What part of Civ3 needs the most improvement in a patch?

[korn469]

This builds upon the thread that jt started yesterday, although unlike him I am working from the assumption that at least one part of civ3 is flawed and needs improvement in a patch ASAP.

Besides just voting, tell me why the option you voted for needs improvement, and if possible try to offer a solution that firaxis could easily implement.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Korn they should employ you

by the way I would choose the editor, if this was a question. But I am not sure, I would take something that cannot be edited. And air and naval units spring to my mind. It would be good to get a choice and the ability to kill other types of units with them if you want to enable that for yourself in a game, and if they do that option make this ability to enable full kills from bombards a unit property, so you can still keep a few units that can only bombard to 1 HP and some air/naval that can totally kill like air fighters/ cruise missiles and similar. Plus a toggle that can enable/ disable this for the whole group. (air/naval/ ground bombard units).

*off-topic*
On the note of bombarding air bombers should hit every unit in a city when they bombard and take a few HP's of each of them. But that is for anoter topic. the strike rate would be bombard streengt /#units in a city. / end off topic


for the game I chose make more HP's default, and sort out the long animation thing.

[TinCow]

I picked the "other" option. The thing that annoys me the most is the AIs total disregard for cultural boundaries. I'll accept their ridiculously fast settler spread and their city building on useless terrain spots, but at least let me have my borders secure from rampaging settlers trying to populate that one square that culture hasn't expanded to yet.

[AJ Corp. The FAIR]

I've voted for the tech acceleration too fast,

but, if possible, also would have voted for

many of the balancing combat solutions mentioned by others on various threads being programmed into next patch.

Could be easily accomplished by Firaxis?

Tech acceleration and corruption settings can also be easily edited as suggested by many well thought posts here (ApolytonCiv3) around ... !?

AJ

[Arrian]

I voted for tech trading/speed of advancement, but I also think that the AI self-destruct syndrome (nationalism + communism + 40 turns of unhappiness per rush) needs tweaking. I guess communism should be beefed up a little. Maybe Monarchy too.

-Arrian

[korn469]

hehe i was going to make it where you could select multiple choices, but then i realized that probably every choice would get the same amount of votes

i've heard alot of complaints, but i would like to see what maybe the top three or four problems are right now

[AJ Corp. The FAIR]

Originally posted by korn469
hehe i was going to make it where you could select multiple choices, but then i realized that probably every choice would get the same amount of votes

i've heard alot of complaints, but i would like to see what maybe the top three or four problems are right now

The victory conditions you mentioned in the poll don't bother me at all.

The other ... !!!

AJ

[Solver]

Should be multichoice. If so, I'd say nukes and easy Diplo victory. Thus, I say nukes (vote). I saw a couple of very nice suggestions here on the forums, and nuke weakness is my biggest complain with Civ 3, as it is now.

Korn: you're lovely!

[korn469]

Korn: you're lovely!

ummm solver, i'm not that kind of guy
i knew what you meant and i'm just joking around with you

___________________________________

anyways i think all of the things mentioned above are areas that firaxis could improve on, and hopefully quality feedback like this will help them out

[BillChin]

Everything in the poll looks like a reasonable candidate. However, I believe that patch 1.17f focused almost entirely on such micro issues and has gotten a thumbs down in the fun department.

That is what I want to see, a focus on the big picture. The big picture is that Civ III is a game. Games are supposed to be fun. When looking at possible changes ask these questions:
Does it make the game more fun or more frustrating?
Does it give the player more options or fewer options?
More choice in play styles or fewer?
Does it make the game too easy (less fun)?

My wish list includes:
fixing the pop rushing loophole (one turn delay after joining before rushing)
making navies useful (add piracy rules, increase movement for modern units)
minor adjustments to corruption to give a player more options
minor adjustments to tech trading for game balance on higher difficulties

But, again these are micro issues and I believe that if Firaxis focuses on the big picture instead of micro issues, the next patch will be more fun than the current version. Something that 50% of fans do not believe is true about 1.17 vs. 1.16 (Civfanatics poll).

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showth...ight=1.16+poll

[Immortal Khan]

I voted for the last "other" option. It's mainly about the AI. It's just plain dumb. Building cities in locations that can't grow above 2, (I can see if there might be a resource in the vicinity, but not just put a city any place there is land outside cultural boundaries) AND the AI attacks for no reason, breaks treaties, alliances, as if it's not held responsible for it's heinous acts by the international community. There are other AI stupid acts, too, which have been covered in other posts.

[player1]

In order or priority:

1) lower pop rush penalities to 20 turns, and make AI better in those situations.

2) chage tech. devalutaion rules

3) balance out some units (and bombardment)

4) all other

[chiefpaco]

I voted for the tech pacing. Even pre-1.17, the game speed tech-wise just doesn't feel right to me (but it's certainly worse now). I'm not crazy about the insta-share & how fast the ancient age goes or how the modern age tech tree looks.

As for the rest, these are others I could've voted for (the others, either I disagree, or aren't a problem to me):
- AI poprushing penalties
- Naval units are underpowered
- Armies aren't as useful as they should be
- Space race is a bit too easy
- Diplomatic isn't complicated enough for my taste (I like the UN suggestion thread)

[SpencerH]

There are so many things to fix its impossible to pick one from the few in the poll. I'll appreciate anything, but if they give us a much better editor we can fix it or add complexity ourselves. Given the talent here, I think we'd have a better game available very quickly. Of course then we'd have to decide who's mod to use as the default for tournament or MP(?).

[planetfall]

Mentioned ideas many times in other posts,
{poll should have allowed multiple choices} but the key items keep on reoccuring.

1. Allow editor to increase range of air units beyond 8 tiles.
Why--ship movement is too slow {for fun not realism}. Fun play has BS, destroyers moving 6,7,8 tile range. Unreal for planes to be limited to same range as expanded ship movement.

2. Change Manhattan project to small wonder
Why-- Nukes have been around for a long time, and all nations still don't have nuke technology. It is good 9/11 was not a tactical nuke.

3. Fix technology devaluation
Why-- give another option, i.e. self fund tech development. Present only method is either aggressive trading or aggressing buying of techs. Can't play game where develop own techs, you just get further and further behind.

4. Add Editor "scenario option"
Why-- An editor option to set different levels for AI trading, similar to changing preference for barbarian activity would add a whole new dimension to the game. Some could play with no trading, each AI must build own techs to full trading as in 1.17 where AI's aggressively trade techs.

5. Add World grid references
Why--Then besides goto with arrow, could just enter a reference, i.e. AC123. Use references like spreadsheets, letters for columns and numbers for rows.

6. Encourage megacities
Why-- if city workable area floated with size there would be more incentive to build megacities than a string of small towns. Something like this would be nice: workable area level 1, 9 tiles, level 2 size=21 tiles, level 3 size=37 {one more ring}, etc. Naturally if this is created, we need a prefence to toggle city workable area on play map, instead of having to double click on city. Cool would be a bold line of the civ color giving current city workable area size.

7. Encourage Modern Era culture wars
Why-- allow another dimension where players don't want to go for either warmonger or leave junk on earth and go to alpha centarii. How about 8 new wonders included ability to generate special leaders who then can be used to encourage city flipping?

8. Remove 50 gold limit on interest
Why--penalized for not being a high spender. What if don't what high military force count and want to use interest to offset corruption and for reserve rushing if some civ makes the mistake of attacking?

9. Encourage learning how to play
Why-- game has too high of a learning curve for new players. In Editor allow an option, "mentoring", to allow player to see what the AI civs do. Computer chess games have helps and hints. Advisors "advice" tends to be too bogus. With mentoring mode we all could learn quicker what changes we need to make in play styles to keep the game fun.

10. Expand play history learning tools
Why-- again learning curve is too high. Besides playback, allow playback to a file so we can play better next time. Or even better would be an option to print F8 screen to a file. I have developed the habit of recording for each turn:
my civ score:
closest civ score:
next closest civ score:
approval percent:
approval ranking
literacy percent:
literacy ranking:
land military unit count:
air military unit count:
sea military unit count:
productivity percent:
productivity ranking:
my civ score change difference:
closest civ score change difference:

This is a great aid in seeing when I am slipping behind before I get mashed by another civ. If I see I am still falling behind, I know I have to try a new tactic.

Unfortunately, currently with the high AI tech trading and tech devaluation, the reward for developing a high literacy rate is small.
Even better would be an option to show line graph and table of numbers of this data on F8 screen. But that might be more than just a patch.




11. Build in mod pack
Why-- rather than force users to learn how to mod, allow 4 user created units:
special leader
land unit
sea unit
air unit
graphic could be fuzzy image of ship, plane, hummer.

12. Show turn # and % of game time elapsed
Why-- took forever with a variable year to turn ratio, to figure out where I was in terms of game time.

13. Regular Vender Q&A
Why-- too many worry wart commenters on forum. A separate topic of the month with answers and firaxis answer with questions from 5 current forum posters would both give us all real information instead of wild theories and would be an opportunity for firaxis to develop more excitement over playing the game.

Think this is probably enough. How many times have we all posted something and hoped, crossed our fingers and prayed that our concerns would be heard by the firaxis gods?

[Ninot]

Just a quick post on the combat system, and why it needs its fixing

look at it this way. (lets hope some of you have seen the video). A Palestinian with what looked to me like an AK-47 was shooting at an Israeli tank from... i dunno, looked like a wall made into debris...

He fires off a few rounds, and turns to take cover. Next thing ya see is debris flying, and he has dissapeared. The tank used its main gun to obliterate the guy.

Now, if thats a reprisentation of Tank Vs. Infantry, just think how WRONG it would be if the guy had a pointy stick. He wouldnt have been able to poke the tank twice before dissapearing into a red smear.

Realistically, a civilization defending itself with anything less than modern techniques and equipment almost never wins in battle, nevermind a war. The AI should be taught to always upgrade troops, and the combat system should be fixed so that if a unit is modern, and its opposing unit isn't, the modern unit should win 19 times out of 20, or more.

[Wittlich]

There is another serious problem that I have specified in the thread

:

Multiplayer Support.

[Capt Dizle]

The new penalties from pop rushing and drafting makes the AI self-destruct

I don't know how to fix this and I don't care as long as they come up with something and then TEST IT!!!!

Let them hold the patch till its right.

I am totally thrilled that almost all of the options had some votes. This shows that there are real issues and that people care about the game and seeing some improvement.

Great thread. Good to see it hasn't grown into a flame war. Excellant work Korn and all contributors.

jt

[Capt Dizle]

Oh, wait. I have to mention something. Unit movement is still a big problem and still a major cause of tedium. We need some improvement here.

Some of these have been mentioned many times. Unloading armies. All units of a type move, even fortified and sentries. Bad. Workers of different nationality have to be moved separately. Bad.

We need a command to wake all. Group bombard is absolutely needed in the worst way. I still don't see why you can't modify the army to allow the formation of a true stack for movement (and preserve individual combat).

I need to be able to designate a stack of units and move them as one. How hard can that be?

Surely Firaxis can understand that I don't want to have to move 22 cavalry one at a time. Unless this is fixed people are not going to continue to play the game. Period.

We need to be able to bind units together. Having a j command that will move all of a certain kind of unit is not going to cut it.

[korn469]

We need to be able to bind units together.

like a command group in starcraft (or most other RTS games) where you can bind a certain group of units to a key (in starcraft it is the 1-0 keys) and then simply hitting one of those keys brings up the selected units

[Roy H Smith]

Grow that Tech Tree.

More Tech = More Options = More Fun

How hard can that be?

1. Advanced Agriculture (Irrigate those Hills)
2. Demolitions (Blow up Mountains!)

[notyoueither]

I voted *There is another serious problem that I have specified in the thread*

Here's why.

It's the Aircraftcan'tsinkships/Shipscan'tshootback/Techprogressestooquicklybecauseitistoocheap/Editordoesntallowciv
placement/Imannoyedthattheprgramwontreallymakemycomputerdowi ndows/Wheresthecureforcancerirl/worldpeacewouldbegoodtoo/Cantyoumakethefinnsspeakareallanguage/Wheres
mylockthisthreadbuttonminghasonewhydonti/andlegionsshouldhavetheeffectsofnuclearweaponsbeca useisaidso/AndlastbutnotleastIcantmakethisdamnboardbreakwindo wsproperly
bug that really gets me.

Spell check that!

Salve

[The Thinker]

Originally posted by Immortal Khan
I voted for the last "other" option. It's mainly about the AI. It's just plain dumb.

Totally. The AI doesn't play smart, it plays dumb and cheats. That's why the new pop rushing rules are a problem, 'cause the AI cannot evaluate the new rules. That's why the editor is so narrow, 'cause the AI cannot keep up with any changes. That's why players seek a multiplayer version, 'cause they want foes who are hard to beat but are playing by the same rules. It's also why people might complain about how easy it is to win under one victory condition or another, 'cause if you are ahead by mid-game when late game arrives you can almost choose your victory.

And I don't really understand why this is. Seems to me the AI could micromanage far beyond what I do and have a real advantage.

So my vote would be for a smarter honest AI followed by a good editor.

Rik

[GePap]

Better diplomatic options would greatly increase the possible straategies for players.

We need long term, defensive alliences ala every other TBS game to return. We need a 'stop war against' button, a way to frame someone else (to stir trouble) and better diplomatic A.I. (not asking for it to be better in all areas, just diplo). A major imporvement in Diplo would mean a massive improvement in the game.

[Pius Popprasch]

Many of your problems can be solved by modding. Just insert the parameters of your choice!
I voted for the Communism but in fact I would like improved bombard units, improved beyond the possibilities of the editor.
The game needs many fixes.

[Martinus Magnificus]

My improvements would include:
- a more realistic corruption system, so it actually makes sense to capture enemy cities (IMO corruption should mostly affect tax income, and to a much lesser extend shield production)
- a more realistic AI city sprawl (I really HATE to see the AI settle that last unoccupied tundra square in my borders)
- a more realistic combat system where spearmen can't beat tanks, period
- a more realistic tech progress
- a diplomacy screen where the advisor tells you instantly what deal would be acceptable (for example "I believe 100 gold for silk would be acceptable, sire")
- more diplomacy options, like "give unit X to civ Y" and "demand that civ X makes peace with civ Y" and border negotiating
- a real UN, that gives diplomatic options like peacekeeping missions
- more realistic culture flipping (I really HATE this system of deposing cities, where your stack of 10+ units vanishes in thin air)
- more usefull bombard, naval and air units
- more satisfying victory screens ("you've achieved a domination victory" is just way to lame)
- a smarter AI that doesn't build wonders during wartime, doesn't refuse to negotiate peace when suffering terrible losses, doesn't send settlers to every free square, doesn't give away crucial techs for free, doesn't... and so on

But I realize it's probably not going to happen in the next patch (nor in any patch actually), so I'll just wait for MoO3 or RoN instead...

[Grumbold]

Massively overhaul the editor so that players can make their own scenario rules, find out which ones actually do balance out best after extended gameplay testing then make those the standard settings.

[=DrJambo=]

AI self-destructing is a must to fix, i'm sick of seeing a plethora of 1 pop AI cities once the AI enters a war under Communism.

Only way to fix this at present, is to put the pop-rushing penalties down to 3-4 turns for each.

One way they could fix this in future patches, is to make the pop-rushing penalties under despotism much more severe than they are under Communism, thus eliminating the despot-rush, but not crippling the AI under Communism.

[Carver]

Originally posted by Ninot

look at it this way. (lets hope some of you have seen the video). A Palestinian with what looked to me like an AK-47 was shooting at an Israeli tank from... i dunno, looked like a wall made into debris...

He fires off a few rounds, and turns to take cover. Next thing ya see is debris flying, and he has dissapeared. The tank used its main gun to obliterate the guy.

I've seen the video of the oppresive occupation. But what if that dude had a portable anti-tank missle (the kind the Palestinians were trying to import into Gaza a few weeks back) like a Stagger or a TOW... the outcome may have been different. Or look at the bombs the Palestinians plant in the road to destroy those Isreali Merkava tanks, they work. So a dude, or a bunch of dudes, always has a chance. The spearmen still deserve their shot at a tank.

[lockstep]

I voted for armies, with tech trading coming in second.

BTW, both the costs and the disposability of armies can be corrected by using the editor. What can't be corrected is the fact that the moment you load units onto an army, you not only gain something (the pooling of hitpoints, which makes armies very useful for defense), but also lose quite a lot (the ability to attack at least once per unit). Adding the blitz ability to armies in v1.17f somewhat alleviated this problem, but an army of knights is still pointless.