it's here: 1.21F PATCH DETAILS - Page 6

BeBro · April 17, 2002, 20:18

Next time you tell us Markos forgot to post the included MP option...

However, the details for the new patch sound good

TheEmerged · April 17, 2002, 20:19

Okay, the possibility exists that I'm missing something, but as I run it through the "issues I care about" checker... I'm just not impressed.

1>

Incomplete information about prospect of creating specific starting locations in editor

2>

No mention of mini-map in editor

3>

No mention of flat map creation

4>

No mention of ability to increase/decrease availability of resources

5>

Insufficient corruption fixes -- fixing on the back end instead of the front end

6>

No mention of correction for corruption problems on huge maps

7>

No mention of ability to put starting units on the map in editor

Bottom Line: Chance that this patch will result in Civ3 being reinstalled in my computer is negligible.

Email me when they get around to fixing the game

Unregistered · April 17, 2002, 20:23

Tanks guys!!!!!

New, good stuff!

exeter0 · April 17, 2002, 20:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike Breitkreutz FIRAXIS
After checking the posted readme, it seems we forgot something:

Wow what an encore!

PulsarIx · April 17, 2002, 20:45

Quote:

Note that you can set a player's civ to be 'Any' so that you can change it within the game.

If i save a game playing with romans, and then load it choosing another civ, does the roman turn get saved? If it does, this could lead to civ2-like MP hotseat with a simple script. Anyone knows?

PatLasch · April 17, 2002, 20:50

The bic file will be in the saved game, thereofre no switching civs mid game, though if hotseat were an option, maybe a real alliance would be possible. especially if I wanted to play two civs. hopefully it would be a real alliance.

ixnay · April 17, 2002, 21:06

Looks like we'll have the basics for a scenario editor: Customizing civs and setting start conditions and units. Nice update!

ALPHA WOLF 64 · April 17, 2002, 21:24

I see that culturally linked starts are now the norm. Who decided that America and India should always start next to each other? Or am I just unlucky? i get a perverse enjoyment out of nucing the Indians after they bought my employer and laid off all the American workers, so I dont want them too close so early. It just makes me happy to hit all those Indian cities with dozens of ICBMs each. Plus thats a cool ground shaking effect

Tuberski · April 17, 2002, 21:43

You can still change it, it's in the game setup screen instead of under preferences.

Steve Clark · April 17, 2002, 21:57

In the meantime, those of us that desires to create and play true scenarios will have to wait some more. I guess I can appreciate them continuing to tweak the regular game and the modders wanting to continue to alter the regular game, but none of these efforts can make true Civ2-like scenario.

Master Marcus · April 17, 2002, 22:00

Will the AI be more aggressive again, the way like the two previous patches have rendered it more aggressive? And research speed, I didn't read any precise answer yet about the AI tech-trading which allow everybody to enter Industrial age by 1000-1200 AD in 1.17 games instead of 1300+ AD before. I just simply can't imagine entering Industrial by 800 AD and having nukes by 1500 AD this time.

MOHonor · April 17, 2002, 22:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Steve Clark
In the meantime, those of us that desires to create and play true scenarios will have to wait some more. I guess I can appreciate them continuing to tweak the regular game and the modders wanting to continue to alter the regular game, but none of these efforts can make true Civ2-like scenario.

Cope. Learn C++.

Shadowlord · April 17, 2002, 22:11

It sounds like they sure got a lot accomplished. And I look forward to more.

For those of you that are complaining they haven't put enough in yet, I ask you this:

Would you prefer they added half of what they are planning, and got it tested and released, so you had half of it to play with while they worked on the rest, or that they didn't release any patches at all until they were completely done fixing the game, hm?

Shadowlord · April 17, 2002, 22:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Marcus
I just simply can't imagine entering Industrial by 800 AD and having nukes by 1500 AD this time.

Eh, I did that all the time in Civ II.

Martock · April 17, 2002, 22:47

i don't suppose there's any chance of ever getting the abililty to upgrade units that are already loaded into an army. i mean this is something that should be an option to those of us who'd like to do so.

please at the least allow this to be an option we can turn off or on.

Amesjustin · April 17, 2002, 23:22

As far as gameplay is concerned, Civ 3 is the best yet. As far as Scenario/Mod making is concerned, it is the worst yet, although this patch will help significantly. Here a few things I would LOVE to see:

1. Mini-map - this is ESSENTIAL. I have gone back to Civ2 because of this. This alone is worth more than this last patch. Add it and I will return to Civ 3.

2. Event Editor (like Civ2 Gold) - not essential, but I LOVE it! Really lets you customize the game. Helped inspire me to be a programmer...

3. Unique Terrain/Landmarks (Like SMAC/X) - Adds more variety to the game.

4. Random Events - Earthquakes, Major volcaninc eruptions, meteor strikes, Christina Aguilera..... gotta love it!

5. Date editing ability - necessary for time-specific scenarios. Also would like to be able to extend gameplay to last forever.....

6. Ability to add unlimited techs/buildings/units. At least let us increase them substancially.....

7. The ability to add negative defense bonuses for certain terrain (in Civ 2 you could do this)

8. At least 3 levels of mines/roads/farms - like CTP 1/2.

9. Oceanic cities/farming/mining.

10. Starting locations/units would be nice, too, but sometimes I LIKE not knowing where I will start. Necessary for 'true-to-life' scenarios though.

11. A dino mod. I know it will never happen, but I loved the Civ2 dino mod and was really looking forward to Sid's ill-fated dino game...

There are more, but I forget...

Look, I love the genre, I love Firaxis, and this game plays very well. But as a previous poster said, this game should have at least included everything civ2 had and at least some of what SMAC had. Civ 2 gold had the best scenario making tools of all the other games out there. And I still prefer it.

This patch is a step in the right direction, but there is alot more to go. Heck, I would gladly shell out $40 to buy an add-on pack that just includes the changes above. So if you don't want to waste time and money on releasing patches, make an add-on. As it is, Civ 3 is an awesome incomplete game.

-Justin

Civfan · April 17, 2002, 23:44

Damn this new patch comes out in perfect timing. I finish my exams today and have the entire weekend to load a new game up. Wheres my CD? Oh yeah next to the trash bin in my room.

Cheers to the Civ team.

Nero Would · April 17, 2002, 23:55

Quote:

* Updated water unit movement to take into account the cost of the terrain type.

It looks like this let's you get closer to creating a "flat map", or at least a map with no wrap-around. You can set the movement cost for Ocean to 1000 and use Ocean to prevent wrap-around.

Kilroy_Alpha · April 18, 2002, 00:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Nero Would

It looks like this let's you get closer to creating a "flat map", or at least a map with no wrap-around. You can set the movement cost for Ocean to 1000 and use Ocean to prevent wrap-around.

You could still go through the ocean one turn at a time. Plus, ships can toggle the "treat all terrain as road" option which would break your suggestion completely.

Nero Would · April 18, 2002, 00:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Kilroy_Alpha

You could still go through the ocean one turn at a time. Plus, ships can toggle the "treat all terrain as road" option which would break your suggestion completely.

Yes. I just realised that was a stupid suggestion, but you beat me to it.

Kilroy_Alpha · April 18, 2002, 00:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Shadowlord
It sounds like they sure got a lot accomplished. And I look forward to more.

For those of you that are complaining they haven't put enough in yet, I ask you this:

Would you prefer they added half of what they are planning, and got it tested and released, so you had half of it to play with while they worked on the rest, or that they didn't release any patches at all until they were completely done fixing the game, hm?

I would like to see Firaxis devoting more resources to maintaining their products. In the last chat is was revealed that they have only two programmers working full time on the game, and perhaps now they've pulled them off to work on the expansion or - god forbid - another game. I'm glad that they've finally decided to indulge us with a patch, but let's not forget what happened after they released the last one.

I'll wait and see.

Grrr · April 18, 2002, 00:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem

Just make some adjustments in the editor, it's easy to do. I believe you can even add some map size selections, if that actually works. I've never tried it myslf, I always play on the maximum size of 256 X 256. I'm glad to see that the maximum distance between civs has been increased. 32 was to close for that map size. Although 256 seems like overkill to me. 64 sounds about right though.

Well it depends on my mood. I am used to the civ 2 custom size dialog.

ALPHA WOLF 64 · April 18, 2002, 01:40

Kilroy,
Programmers arent cheap and I doubt these patches bring in much additional income. Personally, I'm thrilled that 2 programmers are still working on it. I'm a software developer, and if a client wants to add logic its gonna cost them.

foo12 · April 18, 2002, 01:41

Can a Firaxian comment on whether or not their associates at MacSoft are working on a 1.21f for the Mac release? The version number on the last Mac patch, 1.17g, quite honestly scares me if the "g" instead of the "f" indicates that it's the last patch. If so, we Mac users have been left without gameplay parity with the PC version not to mention a highly crash prone product. (1.17g and 1.17f crash constantly on OS X... 1.16f was far more stable.)

Spock · April 18, 2002, 01:48

Sounds like a nice patch for all the Modders...not much use for the rest of us.

Grrr · April 18, 2002, 01:55

To use mods...

Grrr · April 18, 2002, 01:55

Oops Double Post.

notyoueither · April 18, 2002, 02:38

Reduced Corruption further with buildings and WLTKD; ability to easily abandon a city; reduced AI tech trading (I assume); fixed the last Settler crash; fixed the Worker death squads bug; etc...

Nope, can't see much of use here to anyone who isn't modding...

I think it was well known that the editor would be the major focus of this patch (or the next). It is due.

What I'm happy about is the demonstration of support for the game on the part of Firaxis (and Infogrames I suppose). It must mean that the numbers are there and there will be a future for Civ3 through ongoing patches and Expansions. Can't see this as bad news. Although I guess I'm going to have to wait for an expansion to get Bofors for my Battleships.

What I really look forward to is the day when Yin and Lib come back here and ask the rest of us advice on how to play the game.

Naaahh. That'll never happen, they'll just play in the closet.

Hi Yin. Hi Lib.

Kilroy_Alpha · April 18, 2002, 02:57

Quote:

Originally posted by ALPHA WOLF 64
Kilroy,
Programmers arent cheap and I doubt these patches bring in much additional income. Personally, I'm thrilled that 2 programmers are still working on it. I'm a software developer, and if a client wants to add logic its gonna cost them.

Strictly speaking, patches bring in NO additional income, unless you make the customer pay for them. As I'm sure you know patches are usually intended to fix issues that the beta testers didn't find. Since there are no beta testers in this case, these patches represent the ongoing development of the game. Hopefully they'll finish soon.

Nemo · April 18, 2002, 03:06

Bugs from 1.17f:

I didnt see anything stating that the ability to sort the 'production' list in the 'domestic advisor' screen has been fixed.

Annoyances from previous versions:

Still no options to put Helicopters on Carriers (really annoying

)

Still no option to make nuclear weapons kill units in city (or is this covered under the new option for bombardment kill ability?)