Would you like a fifth era?

Adagio · May 16, 2002, 12:19

I just read this thread, and thought why not make a poll of it, to see how many people actually would like an fifth era, and in that case which era!

For me that would be: add as many eras as possible, since I love games taking a lot of time to finnish

EDIT: Forgot the option: "I would like another era, but some other one as listed"...Sorry!

TheBigTurkey · May 16, 2002, 19:27

I voted Rennaisance, but I really would like a dark ages era, because many new ideas came to light then (Not from Europe, however). Things from the Middle East, like Chemistry (Al-Kamii, I believe) and Algebra (Al-Jabir) came about during this time. I'd say the time frame is about 350-1100 (all CE), when the strongest civs were the Byzantines, Muslims, and Chinese. This would be cool, though.

Cyclotron · May 16, 2002, 20:57

IMO, the ancient age is a bit rushed... iron-age swordsmen right before middle age pikemen seems too fast. I would like some other ancient and late iron-age units in there.

Down with future techs!

civman2000 · May 16, 2002, 22:21

no that would be too fundamental a change. however the ability to add extra eras should be given

TheBigTurkey · May 16, 2002, 22:22

Quote:

Originally posted by cyclotron7
IMO, the ancient age is a bit rushed... iron-age swordsmen right before middle age pikemen seems too fast. I would like some other ancient and late iron-age units in there.

Down with future techs!

I agree with both assessments. I don't like future techs.

Tuberski · May 16, 2002, 23:13

Actually, adding an era in the middle of the game would probably bring the timeline in closer with real life.

asleepathewheel · May 17, 2002, 00:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Tuberski
Actually, adding an era in the middle of the game would probably bring the timeline in closer with real life.

adding a new middle age adding 30 techs or whatever would be great. However, either the lower difficulties would have to be tweaked for faster advances, or the new age just not in the game, since it seems that people on the lower levels can't play out the game in time. Indeed, if I played chieftain right now, I don't know if I would make it to the modern era before 1950, since the AI would be retarded. On the upper levels, say regeant and up, this would be fine, as the AI can actually compete for, if not surpass the human in research.

But regardless, woudl love more techs, more units, more turns, etc. need a lot more turns if there are going to be more units, as there has to be time to get the advance and put out the units. Not like SMAX where every couple of turns you would get an advance and never see some of the possible weapons in action.

Jethro83 · May 17, 2002, 05:11

Should be the option to add as many eras, techs, units, etc. as you want. Let each individual decide on what kinds of eras and techtrees they want.

The Viceroy · May 17, 2002, 06:16

It would be nice to see a future era, or a colonial era .. but my experiences with CTP have made me worry about future techs .. don't want some official era with chessy units and silly unthought through science advances .. (I do like to return to the original BIC file once Ive worn a mod out)

So , I decided .. leave it to us to decide .. give us the era's to edit/add .. and im pretty certain, somebody will put a lot of thought into it, and make a spanking excellent mod.

Shame we don't have multiple maps like in TOT .. as you could even go for multiple planets ..

ahenobarb · May 17, 2002, 15:29

A future era would just be retarded! A bunch of stupid sci-fi "wouldn't it be cool if" junk.

There are already significant gaps in the previous eras -- fill them in. Ancient era? Was there an ancient era in my game? It flew right by! Despite the fact that 70% of human history played out in the "ancient era".

Zoid · May 17, 2002, 18:26

Gotta go with ahenobarb on this one. Fix the gaps in the previous eras first.

asleepathewheel · May 17, 2002, 18:26

Quote:

Originally posted by The Viceroy
Shame we don't have multiple maps like in TOT .. as you could even go for multiple planets ..

yes

moomin · May 17, 2002, 18:28

I want the future eras, myself. Hoplites are boring. Bring on the Imperial Stormtroopers.

Darkworld Ark · May 17, 2002, 19:52

Hmm... How powerful are these "Banana Infanty"?

Zoid · May 18, 2002, 08:21

Pretty good, the shoot banana peels so the enemy slips on them. Even an Anti-tank spearman can´t fight lying flat on his back. Besides it looks darn funny

Playa del Carmen · May 18, 2002, 08:52

I would either want them to an ancient/Reniassance age or not change anything at all.
I REALLY dislike future ages. If I'd wanted to play a future age, I would've played SMAC.

DarkCloud · May 19, 2002, 13:58

Renaissance/Colonial would seem to be the most interesting of the eras, as ancient units would be fairly weak and would take a long time to move between the civilizations.

as for the future era- CTP's future units were, for the most part, fairly bad. SMAC's units were better, but I'll back Playa del Carmen's response on that end.

Inverse Icarus · May 19, 2002, 17:13

colonial.

Jethro83 · May 19, 2002, 19:34

I was recently watching a documentary on the Stone age. It pretty much shot most stereotypes of our ancestors that far back right out the window. Our stone age ancestors were actually our intellectual and social equals, and not the primitive lifeforms we attribute to that era.

After watching this documentary, I've found the Stone Age to be quite an interesting era, and IMHO it would be a good addition to Civ III.

Mr. President · May 19, 2002, 19:39

See, the thing about a fifth era is that there's the risk of it overlapping with Alpha Centauri. If that were the case, it would be stupid.

There's not a lot of science in the Stone Age, is there? Fire? Clothing? Pointy sticks? Intellectually, Stone Age man was little different from Bronze Age man, but there was a very large technological gap.

zulu9812 · May 19, 2002, 20:41

My major gripe with Civ3 is that it only goes up to modern day. So, yes, I'd want a future era. Call To Power II had it, but I guess Infogrames don't like using Activision's good ideas.

Jethro83 · May 20, 2002, 02:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr. President
See, the thing about a fifth era is that there's the risk of it overlapping with Alpha Centauri. If that were the case, it would be stupid.

You're maybe right. But I was thinking that there be a future era and its techs and units, completely unrelated to Alpha Centauri. I want to storm through an enemy city with a bunch of missile and laser-toting mechs dammit!

Quote:

There's not a lot of science in the Stone Age, is there? Fire? Clothing? Pointy sticks? Intellectually, Stone Age man was little different from Bronze Age man, but there was a very large technological gap.

The stone age doesn't have to be an era that allows significant technological research. I was thinking of it as an era for early expansion, so that when the ancient era begins, you and your enemies have a strong base with which to play the rest of the game. But then again, a bunch of stone age cities with names we use today sounds a little odd. But so what!

August Borms · May 20, 2002, 06:11

Certainly NOT a future era.

Lucilla · May 20, 2002, 07:37

I wouldn't mind a future era, but rather than playing it on Alpha Centauri, I'd prefer it to take place on Earth. Building submarine cities or satelite stations is more realistic.

Concerning a new era in the middle of the game:
IMO, putting in some more tech advances in the existing eras might be sufficient. Having more optional advances would also give the game more variety in research paths. I hate it, when I have to discover, that the AI follows the same research path, but is just that little bit faster than I am. That doesn't leave enough opportunities for trading techs.

zulu9812 · May 20, 2002, 11:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Lucilla
Having more optional advances would also give the game more variety in research paths.

YES! That would give rise to more varied civs, rather than the linear progression we have right now.

godinex · May 20, 2002, 12:00

What if We need is a Day, Month, Year calendar for the new mods and the editor. Let us select what unit of time we want for the game!
Imagine WWII Mod with a calendar of Days! Will be really cool!

*Clart* · May 20, 2002, 12:11

i think there definatly should be a future era.but it shouldnt be the first priority. this dark age you guys speek of sounds cool.

Cookie Monster · May 20, 2002, 13:47

I voted for having a prehistoric era since Civ has traditionally been a game based on history up to modern times. It wouldn't make sense to have a futuristic era given this fact.

I enjoyed CTP series because it had the future built into it. Activision didn't intend their product to be based solely on transpired history.

So as a true diehard Civ'er I say keep it pure and if they're gonna add another era let it be something based on actual history!

Adagio · May 20, 2002, 13:53

Just had an idea about making the "age" system different (attached picture). Here I have tried to make one ancient age (The one everybody has), two medival ages, three industrial ages and four modern times. E.g. if you "invent" medieval times 1, you can't "invent" modern age three and four!

Each different age number has something special, e.g. some wonders other ages might not have, or better planes, stronger tanks, etc.

To get to a certain age number, you need to have invented certain techs before other techs, e.g. if you invent money making techs as first priority, then your next age will contain more money making techs!

Hope you get my idea. It was just a thought on how to make the inventing area a little more different, since it's now just there, not much difference between the civs...

Lucilla · May 20, 2002, 15:59

Quote:

Originally posted by ADG
Just had an idea about making the "age" system different (attached picture). Here I have tried to make one ancient age (The one everybody has), two medival ages, three industrial ages and four modern times. E.g. if you "invent" medieval times 1, you can't "invent" modern age three and four!

That idea sounds interesting. But would that mean that one civ follows one path and the other a different one (a little bit like parallel universes for the trekkies amongst us), or should the development then be the same for each civ, once a crucial tech has been researched?