Civ III Site Updated - Page 2

java4me · May 12, 2001, 01:35

It was a great update to the site, the photos are great and the reasource layout looks great!!!

Anyways, keep up the great work Firaxis!!!

bagdar · May 12, 2001, 02:06

WHAT IS THIS, EVERYTHING I HOPED FOR!!!

THANKS!!!!

whenisitout?whenisitout?whenisitout?whenisitout?wh enisitout?

Stefu · May 12, 2001, 03:24

*drooldrooldrooldrooldrooldrooldrooldrooldrooldroo l*

Love the way resources are coming up to be. Those buggers could actually work, I tell you, work! And special units might also not be as bad as first suspected. Still hoping that religion would be in, but it's a long shot, I guess

If not religion, then at least bit more formed enemy cultures - for instance, allow me to decide if my state tolerates their existence or tries to actively throw them our.

One quibble. One thing I never liked in CtP was that there wasn't enough "buildable land". To me, "buildable land" is something you plop your cities in, and it means grassland, in emergency plains are also fine. Looking at screenshots, I'm beginning to wonder if land type allocation is more like in CtP, which I didn't like, than in Civ2, which I liked. Will there be huge swatches of grassland for me to colonize?

Mahdimael · May 12, 2001, 03:40

Hey all..this is my first post, though I've read the boards for many months. After looking at the new update, I was thinking: perhaps the resources dictate what specific units you get? For instance, if I have 3 iron, I can make upgraded Legions, or if I have 2 oil and 2 iron I can make F-16's? Perhaps it's also dependent on civilization, so the latter is only applicable if I'm the Americans?

Just a thought...

Ralf · May 12, 2001, 04:37

quote:

Originally posted by Stefu on 05-12-2001 03:24 AM
One quibble. One thing I never liked in CtP was that there wasn't enough "buildable land". To me, "buildable land" is something you plop your cities in, and it means grassland, in emergency plains are also fine. Looking at screenshots, I'm beginning to wonder if land type allocation is more like in CtP, which I didn't like, than in Civ2, which I liked. Will there be huge swatches of grassland for me to colonize?

Good point! Although I dont think above problem was that apparent in the screenshots. Anyway; NO huge continental-sized areas of "non-buildable" terrain-types. Grasslands and plains should be the base, while terrain-types like jungle, swamp, hills, mountains should be proportionally and carefully sprinkled on top of that - not just layed out in enormous monotone country- or in extreme cases: even continental-sized chunks. Yes, I know about the Amazones, but country/continental chunks of it should be avoided anyway, for gameplay reasons.
Forrests and deserts is a middle-ground terrain-type in this respect. Glaciers and tundras preferbly mostly near the poles. Avoid mixing glacier and tundra side by side with desert and jungle.

Finally, In the Civ-2; mountains and hills seemed to occupie an increasingly over-proportial part of the map, the smaller mapsize you choosed to play on. On standard- and huge-sized map there was no problem. Should be fixed in Civ-3.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited May 12, 2001).]

Nikolai · May 12, 2001, 05:27

This update is fabulous!! Thank you Dan!
But one thing I would like to know: Will the colonies be able to grow till they are a new city, or will we have to build a city with a settler or wait till the borders grow? If the colony is far away, it would be difficult, if not say impossible to just wait till the border is huge enough!

------------------
Who am I? What am I? Do we need Civ? Well....

Ralf · May 12, 2001, 06:21

quote:

Originally posted by Nikolai on 05-12-2001 05:27 AM
But one thing I would like to know: Will the colonies be able to grow till they are a new city, or will we have to build a city with a settler or wait till the borders grow? If the colony is far away, it would be difficult, if not say impossible to just wait till the border is huge enough!

I dont believe that colonies can grow into to cities. And therefore they can never produce any "hardware" by themselves. They are merely city-area coverage-extensions - no more, no less. And thats good enough, I think. Also, they dont have to be swallowed up later by your growing borders - its enough that they are road-connected with your city through out the game.

One thing Im curious about: How many city-area tiles can a huge end-game city harvest resources from? Any max-limits? In Civ-2 we had the fixed 1-20 surrounding squares, depending how large that city currently was.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited May 12, 2001).]

kolpo · May 12, 2001, 06:45

quote:

Now that we have iron, we can build fearsome Roman Legions, which are the special unit of the Romans.

Grrr I hate unique civs

The romans didn't had good legions because some God has said that all who will be called Romans will get good legions BUT they have good legions because they spend much in military, train there troops very well, know a lot about tactics,...

BeBro · May 12, 2001, 06:56

GREAT Update, keep up the excellent work!

The ressource ideas are very good (especially that the player has to defend its ressources/colonies), gfx are fine, and I see no problem with unique civs/units.

Someone an idea about the borders? What indicate them exactly? Can units of other civs walk through them, as long as you have peace, or not?

------------------
Civ2000 hosted by CivII Universum

Ralf · May 12, 2001, 07:11

quote:

Originally posted by BeBro on 05-12-2001 06:56 AM
The ressource ideas are very good (especially that the player has to defend its ressources/colonies), gfx are fine, and I see no problem with unique civs/units.

I just hope that they follow this up by tweaking weaker (but still aggressive) AI-civs to concentrate much more on pillagin instead of fruitless HP citywall-banging. They can do much more damage this way. This forces the HP to have counteracting units stationed within strategically placed fortresses in order to intercept, making fortresses much more important then they where in Civ-2.

Cyberbugs · May 12, 2001, 08:30

Just making a brief statement about the graphics, I think the city view looks great, but I really think the scenario map needs some more work.

Keep up the good work!

Sava · May 12, 2001, 10:56

Can somebody clarify something for me? Are colonies going to be different from cities in Civ3? If so, borders should be similarly set up as in the 16th century. European nations claimed huge parcels of land while their colonies were quite small. A colony's Zone of Control was much different from the claimed land. Is this what we are discussing?
[This message has been edited by SoulAssassin (edited May 12, 2001).]

java4me · May 12, 2001, 13:03

I think that you could connect the colonies overseas by a harbor!!! But that is only a guess! And I also had the same question on what you do with resources in the sea that are out of your city limits!

Either way Firaxis is working hard on the game, and the game is looking very good!!!

Pedrun · May 12, 2001, 13:24

I really hope not Sirotnikov. No overseas colonies are going to be a major mistake in this concept.

Pedrun · May 12, 2001, 13:58

Unless they are considering that to make overseas cololonies we need to have a city around from where the roads spread. That makes sense because european colonies used to have a Capital where there was habors that sent the products to the colonizers.

Theben · May 12, 2001, 15:39

quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov on 05-12-2001 12:27 PM
Colonies must be connected with road to one's city. So does it means no colonies overseas?? And how about resources that are found in the sea (like whales)?

I assume overseas colonies will require a port in the receiving city, and that the colony is assumed to have a port. Inland colonies will require a road connected to the port colony.

Now all they need to do is specify what they're doing with espionage, let us know how customizable the game is (including # of civs), and go into detail about how combat will work- especially aerial combat & stacking.

Koyaanisqatsi · May 12, 2001, 15:57

Hmm.

Dan: If a colony requires a road to work, can you build your own road to a foreign colony, destroy their road, and steal the resource?

Also, they said that overseas colonies will work with harbors.

Oh, and to whichever Firaxian was responsible for getting the Pyramids right (white walled and gold capped) thank you!
[This message has been edited by Bell (edited May 12, 2001).]

Krypter · May 12, 2001, 16:35

I noticed that most of the flat land types had green and grey marks on them (to delineate production, ala civ2). But they don't look that great. Wouldn't it be better to simply say (in the manual) that plains produce I 1 shield, grassland 1shield+1food, and then have a special fertile (black earth?) symbol for those especially rich grasslands that produce 2 food?

It would make the map look nicer, cleaner, and less obviously tiled. The shield/food marks really throw the symmetry in your face.

I know, this is probably "test" landscape and the final will look much better. Just general griping.

Comrade Tribune · May 12, 2001, 16:54

The city view looks fine, but the map view... hmmm... I wonder how to put it. How about this: The map view does look a bit, err, weirdish, especially the greens and blues are slightly, err, disturbing, I mean, is this really, err, *OUR* world? Or is this slightly scifi-ish, fantasy-ish look intended to prepare us for the fact that the Greys will be included as a nation?

Just joking, but I really think the map colours should undergo some change toward the natural.

Imran Siddiqui · May 12, 2001, 17:03

You know, one of the best things in the shot was the iron that popped up when you discoved iron working. This will be cooler than I first imagined. Think, what you think is a worthless city, suddenly becomes the most powerful city in the world after oil is discovered there.

The resource system looks amazing!

And did anyone yet comment on the Legion? Special Unit of the Romans? I thought that was going to raise an uproar?

Comrade Tribune · May 12, 2001, 17:16

quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui on 05-12-2001 05:03 PM
You know, one of the best things in the shot was the iron that popped up when you discoved iron working. ...
And did anyone yet comment on the Legion? Special Unit of the Romans? I thought that was going to raise an uproar?

Not only an uproar, it might also raise gameplay issues. Will we find out that in every second game the Romans won´t have access to iron, so they won´t be able to build legions unless a kindly soul supplies them with iron to help them conquer the world?

Myronides · May 12, 2001, 17:28

Quote: As for colonies, the resources go to whoever builds a colony and connects it with a road first. Consequently, colonies become key while your borders are expanding, and if you leave them unguarded or weakly guarded, you will pay the price. Also, since colonies need to be connected to a city with roads, an enemy can destroy your roads and sever the connection to that resource.

These colonides look like a nice idea, the hole game does anyway. I didn't get it though: How does one build a colony? With a worker? With colonist? Wouldn't that be too expencive? Why should I build just a colony were I could build a city? Dan? Anyone?

Krypter · May 12, 2001, 17:37

quote:

These colonides look like a nice idea, the hole game does anyway. I didn't get it though: How does one build a colony? With a worker? With colonist? Wouldn't that be too expencive? Why should I build just a colony were I could build a city? Dan? Anyone?

Workers can build colonies as an action. It won't cost you population.
Cheaper and faster than building a city.

Ralf · May 12, 2001, 18:33

quote:

Originally posted by Simpson II on 05-12-2001 12:14 PM
You didn't play Smac, did you? That's exactly what they decided to make the AI do there. It would bring up a stack of 20-30 troops, then move them around pillaging while my bases were defended solely by 1-1-1 scout infantry. Very bad idea, the AI should attack when it has massed troops.

Well, obviously the AI must do reoccuring checkups on what types & quantitys of fortified units the HP-empire have, before it decides what strategy to follow. That goes without saying, dont you think.

Call it "AI cheating" or whatever, I dont care - the burden of inferior tactical overview still lays heavily on the AI anyway. Infact, I see it as an re-balancing 100% fair AI-benefit to at least give it free info-access about city-guarding HP-units (without spy-unit - only HP must use spy) - all in the name of overal better gameplay and AI-resistance

Besides; If the problem in Civ-2 spelled "blind" (fruitless) HP citywall-bashing, and the problem in SMAC spelled "blind" HP terrain-pillaging (still better) - wouldnt it then be a step forward to promote a suggestion that make the AI more "seeing" and "informed" in this respect?

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited May 12, 2001).]

The diplomat · May 12, 2001, 19:09

As I understand it, colonies are a new tile improvement that allows the player to access a resource outside the borders. So, colonies do not require pop, they are simply tile improvements.

------------------
No permanent enemies, no permanent friends.

Myronides · May 12, 2001, 19:46

OK! Makes sence.

May 12, 2001, 20:04

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Breitkreutz on 05-11-2001 07:43 PM
Programmer art, baby!

-MB

please welcome one more firaxian

Roman · May 12, 2001, 20:05

quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui on 05-12-2001 05:03 PM
You know, one of the best things in the shot was the iron that popped up when you discoved iron working. This will be cooler than I first imagined. Think, what you think is a worthless city, suddenly becomes the most powerful city in the world after oil is discovered there.

The resource system looks amazing!

I echo your sentiments.

Roman · May 12, 2001, 20:07

quote:

Originally posted by Ralf on 05-12-2001 06:33 PM
If the problem in Civ-2 spelled "blind" (fruitless) HP citywall-bashing, and the problem in SMAC spelled "blind" HP terrain-pillaging (still better) - wouldnt it then be a step forward to promote a suggestion that make the AI more "seeing" and "informed" in this respect?
[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited May 12, 2001).]

I agree, I have always said that the AI needs to cheat in these kinds of ways.

Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS · May 12, 2001, 21:37

Workers are increasingly becoming mobile "population points", and building colonies is one of their more spectacular abilities. Unlike terrain improvements, colonies consume the worker, much like a city consumes the settler. You don't get the worker back if your territory merges with the colony (the editors will probably allow this to be customized). Workers can also be merged with cities, captured if unattended, and even traded with your neighbors. In this game you need to defend your TERRITORY, not just your cities, or you will be swiftly punished. I find myself building hillside fortresses more in this game than Civ2/SMAC et al. One advanage of this terrain improvement is the zone of control it gives units normally without one (read: most ancient and middle ages units). But it's their ability to protect vital trade roads, colonies, and goods that makes them invaluable.

Jeff