Why don't we get the flexible unit system à la SMAC? - Page 2

Grumbold · February 15, 2001, 07:09

I agree. Civ and Civ II have been on my PC for years and the only scenario I have ever played is Earth (on a variety of maps.) 95% of my games are random starts. Any mod tools that take place outside of the main game will be nice for scenario builders but are not part of the core game.

Ferdi · February 15, 2001, 07:49

quote:

A lousy scenario builder like myself or possibly many other people just don't have time and patience to build well customised scenarios for satisfcatory result. That's why I prefer to see Firaxis put more weight on the main game

I STRONGLY AGREE!!!

Yog-Sothoth · February 15, 2001, 12:05

quote:

Originally posted by Youngsun on 02-15-2001 12:25 AM
I see this very reasonable but what makes me so sad is why Firaxis decided to sacrifice the main game in favour of scenario building.

I see the scenario tools/customization as a vital part of the "main" game, not some add-on. A lot of people love to play scenario's, and with all the great scenario builders out there it would be disasterious not to include this in Civ3. I don't think there is any sacrifice in including this in the game, as I am confident that Sid will not release a game that's not perfect

quote:

I hope Firaxis open its eyes and put more effort to the main game then the need to create scenario will be reduced if not disappeared.

Hmm, not sure how you manage to come to this conclusion. I really enjoy playing WW2 scenario's, how do you propose I will get to play something like that in the "main" game.

Roman · February 15, 2001, 12:07

I for one mostly play scenarios, though I also like the main game. I dissagree that a unit workshop would make the main game stronger, though.

Ralf · February 15, 2001, 16:10

quote:

Originally posted by Youngsun on 02-15-2001 12:25 AM
I hope Firaxis open its eyes and put more effort to the main game then the need to create scenario will be reduced if not disappeared. I'm not saying scenario builder should not be in civIII but just expressing my opinion that the main game should be counted first.

Infact, it is really the other way around:

A stronger more user-friendly scenario-building tool really make it possible for the Firaxis-team to concentrate their efforts more on important core-elements in the main-game instead.
Thanks to the scenario-tool; they dont have to waste time on implementing SciFi- and Fantasy-stuff in the main-game (like the developers did in the badly selling & badly reviewed TOT, by the way). They can leave that stuff to addon scenario-packs instead.

Above, and many more ideas is really best implemented in scenarios. I think however that Firaxis should make scenario-playing in Civ-3 a lot more feedback-friendly, then it actually was in Civ-2.
Information on new scenario-units (including any special abilities), new city-improvements & Wonders, new terrain-types and new techs (including allowed building-objects and other effects) should be much better and more quickly available (preferably within ONE context-sensitive right-click/doubleclick) in Civ-3 scenarios, then it was in Civ-2 scenarios.

Roman · February 15, 2001, 18:04

A very insightful post, Ralf.

February 15, 2001, 21:03

Although I am disappointed in DAN's response... I can live with it... this is because they said they COULDN'T implement an advanced "unit workshop", not that they WOULDN'T... I find this a reasonable reason for civ3, but as games improve I will EXPECT a full-feature unit workshop in civ4.

But I will ask firaxis to make sure that the units included within the game are diverse as possible... not just linear improvements, but real diversity.

Youngsun · February 16, 2001, 01:42

Ahaha!

Some people just never get it! Did I say scenario editing tools have to be weakned or disappeared? Infact I love to see them in the game(surprise?!)Though I'm a bad scenario builder, I want to build my own scenarios once in a while you know. But there are some people out there with "You Die I live" kind of attitude while the majority of people have "Let's Live Together!" kind of attitude.

Cyclotron · February 16, 2001, 01:45

DanM: "You will absolutely be able to create your own units. You will have the flexibility to do practically anything you want with them: you can give them whatever tech prereqs you want, name them whatever you want, fiddle with their abilities, and *lots* more.

Does anyone else actually understand this? Myself, I haven't the foggiest notion of what this means. So... does this mean I can choose to have paratroopers require only iron working? I can make a phalanx x2 vs. air units? Does all this go for your scenario builder, or the game itself? How could you possibly hope to balance any of this if its all up to the whims of the players? Does anybody out there get this post, and if they do, could they enlighten me!?!?

------------------
"Any shred of compassion left in me was snuffed out forever when they cast me into the flames..."
- Marsil, called the Pretender

Sarxis · February 16, 2001, 02:58

We don't need to be able to design our own units- what are you going to make with a workshop? Harrier jets that have silksteel armor? Knights that wield sub-machine guns? Let's stick with the historical units, but let's get a bigger list of them.

The reason the workshop worked so well in AC/X was because we weren't dealing with historical units.

Grumbold · February 16, 2001, 08:03

quote:

Originally posted by cyclotron7 on 02-16-2001 12:45 AM
Does anyone else actually understand this? Myself, I haven't the foggiest notion of what this means. So... does this mean I can choose to have paratroopers require only iron working? I can make a phalanx x2 vs. air units? Does all this go for your scenario builder, or the game itself? How could you possibly hope to balance any of this if its all up to the whims of the players? Does anybody out there get this post, and if they do, could they enlighten me!?!?

I think its like any other product. They provide it as fit for its intended use. If you then do the equivalent of add a dozen chrome wing mirrors and put bicycle wheels on your car, then its not their fault when it doesn't corner properly and gets you laughed at! They balance the vanilla game, produce an AI that does its best to win under all circumstances and some documentation on the customisation tools. You are responsible for making sure you don't make any mistakes with your customisation. If you produce a valid unit that the AI does not understand how to handle properly, they have a problem. If you produce a unit that just unbalances gameplay its your fault.

Dan Magaha FIRAXIS · February 16, 2001, 11:26

quote:

Originally posted by cyclotron7 on 02-16-2001 12:45 AM
DanM: "You will absolutely be able to create your own units. You will have the flexibility to do practically anything you want with them: you can give them whatever tech prereqs you want, name them whatever you want, fiddle with their abilities, and *lots* more.

Does anyone else actually understand this? Myself, I haven't the foggiest notion of what this means. So... does this mean I can choose to have paratroopers require only iron working? I can make a phalanx x2 vs. air units? Does all this go for your scenario builder, or the game itself? How could you possibly hope to balance any of this if its all up to the whims of the players? Does anybody out there get this post, and if they do, could they enlighten me!?!?

There will be tools to let you tweak the units, from simple skill adjustments to graphical representation. These tools can be used to create a full-blown scenario, or they can be used to just tweak the game to your liking.

Dan
Firaxis Games, Inc.

Roman · February 16, 2001, 11:59

quote:

Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS on 02-16-2001 10:26 AM

There will be tools to let you tweak the units, from simple skill adjustments to graphical representation. These tools can be used to create a full-blown scenario, or they can be used to just tweak the game to your liking.

Dan
Firaxis Games, Inc.

Thank you Dan, this is exactly what most of us understood from your previous posts.

Roman · February 16, 2001, 12:03

PS.
When can we expect a site update?

Cyclotron · February 16, 2001, 21:33

quote:

Originally posted by Roman on 02-16-2001 10:59 AM
Thank you Dan, this is exactly what most of us understood from your previous posts.

Ecchh... "most of us"... this post is so devoid of detail I still don't know anything more about Civ3... Is this because you haven't made any of this yet, and this is just "some thinkin'", or is this a new sales strategy? I for one would like some more concrete details, if at all possible...

------------------
"Any shred of compassion left in me was snuffed out forever when they cast me into the flames..."
- Marsil, called the Pretender

Yog-Sothoth · February 16, 2001, 21:41

I think it's detailed enough, give these people a break. I think it's great that Firaxis have this continous dialog with us. We should appreciate this, not just demand more and more.
[This message has been edited by Yog-Sothoth (edited February 16, 2001).]

young newbie forever · February 18, 2001, 11:59

I agree with yog. im gratefull to be heering from them.
by the way when will the site get updated?

Theben · February 18, 2001, 14:25

quote:

Originally posted by cyclotron7 on 02-16-2001 08:33 PM
Ecchh... "most of us"... this post is so devoid of detail I still don't know anything more about Civ3...

It would appear that Dan is saying Civ3 will allow players to tweak the game from image files & .txt files, but that it will all be 'out of game'. Like civ2.

He's hinted that there may be something else to tweak with but he hasn't said what it is yet...

GaryGuanine · February 20, 2001, 04:34

Chaos Warrior, what does "basta" mean?

Gary

Theben · February 20, 2001, 05:36

In Italian it means "enough". Not clear if that's what he meant from context though.