Are there enough "quality" civs left for Firaxis to eventually release another XP? - Page 3

ranskaldan · June 10, 2002, 16:19

at least that makes it somewhat accurate.

well, if we want to include all the important civs, then there's no way we can circumvent the problem of the overcrowded Eurasia or even Mesoamerica. Civs tend to sprout next to each other.

The only thing that can be done is for you to choose your opponents carefully whenever you play Earth, or turn off real starting locations.

Panag · June 10, 2002, 16:30

Quote:

Originally posted by ranskaldan

at least that makes it somewhat accurate.

well, if we want to include all the important civs, then there's no way we can circumvent the problem of the overcrowded Eurasia or even Mesoamerica. Civs tend to sprout next to each other.

The only thing that can be done is for you to choose your opponents carefully whenever you play Earth, or turn off real starting locations.

hi ,

well , on what map do you play , if on a huge map , 256x256 , you can put the distance from each civ , there starting location that is true the editor.

have a nice day

Imp. Montezuma · June 10, 2002, 17:47

Quote:

Originally posted by panag

hi ,

tip ; let them start with upto 25 defending units , ...then it works , ....

have a nice day

Ahha!

Like Mossad or Shin-Bet UU 5/5/3 Treats all as road, Invisible, Hidden nationality, Explore, Offensive, Defensive, cost 2, Lethal bombardment.

Panag · June 10, 2002, 17:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Imp. Montezuma

Ahha!

Like Mossad or Shin-Bet UU 5/5/3 Treats all as road, Invisible, Hidden nationality, Explore, Offensive, Defensive, cost 2, Lethal bombardment.

hi ,

, that sounds more like unit XXXXX , ....

, allas , it would need parachute ability also , .......

hmmm , we could go for an intel unit , yeah , or a special thank , but it would be better to give each civ two (2) UU's , .......

have a nice day / night

Oerdin · June 10, 2002, 18:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Imp. Montezuma Celt/Gaul, Portuguese, Dutch, Hebrew, Poles are too close to they neghbors on Earth map. I'm tried make Hebrews. They disapears in stone age razed by Bailonians or Egiptians. May be good for kinda a mediterranean or middle-east scenario.

I'd say less then 5% of the games will ever be played on an earth map so why should who's in 95% of the games be determined by a mire 5%?

We should include the civs with the most global reach and staying power reguardless of where they are located on the "real" map.

Panag · June 10, 2002, 19:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin

I'd say less then 5% of the games will ever be played on an earth map so why should who's in 95% of the games be determined by a mire 5%?

We should include the civs with the most global reach and staying power reguardless of where they are located on the "real" map.

hi ,

, about 20-35% like to play on a "real" world map !!! , so there should be a bigger map ! and a really good reflection of the modern day world , as a planet that is !

have a nice day / night

ranskaldan · June 10, 2002, 22:27

Indeed. We need a bigger world map.

Another possible solution is for their to be a patch where the computer random civ selector will automatically select civs that are far apart. For example, if the French are randomly selected, then the computer won't select the Germans or Dutch. And so on.

Imp. Montezuma · June 11, 2002, 05:19

Quote:

Originally posted by panag

hi ,

, that sounds more like unit XXXXX , ....

, allas , it would need parachute ability also , .......

hmmm , we could go for an intel unit , yeah , or a special thank , but it would be better to give each civ two (2) UU's , .......

have a nice day / night

Well, would be better to give War unit from begin. It is unrealistic when city without defenders during centuries.

Imp. Montezuma · June 11, 2002, 05:27

Quote:

Originally posted by panag

hi ,

, about 20-35% like to play on a "real" world map !!! , so there should be a bigger map ! and a really good reflection of the modern day world , as a planet that is !

have a nice day / night

When I playing The Game I think about dawn of Mankind. I n the Game we began from 4000AD, in reality it 10000-6000AD. ( Ieriho, Israel, 10000-12000AD, Arkaim, Cheliabinsk, 10000-13000AD) And I like to play 80-90% in Earth. With civ2 and clones I like play on random map and random civ. May be 70-80%. If in PTW they makes 24 civ playable it will great!

Imp. Montezuma · June 11, 2002, 05:38

What about Khazar Kaganat. Unique civilization sedentary+roaming+iudaism. Big problem for Byzantines, Khalifat and Rus'

Panag · June 11, 2002, 13:54

hi ,

every civ is good to put in , but we need a bigger map for that , 300X300 is a start , but 360X360 would even be greater , ....

if we want more and more civ's , no problem , but we need bigger maps , .....

have a nice day

Oerdin · June 11, 2002, 15:26

Quote:

Originally posted by panag
hi ,

, about 20-35% like to play on a "real" world map !!! , so there should be a bigger map ! and a really good reflection of the modern day world , as a planet that is !

have a nice day / night

Perhaphs 20%-35% would like to play on a world map but what percentage of the total number of Civ3 games played are on a real world map? I'd bet the number is very, very small.

Panag · June 11, 2002, 15:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin

Perhaphs 20%-35% would like to play on a world map but what percentage of the total number of Civ3 games played are on a real world map? I'd bet the number is very, very small.

hi ,

a small poll ; 400 people , something similar like a world map , like Marla's , 242 say yes , .....

that's more then 50 % , when on apolyton level the number is about 20%-35% , .....

have a nice day

snuggs · July 14, 2002, 10:19

The godawful world map that came with the game was a major disappointment - right on top of the lack of real scenarios and the lack of scenario editor - thank God for Marla's map.

Some civs that have been suggested are just daft. However successful the Kirghiz/Khazars/Cumans never mind the Australian aborigines and Polynesians were they were NOT settled cultures and thus NOT eligible by definition to be civs. The Mongols I can just tolerate. Iroquois not however.

Sonic · July 14, 2002, 14:32

Poland is in fact nothing on itself. If you'd read history you'd knew that Lithuanian Great Dutchment was much bigger and much stronger (an empire from Baltic sea to Black sea). Later we unified to Poland, which was about quarter of our size at a time to create even better country. I don't know why so much people call that country Poland, in fact it was Lithuania-Poland and Lithuania was a bigger part. But for a civ, Lithuanians did much much more than Polish. We were one of biggest European countries at a time.

snuggs · July 14, 2002, 17:33

How about that the union was referred to as 'Poland' by all countries after the 1560s - even by Russia which bordered only Lithuania - that Poland annexed a big piece of the Ukraine, hardly the action of a minor partner - and that the Polish aristocracy and structures of government came to predominate over virtually the whole area?

Let's face it, there are some great empires that'll never make it into any expansion and Lithuania will just have to be a custom civ. Vytautas, mine enemy!

Sonic · July 14, 2002, 18:06

Let's also face that Lithuanian GD in it's best times was bigger than Poland-Lithuania and, obviously, Poland. At the time the union was created Lithuania wasn't so strong as it was for many years before. But again, there were no Roman Empire, Babylon at that time at all. So, I think was the empire strong in late middle ages means nothing, many huge empires risen after and before that. Yes, Lithuania was much weaker in it's peak than most of other empires in civilization (stronger than Babylon but considering into account Babylon's input to the world's history I do agree Babylon was "better" empire than LGD). But Lithuania was certainly stronger than the following: Kingdom of Israel, Poland, Carthagine, most unorganised native tribes from America and Africa (except very obviously empires like Aztec) and some others ussually made into RTS and TBS games. At the best times Lithuania was about of size of current days Saudi Arabia. It is not large in the world terms but in European terms it was (and is) quite large. The only reason why companies doesn't includes LGD are that current days Lithuania there are not so much gamers and if there are they are not very rich to buy many games. Poland is much bigger and such republics as Korea has many people. I seriously don't believe anyone in the world would add Korea as civ if now there would be no South Korea, only the DPRK. This is also the reason why Arabs, who created one of the most glorious nations and one of biggest religions in worlds history, are so rarely included to RTS/TBS games. As for long died empires like Roman, gaming companies obviously has to include them because of their importance and I do agree with that, but you must face that other countries are chosen mostly by their current size and importance and that Lithuania was stronger than many (but not most) countries included in RTS/TBS games.

Dimorier Maximus · July 15, 2002, 03:56

Quote:

Originally posted by statusperfect Keeping in mind that America (

) was in the original game my answer is: It doesn't matter.

Keeping in mind that this game wouldn't exist if there was no America, I boo at that comment.

As far as making up 8 new civs:

1. Israelites/Koreans/Incas
2. Israelites/Koreans/Incas
3. Australia
4. Austro-Hungarians
5. Dutch
6. Portuguese
7. Malians
8. Thai

Man...there are so many good European civs. And so many good Asian civs...it's so hard to decide. But I made Europe even heavier because those are the civs I would like to see the most.

Q Classic · July 15, 2002, 13:34

there are quite a few good civs.

it's just a matter of awareness.

if more people knew that korea wasn't the same as china or japan, and knew what it'd done in the past, there would be more support; same for the khmers, the thais, the mughals... the ashanti, etc., etc., etc.

just happens to be a eurocentric world we're living in, and that's why the only civs anybody really learns about in their textbooks in the west is european civs.

snuggs · July 15, 2002, 18:20

Sonic - do you have EU2?

Sonic · July 15, 2002, 18:50

Snuggs, no, I have EU1

Dimorier Maximus · July 16, 2002, 01:20

Quote:

Originally posted by snuggs
Sonic - do you have EU2?

Quote:

Originally posted by Sonic
Snuggs, no, I have EU1

What is this? The EU forum?

snuggs · July 16, 2002, 14:26

Last EU-related thing I swear, but Sonic may be interested to know (may already know) that EU2 begins in 1419 and thus with Lithuania as a playable nation. If you want to replicate the Union but with a Lithuanian focus it's simplicity itself to fiddle the events file so you inherit Poland some time in the C15 rather than the other way about. Then you can busy yourself with the retro-conquest of the Mongol empire (Russia and the Tatar khanates are better modelled in EU2, too).

You could even make Lith pagan if you wanted to :-)