Thread Tools
Old January 8, 2001, 15:26   #1
Stefu
Apolytoners Hall of Fame
Emperor
 
Stefu's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:40
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: CLOWNS WIT DA DOWNS 4 LIFE YO!
Posts: 5,301
Combat system in Civ3, as according to official website
Or "Stefu wants a sticky thread. Anyway...

quote:

"Sid's original Civilization was not intended to be a game about war. The design had combat of course, but it was simple, quick, and to the point, allowing players to pursue "peaceful means" of co-existing with other civs.

Needless to say, Civilization was most often played as a conquer-the-world game. So in Civilization II, we added a few details to the combat system to make it a little more interesting and "realistic."

In Civilization III, we continue to expand the combat system to make it a deeper part of the experience. Civilization III will have a combat system rich in fun choices that enhances the experience of planning and executing military campaigns. Here are just a few examples of how we are achieving this:

Great nations can produce gifted leaders from history, each one capable of leading your civilization to martial glory. Whether helming an army on a distant battlefield or passing their personal experiences onto future generations of soldiers, these towering figures can single-handedly alter the course of history.

Increased technological finesse can be found in Civilization III's reworked Zone of Control rules. No longer can a Phalanx hold a vulnerable pass as effectively as a mechanized infantry regiment. The ability to intervene in surrounding terrain is now determined by mobility and ranged weaponry, rather than the universal privilege of being just any military unit.

In CivIII, ranged weapons such as catapults, artillery and battleships can bombard enemy fortifications such as city walls and fortresses. This allows for a general 'softening' of defenses, which provides a substantial bonus to direct-fire units.


What can I say? Drooldrooldrooldrooldrooldrool...
Stefu is offline  
Old January 8, 2001, 15:41   #2
The diplomat
King
 
The diplomat's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:40
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Terre Haute, IN USA
Posts: 1,285
Looks great!

I just had an idea: what if the leader idea is one way to solve the "bigger always better" problem. A small civ might be able to get a leader that enhances his military enabling the small civ to fight a much larger civ.

Improving the zone of control is great news.
Also, the news about bombarding city walls sound fantastic as well. Hopefully, in civ3, we will be able to stack catapults with our legions to knock down walls in order to take an enemy city!

------------------
No permanent enemies, no permanent friends.
The diplomat is offline  
Old January 8, 2001, 15:57   #3
hHydro
Chieftain
 
Local Time: 00:40
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Vancouver, Canada,
Posts: 94
Interesting that they don't clarify what they mean by 'produce' a great leader.

I wonder.. Do they mean that you will be able to allocate resources, or create conditions to obtain these leaders, or do they simply men that all civs have a random chance at producing these leaders at key points in history?

Man.. Imagine the smile on my face when my previously mediocre Civ suddenly announces the rise to power of some guy named Napoleon..
hHydro is offline  
Old January 8, 2001, 18:32   #4
tniem
King
 
Local Time: 19:40
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Hope College
Posts: 2,232
quote:

Sid's original Civilization was not intended to be a game about war...

...Needless to say, Civilization was most often played as a conquer-the-world game. So in Civilization II, we added a few details to the combat system to make it a little more interesting and "realistic."

In Civilization III, we continue to expand the combat system to make it a deeper part of the experience.



I find it interesting that Firaxis acknowledges that while Sid did not expect Civ to be a conquer the world game, that it has become that and so Firaxis plans to add to that game type. I would have thought if Sid didn't want conquer the world that in this release he would be able to program it to have players be more peaceful.
tniem is offline  
Old January 8, 2001, 18:48   #5
Sparky
Warlord
 
Sparky's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:40
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: DC, Cleveland, Charlotte, Cimarron. Take your pick!
Posts: 196
Not that I don't approve of the military detail, but I'd like to see an equal amount of peaceful city-building detail, too. Not all of us are war mongers
Sparky is offline  
Old January 8, 2001, 19:18   #6
Sirotnikov
DiplomacyApolytoners Hall of FameCivilization III Democracy Game
Emperor
 
Sirotnikov's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:40
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 7,138
Well, whether you tried to conquer the world or not, you almost always needed large military forces to win / survive. I mean, once you launch that spaceship everybody are attacking you and you might as well attack them

Conquering the world is every child's dream. How can they deny that? Pax Romana is the best solution for all problems.

I just hope they won't ruin anything. I'm a bit suspicious of this "Leaders" thing. It might be a serious turn-off for me if it's something stupid.
Sirotnikov is offline  
Old January 8, 2001, 20:06   #7
The Kaiser
Chieftain
 
Local Time: 00:40
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stoke-on-Trent, England
Posts: 91
quote:

Originally posted by hHydro on 01-08-2001 02:57 PM
Interesting that they don't clarify what they mean by 'produce' a great leader.

I wonder.. Do they mean that you will be able to allocate resources, or create conditions to obtain these leaders, or do they simply men that all civs have a random chance at producing these leaders at key points in history?

Man.. Imagine the smile on my face when my previously mediocre Civ suddenly announces the rise to power of some guy named Napoleon..


Yes it would be nice if this feature could be Civ specific to add a bit of difference to the Civ's. Like if the British could only build Nelson to get a Sea Bonus on whichever ships carry him. Or the French could only build Napoleon and all cannon's have enhanced Bombard when they share a square with him. Just think of the possibilitie's:-

Germany,Rommel:Panzer unit bonus
Spanish,Charlton Heston(Oops)El Cid:Knight bonus
Egyptian,Seti:Chariot bonus
Mongols,Genghis Khan:Mounted Archer bonus

I could go on, but I will just add that if they are using the 7 stages of Veteran Status from SMAC, there could also be a general benefit of boosting the Experience level by 1 for all units on the same square.

And what if the leader get's captured, could he be ransomed in some way? If he get's killed can you build another and will it be the same character?

Whatever the answers, I think the feature will be a interesting addition.
The Kaiser is offline  
Old January 9, 2001, 00:26   #8
Theben
Deity
 
Theben's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:40
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Dance Dance for the Revolution!
Posts: 15,132
I like the idea of leaders, but the "towering figures" that "single-handedly alter the course of history" gives me pause. I don't want MOO2-like leaders whose abilities were way too powerful. Hopefully just minor bonuses. Even the greats screwed up a lot. Their enemies just screwed up more.
Theben is offline  
Old January 9, 2001, 00:51   #9
Alexander's Horse
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
"a combat system rich in fun choices"

LOL, the warmongers amongst us do actually see it like that


------------------
Chaos, panic and disorder - My work here is done.

Keep the OT sticky thread free!!
 
Old January 9, 2001, 06:23   #10
colossus
Warlord
 
Local Time: 00:40
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 141
'In CivIII, ranged weapons such as catapults, artillery and battleships can bombard enemy fortifications such as city walls and fortresses. This allows for a general 'softening' of defenses, which provides a substantial bonus to direct-fire units. '

It seems as if the city wall will have hit points so as to be gradually worn down.
colossus is offline  
Old January 9, 2001, 11:14   #11
Grumbold
Emperor
 
Grumbold's Avatar
 
Local Time: 01:40
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 3,732
I find the current information as interesting for what it does not say as what it does. Considering how slim the website is on detail it is not surprising we are squeezing the few words for maximum effect. There are always dangers involved in reading publicity material and trying to determine the actual game rules they describe. We already knew there were going to be leader pieces and bombardment as a concept has been used before. The zone of control idea is interesting but we need to see what they mean. In all times forts, castles and military emplacements have been used to provide effective ZoC's even when it is not possible to physically impede the progress of the enemy. Just saying certain unit types cannot cast a ZoC into certain terrain types will be missing the point. I hope I have missed theirs!
Grumbold is offline  
Old January 9, 2001, 16:52   #12
supremus
Chieftain
 
supremus's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:40
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 61
quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov on 01-08-2001 06:18 PM

Conquering the world is every child's dream. How can they deny that? Pax Romana is the best solution for all problems.

I just hope they won't ruin anything. I'm a bit suspicious of this "Leaders" thing. It might be a serious turn-off for me if it's something stupid.


Well, it seems a good new thing. Randomic leaders ? Humm.... I don't thik so! Maybe the leaders will appear along the gametime in according to some conditions that the player fills. Pax romana is always a possibility, but Civ2 offer lots of pacific strategies to increase your civilization strenght and I beleave Civ III will remain with this and improve it. But don't forget : Civ is a war game like the humankind history was and still is.

supremus is offline  
Old January 9, 2001, 22:26   #13
Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto
Prince
 
Local Time: 00:40
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, USA
Posts: 456
quote:

Originally posted by Sparky on 01-08-2001 05:48 PM
Not that I don't approve of the military detail, but I'd like to see an equal amount of peaceful city-building detail, too. Not all of us are war mongers


They didnt say there wouldnt be as much peace-stuff as combat in civ-3, they just said that they were expanding on the combat system, and makeing it much more realistic, larger, and hopefully funner.
Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto is offline  
Old January 9, 2001, 22:29   #14
Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto
Prince
 
Local Time: 00:40
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, USA
Posts: 456
quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov on 01-08-2001 06:18 PM
Well, whether you tried to conquer the world or not, you almost always needed large military forces to win / survive. I mean, once you launch that spaceship everybody are attacking you and you might as well attack them

Conquering the world is every child's dream. How can they deny that? Pax Romana is the best solution for all problems.

I just hope they won't ruin anything. I'm a bit suspicious of this "Leaders" thing. It might be a serious turn-off for me if it's something stupid.


Are you hitler? I dont want to conquer the world, cause then I'll have too much responsibility in running it.
Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto is offline  
Old January 10, 2001, 00:55   #15
N_A
Chieftain
 
N_A's Avatar
 
Local Time: 16:40
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Posts: 49
One of the things that has always bugged me about Civ is that all the units either die or they don't, no strategic retreat or anything. Civ 3 needs something like that. Civ 3 also needs customizable units just like SMAC did, and to that level of complexity too.
N_A is offline  
Old January 10, 2001, 14:59   #16
wernazuma
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
nja, no customizable units. it's fine with the number of predefined units they have in Civ2. Anyway, every a little bit skilled guy can make his own units in the txt and bmp files.

As for the leaders: i fear they will ahve to be "built" like wonders, what would be really bad. *horror*
nevertheless there also is a chance in introducing leaders. just three examples:
Civs that enter later in the game could automatically receive a leader (e.g. mongols get gengis khan) giving them a better starting.
if your empire falls to anarchy tokugawa may help you out.
if you make a change from monarchy to democracy (or republic), there could be a chance that you get a leader like napoleon (gov. goes back to monarchy), hitler (gov. turns to fashism).
when they die you can again chose your gov. freely.
 
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 20:40.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright © The Apolyton Team