Civ3 editing tools: what do *you* want to see

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

Okay Civ editing gurus:

I know this topic has been discussed ad nauseum in various threads before, but we want to get a handle on what the major points of importance are for you, the Civ editing community, so here goes.

1) Would you rather see an in-game editor, or an external editor (or combination of both), and why? Do you prefer standard Windows-based interfaces with standard types of controls (i.e., select/combo boxes, tree metaphors, etc.) or something more customized and specific to the game?

2) What types of functionality are you interested in seeing in a scenario / map editor? Be specific, e.g., "Cut and paste functions for map creation", "Drag and drop terrain tile placement" vs "Paintbrush-style interface", etc.

3) If possible, for each specific suggestion, reference existing game editors that do this well. So, for example, if you think the StarCraft Editor's handling of triggered events is exactly what you're looking for, mention that.

4) Try to qualify your suggestions as either a "must-have" function, a "would be nice" function, or a "in my dreams" function. We need to know what the most important features are to you, so that we can direct our efforts towards the features that most of you really think you'll need.

5) Examples of why something is or isn't desired are always helpful.

6) What would also be helpful is an idea of what kinds of scenarios, mods, or conversions you're interested in creating with these tools. It gives us a point of reference for thinking about how all this will have to be implemented to make those ideas happen.

We obviously can't guarantee that everything suggested will be implemented, but we realize that you will be the ones to use or not use the editing tools, so we want to make sure that we meet your needs.

Thanks!


Dan Magaha
Firaxis Games, Inc.

[Zer0_T0lerance]

Yes, I think we need an in-game editor for everything!

Specifically, the scenario editor in Civ2 is not very customisable. There are too many limitations which can keep you making a good scenario. I once tried to make a historically accurate Cold War scenario in Civ2 and couldn't do it because of the limitations. Also, the scenario editor in Civ2 is too hard to understand. I think that creating scenarios in Civ3 needs to be more intuitive and easier, ie., no more textbased editing--everything should done from within the game. Make it so easy that a baby could do it (point-and-click interface)! But don't make it so simple that you take away customisability; add more power to it! Complete on-line documentation on how to create scenarios is a must; there is just too much stuff that the book doesn't tell you about creating scenarios in Civ2.




------------------
Zero
[This message has been edited by Zero_Tolerance (edited November 20, 2000).]

glad to see someone noticed today's poll
i'm top-ing this thread and de-toping the threads about the polls(in order to not have too many threads on the top of the forum)


on the question, i'll quote myself

quote: with "editors for everything" i mean having tools (in the released thing, not after the release online) to make maps, scenarios, edit the text files, the unit sprites and the city/terrain graphics, everything and to be able to create a load-able mod in a few minutes

[Ralf]

PART ONE (more to come)

I would prefer an external combined cut-and-paste map/scenario-editor.

Why external? Because its to easy to cheat with an in-game editor - just one menu-click away. With an external editor you have to save > open external editor > load the game > do the cheating > save the changes > open the changed game with the main program again. Not impossible, but a little more prohibitive.

Why combined? Well, all "scenarios" dont have to be that advanced. Once im finished with the map, i might as well continue with a very basic setup:
cut-and-paste 2-3 cities on optimal starting-locations for each civ, and then adding some few basic tile-improvements. I want to be able to do that manually, so im sure that each civ gets a fair opening-chance.

Why cut-and-paste? Because its enormously time-saving and much more intuitive! I realize that once you dabble with changed graphics, rules, techs and so on, its unavoidable that things takes time.
But what if i only want to create a simple standard-rule scenario-setup? In Civ-2/SMAC one STILL had to painstakingly do everything civ-by-civ, and turn-by-turn, in a rather roundabout manner.

-------------- text edited, see my 2:nd post

In practice i did many attemps, but i NEVER finish any scenarious. I really wanted to, but it was it just too much exchausting work.

I want to load an finished (but empty settler-free) map; then drag-and-drop from a multi-paged palette all cities (in differant sizes/styles) for all civs on to that map.

Then above is done i want to be able to choose from a screen with connected dropdown-fields (combo-boxes?):
choose [city-improvement], then
choose [globally/specific civ], then
choose [all cities/1-3 sized/4-6-sized/7-9-sized...] and finally a "Generate" button.

Then i click on the units-tab, and then i basically do the same with the units:

choose [unit], then
choose [globally/specific civ], then
choose [all cities/1-3 sized/4-6-sized/7-9-sized...] and finally a "Generate" button to the right.

Then i click on the tile-improvement tab, an do the same with tile-improvements in city-areas (only):

choose [tile-improvement], then
choose [globally/specific civ], then
choose [all cities/1-3 sized/4-6-sized/7-9-sized...] and finally the "Generate" button.

Now, i have a rough layout here. We go back to that multi-paged palette i used for the city-sizes and styles. I can now click on the city-improvement tab, the unit-tab or the tile-improvement tab: then basically fine-tweak any city by copy-and-paste (or right-click delete) any improvement to any city, as simple as 1-2-3.

If i want to check the updated result in any city, i can doubleclick that city and up pops a scenario city-screen with the city-info.

Finally, i want to be able to tie the whole sack up, by adding...

- Civ-specific governments.
- Tie together trade-routes between civs.
- Setup basic diplomacy relations between civs.
- Anything more?

Other things like health, happiness, demograpics and advances in the tech-tree should be calculated automatically on the basis off all of above choices.

Thats basically it! (for the time being). All of above is of course must-haves.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited November 21, 2000).]

[Panda]

quote: In Civ-2/SMAC one STILL had to painstakingly do everything civ-by-civ, and then turn-by-turn - basically playing the whole scenario pre-history in slow-motion, before one finally came to the scenario point-of-today.

You did what?!

I agree scenario editing in civ2 was awkward because of the limited editors, but it wasn't that bad. The trouble is having a very easy to use, very simple editor with cut-and-paste functions, drop and drag (it would be brill if you could drag completed cities to different locations ) are not going to make scenario creation that much easier.

Basically I'd like the most comprehensive editor you can give us. Every factor that can be changed should be open to us to change/toggle. Why only allow cities to clear disorder/we love the King when you can't invoke those situations? Why allow shields to be edited, but not food? Gothmog did an excellent job of creating an external city information editor based on investigations into hacking the save game file which allows a fine job for this in Civ2. Especially with regards to trade routes. Actually I think I'd favour an external program for this kind of editing in the same way as we have a map editor to create maps.

Cut-and-paste functions would be vitally important in map creation. I don't think that point can be stressed quite enough. Also easy post-production editing of map dimensions, turning off resource flags, editing rivers in game, etc. It's difficult to advise when I don't know what you have in mind for the game. There was some cut and paste for civ2 city improvements (copy another cities improvements); whilst I doubt i'll make a scenario with 250+ cloned cities it would be useful to have the option there even if it was never used. This again argues in favour of an external program, which might be huge, but like the map editor, if you don't want you can simply delete it - thus saving valuable space.

To reiterate, the more comprehensive the better. Ease of use is IMO a secondary consideration to the effects. Just make sure whatever you make works as advertised.

Another must have is the freedom to edit any associations: don't hardcode so much. This is especially aggravating for tech slot functions and unit slot sound associations. Also unit slot functions as well, like no.9, no.10 and no.14 in Civ2 all have specific "functions".

The real handicap in scenario creation is working around the civ2 engine. Make it less obstructive.

Also programming: we have $STRINGs in the game.txt. It would be wonderful if we could change what they relate to.

Oh, and I like the text based information. I find it easy to locate and deal with. Again, more and more. Make AI strategies/goals more open to customization than just a simple expansionist/aggressive posture.

My vision for civ3 is that it is a game shell. The 4000BC to 2000AD game you produce will be one "scenario", rather than a game itself. Open it all up, and Civ3 will live forever. Why buy another TBS when you can make a Total Conversion for Civ3 into whatever you want.

Thanks for asking.

------------------
The Historical Civ2 Site
http://members.nbci.com/HistCiv2/index.htm

"The man who can smile when things go wrong has thought of someone he can blame it on" - anon

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed" - President Eisenhower

"Treaties are like roses and pretty girls: they last while they last." - Charles de Gaulle
[This message has been edited by Andrew Livings (edited November 20, 2000).]

[Seeker]

Dan: have you ever played Warlords II Deluxe? The scenario editor is a dream, it's simple, it's intuitive, and it's easy.

I would pay for a seperate scenario editor if it would give me more functionality.

[Captain Nemo]

I have a worry that easy, simple editors will lead to cookie-cutter scenarios without much "soul".

Many of the Civ2 scenario makers ended up building their own editors to address the shortcomings of the built-in Civ2 editors. For myself, in 6 years of scenario building, I never used any of the "editor" functions included with FW or MPGE. It was always easier to edit the files and graphics directly.

There are now map editors, city editors, game file editors etc. available for Civ2. I think that type of add-on tools is more effective than the lump-sum package that ends up having too many limitations.

I have to agree with Andrew that far too many things were hardcoded in Civ2 and has forced us to really rack our brains to get around some of the limitations. ToT is a step in the right direction with more capabilities in the events structure.

I would like to see ALL graphics stored in separate files that can be edited rather than built into a .exe or .dll file as many were in Civ2.
All unit/improvement/tech functions, if Civ3 uses the same type of structure as Civ2, should be stored in a tabular format... For example sounds, text pop-ups, effects etc. should NOT be hardcoded to specific techs, units, improvements.

The "events" need to have much more flexibility, including having internal parameters and flags that can be set or stored in the game. Events should have access to more of the game parameters: For example know WHERE a unit was killed and be able to use those coordinates in formulas and triggered events... Really would like the events file to be more of a VB program?

Maybe the biggest shortcoming of Civ2 is the AIs ineptitude. If this is improved in Civ3 I would like to have access to the AIs algorithms for how "He" uses units, schedules production and sets goals. That may be asking for too much but is probably the area where most improvement is needed.

[DarthVeda]

Ok, a (when was civ2 released?) 4? year veteran of scenario creation I have 10 scenarios under my belt with an eleventh (and probably my last for civ2) on the way (the last one has taken a year of work to produce).

Now the first and foremost thing that comes to my mind when I think of scenario creation is ease of use. While in-game editors are nice, they tend to, how shall I say "cramp the style" of some authors who would prefer to change the gameplay from civ-style to duke nukem. As Nemo said, we would end-up with "cookie cutter" scenarios as I felt SMAC was notorious for.

Civ2 sets the bar and maintains it for the necessity of easy access file formats. Test of Time is a model for the integration of sprite and bitmap technology. The player can override the sprites with a .bmp if necessary. It is vital that all game files dealing with text messages, unit/terrain/improvement statistics, unit graphics, be in a non-proprietary format (ie BMP, PNG, TGA, TXT, DOC, etc.)

They could be part of a larger bin file ala .wad and .pak files as long as all non-proprietary file formats have exploder/extractor programs for the authors to use.

For directional sprites, I cannot stress the necessity of being able to KISS (Keep it simple stupid). I do not have the time to draw 50,000 different unit facings and motions, nor do I have the hundred dollar rendering programs. 6 is to many, I would prefer one and more if I feel like it.

On to the next part... events

If I can turn civ into pac-man... you have it about right. (This is my dream scenario) I want absolute control of the game, I don't want there to be a SINGLE in-game action I can't duplicate, change, or control in some fashion. If I want to add new windows with new features, say, a whole new system for trading and remove the standard one, I'd want that. I know in the FPS games like Quake and Half-Life it is possible to modify .dll files and completely re-arrange the game. I would like this alot.

However, a happy medium would be a SLIC (see Ctp/Ctp2) like system with the option to create new triggers and actions based off class extensions (in C++, Java, whatever u guys are using) that the author can add in addition to default triggers and actions.

I agree with Nemo totally that the AI needs to be manipulated at a fundamental level so that the AI understands the "goals" and gameplay of an environment outside Normal civ.

Next... the map editor

The map editor has to be just that, no unit placement or such nonsense. A paintbrush style approach ala the civ2 mapeditor is preferable.

Next... the in-game editor

Civ2's only problem with the cheat menu was that it was excessively difficult to modify terrain at any kind of pace. It takes HOURS to place cities, improvements, etc. There needs to be a better way!

As for unit placement, the norm is acceptable.

Bringing it all together... what am I creating?

Well the obvious base for scenario design is World War II, ancient Rome, and WWIII scenarios. If the scenario engine can at least do these well, you're in the right direction.

However, there are some more interesting extensions. Say somebody wanted to create a colonization (the sid game) type scenario... that would require totally modifying some game aspects (especially trade).

Other scenarios are more RPG like in nature, it would be useful to have units that "evolve".

I would suggest the Civ3 team look at some more innovative/different civ2 scenarios like Red Front, Second Front, Shannara, Spartacus, my own Wing Commander scenario (yes it sucks, but I was limited by the dumb naval AI), Gang Wars, MicroProse's XCOM scenario, and there are a slew of other non-standard scenarios for civ2 that push the engine to its limits. (You can get the first three from http://csc.apolyton.net and my two you can get from my homepage at http://darthveda.tripod.com/scenarios.html) Civ2's main scenario design flaw was that most had to be conquest in nature and the authors were hard pressed to produce a scenario with other than a conquest victory.

O/T: Sorry about the advertising for my own scenarios, but I can't think of other non-standard scenarios I've played.

EDIT: I should also mention Mr. Temba's "Enemy of God" scenario in my non-usual category, along with the Pirate and Sacrificial Blood scenarios.
[This message has been edited by DarthVeda (edited November 20, 2000).]

[techumseh]

I'm not so concerned with how the editors work, but what can be edited. I want to echo Andrew and Nemo's comments about less hardcoding. Push as many of the determining factors forward into editable files as possible. They don't all have to be in "idiot-proof" editors, either. There are many active civers who are capable programmers, hex editors, etc. They will create modifications and make them available for the rest of us, if the game is set up for it.

a)Units. Make every type of unit capable of transporting every other type of unit, depending on how the settings are changed. For example, a ground unit should be able to transport air units, and an air unit should be able to transport ground units. Don't place any artificial limits. But do allow the player to place limits. For example, one type of naval unit can be set to carry A and B type of air units, but the next type of naval unit can be set to carry only B type air units, etc. The number of each type carried should be set by the player independently as well. This change would allow the development of better naval (& space) and tactical scenarios. Until now scenario designers have had to use great ingenuity to get around built-in limitations, eg. Nemo's use of paratrooping ships as gliders in "Second Front."

b)Terrain. Allow maximum flexibility here too. Create a series of codes to create different movement capabilities for units on various types of terrain. In ToT there is an override which can given to any type of unit for travelling on prohibited terrain. Why not 8 kinds of prohibited terrain, each with its own override, so any particular unit could move on all types, one type, five or seven? Allow more than one type of ocean terrain too. ToT missed out on being the perfect Star Wars platform by not allowing a zero M.F. for ocean (hyperspace) terrain.

c) Improvements. All the factors affected by improvements and wonders should be programmable, eg. increase in shield production, trade, happiness, etc. Wonders should not automatically be limited to only one per game. Many is the time I wished I could use Leonardo's Workshop for more than one civ - it's a fabulous scenario tool.

d) Combat. Why does the elimination of the strongest unit in a stack result in the elimination of the entire stack? Why not allow the entire stack to total it's defensive or offensive strength? Or the two strongest units, or three? Make these variable, depending on the terrain, or the tech.

e) Animations. These seem to be required nowadays. Many of us have just turned our ToT animations off, since the can't be modified. Please make them simple, modifiable and non-proprietary. You don't need some sort of studio-in-the-box editor, either. There are a few hard core players out there who will make new units, even if it's not easy, and distribute them for the rest of us.

[techumseh]

I forgot one thing. Everything should be modifiable in the scenario folder. ToT was a step backwards in this case, since some graphic files must be changed in the game directory to affect the appearance of the scenario. It would be nice if some of the dll. files (leader portraits) could be changed in the scenario folders, too.

[DarthVeda]

How about an unlimited number of units, improvements, tiles, and whatnot so long as there are the graphics files and text descriptions to back them up

(Didn't read everyones post)

Whenever I wanted to make a scenario, I had to stop, because of the limitations. The biggest one I found was the fact you only had so many designs to choose from. Like, I wanted to have different looking cities for every civilization. I think that its important you allow for unlimited city designs. So that people like myself, can design hundreds of them, make the game look more interesting.

The other one is the fact you could be British and build Samurais!?! nononono....allow for complete control in what civs get what units and allow for unlimited types of units.


ok designing...um..as in photoshop, if you hold down the shift key it straightens it and you can pull it, etc, so I think thats a must, and I also think a fill option is a must, that would save a lot of time too.

[BeBro]

I agree with everyone who says that the editor should give us the chance to change as many aspects of the game as possible, under NO circumstances less options than in Civ2. The editors from Civ2 FW were not a bad start but they had too much limitations.

For me it isn´t important if we have an In-Game editor in Civ3 or an external one, the point is the quality of this editor. I think its a good idea to make an "all-in-one" editor that replaces the different FW editors. Exceptions may be a separate map editor or a separate animations editor. All other graphics should of course be editable by normal graphics software.

The editor should have options for events like the Starcraft editor Dan mentioned, because this is good for beginners, but experts should have the chance to edit the (text) files that contain events, unit values, the techtree and so on directly with a simple text editor.

More later...

------------------
Civ2000

[Allard HS]

As everyone seems to mention their scenario creation experience, I've had a number of years as well. I do not recall how many, and I'm sure nobody'll care, I myself least of all.

Anyway, I would like to make a few points very clear.

First of all the in-game tools as they are now in Civ2. They are excellent, and, though some functions can always be improved (such as easier in-game mapediting, or easier adding of units with NONE city ownership), not too much will need to be changed. The cheat-menu as such is of vital importance and excellent in its use.
The Editors menu, as in Fantastic Worlds, however, lack a lot of things. They are not very useful, and I doubt that any serious scenario editor makes frequent use of them (except maybe the events editor).
Why?
We have Paint Shop Pro, we have Notepad. Then why add an in-game unit designer that is hard to use? And instead of adding more functions for drawing units, please use your efforts on something else. Paint Shop Pro will always remain easier and better to use than any in-game editor. That's a fact.

So, what is needed is a simple yet effective in-game cheat menu, with all vital functions, and a lot of external elaborate easily changeable text files and simple graphics files.

Now, the next question is: What more to add?

- I could give a whole list of things to add, but it easiest to see what people have done so far in making external editors.
For instance, Jorrit Vermeiren recently finished an excellent mapeditor that has a lot of functions of which the official Mapeditor is incapable. This mapeditor is downloadable on this page: http://apolyton.net/civ2/files/Special/ (name of program "MapEdit", author "Jorrit Vermeiren"), together with some more excellent tools. These other tools are for example Gif Extractor, to extract GIFs from the various DLLs, and CivTweak, a program that allows more options for scenario editing.

- Closely examine the best scenarios available on the Internet. Most revolutionary of the recent scenarios are the scenarios by Captain Nemo. These are downloadable at the "CSC" http://csc.apolyton.net .
Captain Nemo is a master of adding things to civ2 that are not normally possible. Some examples: amphibious tanks, paradropping gliders with parachuters inside. A lot more stuff is possible in civ2, such as underwater cities, mega-cities of a few cities directly next to each other (via hex-editing) and more.
I thing that by giving 15 minutes of examining of Captain Nemo's scenarios, Firaxis could have a pretty decent idea of what is needed in scenario editing, and I think that that is much better than to ask us for a list of ideas, of which only a few will be used.

- I would estimate that about 90% of all scenarios produced are more or less Historical. Have a look at the CSC, http://csc.apolyton.net , and you'll see so: a lot of Historical scenarios, very few fictional scenario.
As you can clearly see, the 19/20th Century is most popular, then Classical times, then the Middle Ages.
Also, hardly any scenarios at all are "build-from-scratch" scenarios, but rather scenarios where the whole world is already standing, and it's up to the player to take over command from famous generals.
Because of all this, the scenarios that came with Fantastic Worlds were much less popular than the scenarios that came with Conflicts in Civilization, which were mostly war-scenarios.

[Gothmog]

The point about non-proprietary formats is well taken. Most of the people who have posted here have gone well beyond the bounds of typical scenario editing and will probably continue to do. That's part of the fun of it.
Another important point is what can be edited. Things like units, wonders, improvements need to have more customizable attributes. Focusing on what the editors look like igores this very important issue.

Finally whatever in-game interface is created, make sure it has no bugs. Most of us continued to use notepad when we realized that the FW editor could destroy the rules.txt.

[Ribannah]

Just a small addition: it would be nice if the effects of the wonders could be edited, or alternatively if there would be a long list to choose from, ie many more wonders or at least wonder effects available to the editor than there are in the basic game.

In my dreams: a fully programmable AI.

------------------
If you have no feet, don't walk on fire

[BeBro]

Ok, some more details:

"Must-have" functions:

-all options from Civ2 FW, without limitions (as long as possible)

"Would be nice":

-Cut/Copy/Paste/Undo/Redo operations, but not only in the map editor
-Improved events, e.g. events that can create more than one unit on one place with one event,
-events that can create or destroy a city completely
-events that can create or destroy
improvements/wonders of a city
-events that can not only display textboxes, but also pictures (or both combined)
-events that can change some things DURING a scenario, like unit values, or disable negotiations generally, but also at a special point (time) at the scn

"In my dreams":

-Programmable AI, yes!

I´ll finally add one point: the editor should be NOT TOO complicated. I also admire the work of experts like Nemo and others, but in my opinion as many people as possible should have a chance to make their own scns. But that doesn´t mean that the editor can´t be very powerful, it should be possible that everyone can make simple, quick changes while the experts have the chance to make deep changes on the game.

------------------
Civ2000

[CornMaster]

My scale for importantance....
1-not too important
5-Very important

1) I would prefer an external editor with the windows interface. I want external because then you can edit the scenario/map and then load it up in the game and try something without loosing your spot in the editing process. Just found the Civ 2 one too hard for doing this. (4)
As well the scenario editior should either be the map editor or be able to edit maps. Trying to tweak maps with the cheat menu was such a long process!!!!! (5)

2) A paint brush type editor would be easiest to use I think. But any editor should be better than Civ 2's. (2)

3) The Starcraft editior was excellent for making triggers. Although everytime I made the Zerglings appear they ran away from my massive defensive line and I couldn't get any money to upgrade my defences until the main force came. AND THE THE SLAUGHTE..... Anyway. (3)

4) I would like to beable to make scenarios where you have to defend a certain area and if the other players take it over, you loose. Things like this are really hard to do with the Civ 2 editor. (4)

5) I would also like to see independent terrain. What I mean by that is that I can put a big rock on the map and it would have a special icon and attributes, but not have to waste an entire terrain type. (For example....what I do now is take tundra and redraw it to a big rock. Then I have to put it in the map. It works ok but I lose 1 entire terrain type) If we could make independent terrain types, landmarks, and unmoveable units this would be great. (4.5)

Well there we go! I don't think any of these features are too far out of reach. If all this got put into the game you would have at least one happy camper!!!

------------------
"I'm too out of shape for a long fight so I'll have to kill you fast"
"The best meats' in the rump!"
I AM CANADIAN!
CornEmpire Index
My Civ 2 Scenario Page.
[This message has been edited by CornMaster (edited November 21, 2000).]

As a vocal advocate of decent scenario editors, I'm certainly very happy that FIRAXIS has taken such an active interest in this vital pliece of Game Design. I will try to make a (long) post about this now, but for more I suggest looking at (a) Everything under scenario design in the Relevant Threads area, (b) At the list suggestions from both forums, and my summary in the Essential Civ3, which albeit limited in length is more, er, consise.

To me, it is plain that the best type of editor for this sort of game would be an External one. An external application will be more easy to use for a couple of reasons: (a) It will allow the interface to be significantly different from the in-game one. I personally think that the in-game interface, with slower non-standard menus, tricky placement, bad scrolling and painting functionality, no scroll-bars, etc. is far from ideal when it comes to designing a map or scenario. The map design aspect of SMAC, especially, was a shambles, as there was barely painting of areas, and the elevations needed to be placed in a very cumbersome and imprecise way. Units had to be selected from lists, and many parameters were difficult to reach inside nested menu systems. While creating a basic scenario with just starting points was okay, a fully-fledged one was a nightmare to build because units and tile improvements were so hard to place.

My suggestion is that you try to keep the functionality of the editor as easy and familiar as possible, and that this is best accomplished by a standard Windows-type interface. However, I also acknowledge that some people find in-game scenario building useful, as it allows them to create "natural" civs that seem to have been played in a sensible way. For this, I see no other difficulty than implementing a way of loading and saving scenarios as if they were save-files, and hotseat them as a single player. Still, most functionality needs to lay outside the game for it to be intuitive to use.

As for the interface, I suggest a mix of several styles. For terrain and improvement tiles, a "paintbrush"-style painting system is good. This was sucessfully implemented in WarCraft 2 and StarCraft. What is needed is, beside small single-tile paintbrushes: a few more sizes of paintbrush, a fill capability for quickly turning areas into a certain terrain type, and a line-drawing capability for doing straight lines (not vital in most scenarios, but damn annoying not to have when you need it... Trying to draw a football pitch in Civ2 was a nightmare). If elevation is to be included, I would greatly appreciate if the different levels were just tile types rather than the unweildy Raise Terrain option of SMAC. One omre thing that would be intentely useful when drawing lines (and maybe rectangles, if possible) would be a size indicator in the status bar that tells you the exact size of what you're drawing.

For units, cities and landmarks, I propose a click and drag system similar to that of the Heroes of Might and Magic 3 editor. A sidebar would contain a list of objects (which list it is is selected using a combo box (aka pull-down menu) above this sidebar). Also, a list of coloured radio buttons would select which civ it belonged to. These objects could then be pulled across onto the map. Custom sidebars could be created through simple cut-and paste operations (in case you wanted to place, say, a city of a certain size with certain improvements several times). All of these objects' properties could be located via a simple right-click menu where you could set the status of various things relating to that object.

So far, so good, that's the scenario editor. Still, the real power in CIV editing lies within the rules/units/technologies/macroes editors. The files for all of this should lie, in non-proprietary formats, outside the editor itself so that they could be edited by outside applications. Graphics are going to be a bit tricky since the chances of CIV3 actually using 2d sprites are pretty slim. However, with the standard Civ "fixed perspective", implementing an option (at least) for 2d bitmaps would not be hard. My suggestion is that each unit would have its own graphics file and ini file, A bit like the Ego's in RoBOT. This would allow the scenarioes to contain as few or as many units as they'd like. The in-game editors should be acessible through the menus, as before. For most things, the editors in fantastic worlds were fine, though I'd like a tree-view for the techs and a "clear all techs" option.

However, several things spring to mind when it comes to the editors, and they are mostly about the macro language. Firstly, it is not nearly strong enough. No counters, variables, no manipulation of most of the games' objects? StarCraft's trigger options had all of these. As a test for when the Language is just powerful enough, you could set about describing each improvement or wonder in the macro language (say, the pyramids are equal to civ().improvements().granary(1) or something). If you can, it's powerful enough. Now, let each improvement or wonder actually be defined this way in the text files, so we can edit them as well. Two birds with one stone, I'd say. Oh, and governments could be defined this way, too.

The ultimate (dream-like) scenario would be one where the game is based around a proprietary scripting langauge a la QuakeC or UnrealScript. Only as an underlying layer, mind, for those who wish to venture that deep.

Finally, complete documentations, tutorials, wizards, etc. would be of great help.

Three scenarioes to give you an idea of the required/desired/ultimate level of the game:

Scenario 1, Required: A standard historical scenario with a few custom units, custom civs, custom techs and slightly different terrain attributes.

Scenario 2, Desired: The Marxist Mod. A scenario fully implementing an experimental approach to historical materialism, several fundamental game rules have been edited slightly. The governments represent economic systems now, and do different things. Revolutions can only be brought about at certain key points in the game where the Means and Relations of productions are incompatible. The citizen lists have been replaced by class lists, and revolutions will generally change them in a radical way. The victory condition consists of achieving pure communism. Improvements, wonders and techs have been edited heavily.

Scenario 3, Ultimate: Civ3 football (soccer to you). The game runs in real time, and all of the AI has been adapted to this new purpose. The fundamental game rules are gone, replaced bya totally different set.

[DarthVeda]

Yes, snap directly illustrated my point of having a language and then a possibility of extending it into the bizzare... while real-time may be hard to convert the civ engine to for a scenario designer, there certainly needs to be a timer function that can be used for turn limits, game limits, or an amount of time until an event happens no matter what...

A multi-command macro language ala slic(2) and civ2 is mandatory. A way to extend that macro language and play with the "guts" of the game is in my wildest dreams (because I'd be in heaven...)

[Panda]

I have thought of one GUI editor I would like to see, and that is an easy to use tool for creating tech trees. It's probably the hardest part to edit for total conversion. I seem to recall the Civ2 manual regaling us with the anecdote of how the civ2 tech tree was made with cards placed in their proper order. Solution: make them virtual cards.

MGE allowed us to see the tech "tree" in the civilopedia, and it would be great if there was an interface program that could open the tech tree up entirely. You would have x number of boxes, one for each tech. You would drag them around and create links between them. You could double-click on them and edit their names and attributes, plus include a description for viewing in the civilopedia. The main window would be scrollable in all directions. If it was really smart, and the tree sufficiently linear, you define eras by drawing lines through the tree. The editor would then translate how the tree looks and store the values in the text file.

And, for the cream, it could then generate a reference picture of the tree in a graphics format.

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by Andrew Livings on 11-20-2000 08:04 PM You did what?! I agree scenario editing in civ2 was awkward because of the limited editors, but it wasn't that bad.

Andrew, i must confess that the ability to add units, improvements and change other stuff through the scenario-menus in Civ-2, completely slipped my mind than i wrote that piece. Its never been *that* awkward as i described it.

-----------------------------------------------------

However, having said that, i am having a hard time trying to understand why some here seems to instinktively dislike the idea of an easy intuitive drag-and-drop as much as possible from a palette, type of map/scenario-editor.

Why?

Does this conficts with "heavy stuff" such as scripts, triggers, hex-editing and whatnot, in any way? Cant this not be added as well?
Does an "only for the active programming propellerhead civer" approach, always guarantee FUN scenarios? On what basis do you guys assume that?

Not all scenarios is about rewamped graphics, tweaked rules and changed tech-trees. Personally, i often prefer standard-units and standard-rules scenarios (or setups) - and these should really be much easier and inuitive to create, than it is in Civ-2 and SMAC.
Look at the CTP-2 map/scenario-editor. I havent tested it yet, but it seems to be something in the right direction: click-and-paste tile-improvements and drag-and-drop units, improvements and even cities, from a multi-paged palette. Nice!!

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited November 21, 2000).]

[BeBro]

Ralf, I can understand what you mean with

quote: Does this conficts with "heavy stuff" such as scripts, triggers, hex-editing and whatnot, in any way? Cant this not be added as well? Does an "only for the active programming propellerhead civer" approach, always guarantee FUN scenarios? On what basis do you guys assume that?

I don´t think that we want to limit scenario making to an elite group of designers, but the editor for Civ3 should definately a step forward compared with the Civ2 FW editors and this means that a scenario maker should have more options to customize the game.

This should of course include the changes you mentioned (like:click-and-paste tile-improvements and drag-and-drop units, improvements and even cities), but these things seems like standards for me and for historically accurate scenarios (and these are the best scns for civ2) they aren´t enough...



------------------
Civ2000

[Mike the Nuke]

KISS (Keep it simple stupid). In other words, make it easy for everyone, not just the experts. Allow us to modify and add resources (ie silk and oil, etc). CTP I wasn't bad in this area, but not always easy to create maps (took too long). Allow cut and pasting of large areas as well as small areas, so maps could be faster to create. Everything should be simple. Include the editor as part of the program but not part of the game. Once you are playing the game, you must exit the game to get to the editor (minimize the cheating). Nothing yu do will stop the cheaters, so really, Why bother? Make modified maps available in all game modes (uploading to internet, PBEM, Hot Seat, solo).

Most important...

What ever you do, provide good documentation with examples, so all of us can utilize the tools.

The documentation on how to modify units, except for how to create unit icons (graphics) was excellent in CIV2 and TOT. Little was discussed on how to do the graphics (no examples). I, personally, don't have time to research everything for a game. I had to resort to using other peoples graphics for my add on units and they didn't always have exactly what I wanted.

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by BeBro on 11-21-2000 03:34 PM but these things seems like standards for me and for historically accurate scenarios (and these are the best scns for civ2) they aren´t enough...

I agree on that, BeBro. I certainly dont think "drag-dropping from palette" is going to be the Holy Grail, or anything. I just think we all should be carefull not to reject ideas, that dont *have* to be rejected in order to give place to our own ideas. These different ideas can most often COEXIST under the same umbrella.

I am certainly not *against* advanced editing-options and powerfull script-languages - such features could easily coexist with the drag-and-drop from palette -idea.

Likewise, people with more advanced needs shouldnt instinctively be *against* the easy/simple drag-and-drop -concept. Such a feature could easily coexist with much more advanced editors and tweak-options, you see. They really dont *have* exclude each other.

[Jon Miller]

Be able to scan in maps. Have the editor (for both map and scenario) be externalbut also loadable into a hotseat editor's mode.

Jon Miller

[DaddyCool]

I read through the posts, and this has been pointed out a few times, but I think it's *very* important, so I'll point it out too.

Obviously you guys'll want to make the graphics better than civ2, and even though most of us TBS guys don't really care about that, you'll probably do it anyway.

But at least store all the graphics in a non-proprietary format, and in a way that's easy to change, and add to. That way, even though not all of us may be able to make new graphics for the game, at least make it possible for those of us with a bit of skill in such things to do so.

[UltraSonix]

Part 1:

Well the first thing I must say is that I was never a good Civ2 scenario designer. But that was because I've found it so labourious to do anything. The fact that you couldn't copy units/cities annoyed me no end because contructign an army took ages!

And here are some threads from the past on this very issue (though it's been implied that they've been read by Firaxis):
*A Scenario Builder's Request
*Scenario Design in Civ3
*Scenarios that should come with the package?
*Game-editor
*Scenario editor - What does it need?
*scenarios, scenarios, scenarios!!!!!!!!
*A faster scenario-editor could save the day

quote: You guys are making the assumption that the triggers should be contained in a text file like it has been. I think that Civ3 should change and follow starcraft instead - ie the scenarios and all its info (rules.txt events.txt graphx) should be contained in a single file. And the triggers stated above (which would be very useful) should be implemented through a scenario editor (once again, like Starcraft's), which is much more user-friendly. The advantage of this is that newbies would be able to pick up scenario design much more easily, because you'd actually be able to see all the tiggers available, and you can see how the syntax works.

quote: Originally posted by UltraSonix on 10-17-2000 04:50 AM quote: its [the scenario editor of civ2] so damn roundabout to us You're damn right! Stuff that's been said before on this issue: quote: Originally posted by UltraSonix on 05-23-2000 04:18 AM I was put off by the scenario editor being integrated with the actual game in Civ2 and SMAC - it's like putting IE with Windows, and we all saw what happened to that! Instead, a sophisticated and dedicated scenario editor should be available, with abilities such as copy-paste (eg drag a box and copy and paste a bunch of units that you've spent ages pefecting the hit points etc, so you don't have to redo the samething over and over again if you're designing an army. Same thing goes for copy paste of cities.) quote: Originally posted by UltraSonix on 08-14-2000 01:28 AM I agree with Gord McLeod - who cares if they don't even ship a single senario. Shippind a powerful/easy-to-use scenario EDITOR, now THAT's far more important. Looking on the web, you'll find lots of scenarios available for Civ2, and the method for creating them was stupid (integrated into the game). quote: Originally posted by Mad Lord Snapcase on 08-14-2000 04:55 PM Oooh, I've made three summaries already on my thoughts on this subject, so maybe I shouldn't reiterate everything I've already said. If you want to look at what I wrote, take a look at Column #99, The "Comprehensive Scenario Editor" suggestion for the Essential Civilisation 3 list, and about 75% of the stuff in the Customization/Scenario Editor section of the Firaxis Forums appendix of the List v. 2. Suffice to say I agree with Ultrasonix that the StarCraft one is the best editor created to date. Yet where that had ease of use and a good trigger system, it wasn't really as powerful for the common user as the civ2-FW editor was. There was no changing unit graphics and attributes, terrain, names, techs... You know, the reason Civ2's editor was so fun to use. Here are the points I'd most like to see in an editor, in order of importance (this is of course assuming that what's currently available for edit in civ2 remains intact, otherwise #1 would be keeping all of those things editable and easily acessable. I used to think this was obvious, yet SMAC was definately a step back.): 1. Ease of Use. It doesn't matter how powerful an editor is if most users never get to see any of it. What I'd like to see is an editor with a good click-n-drag interface, proper documentation, a tutorial and so on so that anyone can get right in there and start working. 2. A scripting language. Ever thought about why Mods for Quake (1/2/3 as well as Half-Life) and Unreal (and Tournament) seem to be the most popular? It's because these games have proper, proprietary scripting languages, similar to C (They are called QuakeC and UnrealScript respectively), that allows the user to manipulate ingame objects in whatever way she choses. Neither of them are horribly difficult, yet both are immensely powerful. If we could get such a powerful language in a Civ game, together with a really instructional help file or text file, it would do so much. 3. A better Macro Language/Trigger System. Counters, Other events, manipulation of all game objects from within the game with maintained ease of use. 4. Edit the stuff we cannot edit today, chiefly wonders, city improvements and special properties of techs. This could be done very easily if each wonder (or whatever) was described using strings of code from the macro language. quote: ============= A trigger system like the StarCraft editor has would be nice. ============= In fact, the WHOLE Civ3 editor should be based on the Starcraft one. Not only was the Starcraft trigger system good, it was also EASY to use. And it goes without saying that I think the scenario editor whould be separated from the game itself (ie no cheat menu ). It was really cumbersome because while trying to design a scenario, I'll accidently continue the turn, spoiling all my hard work...

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary... (And no, koalas don't usually speak!)
[This message has been edited by UltraSonix (edited November 22, 2000).]

[UltraSonix]

Part2:

To me, what is most important about the scenario editor is that it should be powerful, and yet also very easy to use.

By "powerful", I mean that if Civ3 is to go down CTP2's path of having a sophisticated diplomatic system - which it surely must - then there should be a trigger system that is capable of manipulating it. The trigger system must be capable of causing civs to exchange units/cities/try to steal tech, that sort of thing.

Of course, all this assumes that there is indeed a trigger system - and since Civ2 has this, I assume that it's also going to be in Civ3. The best way to implement it would be through an external scenario editor, in a very similar way the way Starcraft's is done (as I have quoted above).

And like I have said also before, the most annoying thing was that to get the units "just right" took me ages in Civ2. A copy/paste system is a must for laying down units. It is also vital for cities - recreating the improvements in each city was extraordinarily boring! However, to me personally, the creation of terrain is adequate in Civ2 - but that's probably why my maps were no good...

And please excuse me for telling you guys what to do... but to way to implement the editor could be something like:
*You can predesign some cities - small, medium, large - in a different screen.
*In that screen you create the default population, improvements, and units present at the city.
*You then right-click a tile and select "Place city (large)"
*You click then city and at side, a taskbar is brought up that allows you to further manipulate the city.

(Maybe I'll add more stuff when I actually read this thread! )

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary... (And no, koalas don't usually speak!)

[N35t0r]

Ok, i haven't read all of the replies..

I would like in-game editors, but don't leave the editable text files out either.

Personally i find it much more easy to do my rough work in the text files (much quicker) and then fine-tune them using the in-game editor.

also leave the menu-editing text files (in order to make spies uncapable of bribing cities, to completely eliminate the cheat menus, etc.)

Definitely in-game terrain editing, esp. for rivers.

The triggers of StarCraft's editor are++++, but i've experienced many difficulties using it.(a teleport booth which requires units on both sides to work)

As for unit-creation-following-trigger, a lasso-like tool (of PSP) would be great. (not having to plot down all the coordinates... As well for the rectangle in the go-to command.

Of course it would be impossible to create a perfect scenario in less than around six months, but make the actual changing and editing easier for us goddamn perfectionists. A drag-and-drop unit-moving-around system for editing scenarios would be nice, and maybe a right-click menu to alter it... -just thoughts-

Map visibilty editing tools! It is just tiresome to pop out helicopters and then disband them for early scens. where the entire map can't be revealed.

Definitely cut-and-paste map editor.