over-hyped disappointment of a game was just their BETA test version. Everyone can now send in their discs and have the REAL game sent to them with all the problems and bugs worked out!!

If only.

Firaxis, here's to you:

nato · January 31, 2002, 22:24

Very broadly, the game needs less boring decisions and more fun decisions in the late game.

More specific things I'd like, both possible and impossible, as the original post asked:

* No culture flipping to a civ while you are at war with it (possible)
* Failing the above, double or triple the power of military units to prevent culture flip to a civ while you are at war with it (possible)
* Group movement (possible ... hopefully)
* Group combat like CTP (impossible)
* An ability to tell more than one artillery at a time to fire, to save tedium on bombard stacks (possible maybe, don't know)
* No workers except for building roads, and terrain improvements tied to techs (impossible)
* Failing the above, improved worker automation (possible)
* Pollution cleaning changed, or at least improve worker automation to clean it efficiently (possible)
* A "Stop Growing" button for cities to stop the starvation-growth cycle, or some other fix for this (possible)
* Improved governors (possible)
* Easier to work with, more adaptable city build queues (possible)
* Lower clearing time for jungles, to make those start areas more feasible (possible)
* Banana or Gems to also help out jungles (possible)
* Submarines to be able to do some sort of economic damage to coastal cities, to represent commerce raiding (possible)
* The ability to send excess food and shields from one city to another ... REALLY love to have this (impossible)

I'm sure there are plenty more, but of course desires are unlimited. Just a few key ones of these would push Civ3 over the top to greatness I think.

Thanks for reading.

WolverineD12 · January 31, 2002, 23:05

Oh! The ability to be able to turn off and on the Retirement at 2050. That pisses me off sometimes.

Encomium · January 31, 2002, 23:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Azrikam
-Speed the game up
-Fix crippling corruption
-No more Culture Flipping
-Bring back Wonder Movies
-Bring back Spies!
-Bring back Terraforming
-More Winnable Strategic Options
-Scenarios
-Scenario Editing Tools

Hey, wait a minute.

This is all in Civ II. Nevermind, I think I just saved myself 50 bucks.

Hehehehe...

And $12.95 for the Strategy Guide!!

Are you getting an INTENSE DESIRE to fire up Civ II like I am?

I have about fifteen scenarios I haven't played yet. Back to Civ II for a while.

Ogie Oglethorpe · February 1, 2002, 11:08

Completely new look at the combat model. Combined arms and combat resolution similar to MOO2. Allow option for either tactical resolution of combat or strategic ala the current combat resoution method.

Something other than a great leader to allow rush of wonders. All GL's do is favor the warmongerer. CIV3 has now been doomed or destined depending on your outlook to be a warmongering game as GL's become key to setting a new FP, building wonders etc. Fact is GL's might be a great idea if they could be generated from something other than combat. Think I read somewhere perhaps by Vel of a concept like a great artist/engineer/scientist etc. generated from something other than combat results. Afterall if it wasn't for Michealangelo or DaVinci, we wouldn't have Sistine Chapel or Leonardo's GW's (no Attilla the Hun or Ulysses S Grant would have built them). So to summarize, Gl's should be broken into two functions and two units Great Generals that allow builds of armies and perhaps increase expereince and/or movement of all units within the army but not wonders and Great Artisans that allow builds of Wonders etc.

Oh and about 35th down the list I guess you could look at group movement.

Og