1.29f PATCH README - Page 9

Jon Shafer · July 19, 2002, 01:22

I agree. A slider/drop down menu/checkbox to change the RR movement bonus would add much to the game.

KingJoshi · July 19, 2002, 01:29

It's probably hard-coded because they seem very reluctant to change it and I know so many people have asked for it (including myself). I was hoping for it in this editor, but during the last chat, they said it wasn't likely. Well, here's hoping they fix it by PTW.

The_Aussie_Lurker · July 19, 2002, 02:11

What I wanted to be able to do was set the movement rate for enemy roads at 1 so that, regardless of the terrain underneath, movement would always cost at most 1mp on roads. I would then set friendly roads at 4mp/square and friendly rail at about 8-12mp. I would then have set enemy railroads to give 2mp! This would, to my mind, represent the fact that logistical difficulties would always prevent a unit from utilizing an enemies road, or rail, to their full potential.
Anyway, as KingJoshi has said, I hope they have fixed this by the time PtW comes out!!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

sabrewolf · July 19, 2002, 05:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Was it advertised as a scenario editor? All they said was "editor." I don't recall them making a big deal about scenarios.

At any rate, I did get my biggest wants (civ placement, minimap, adding units), but am a little disappointed you can't set diplomacy. But most of the changes/additions are VERY welcome.

yes and no.

i don't recall hearing explicitly "scenario editor" in any official statement. but they DID say, that PtW would come with some scenarios, some from firaxis and some from the community...

that means
A) another small patch might come before PtW
B) they will use our pseudo-scenarios (units and cities placed, but no diplomacy settings) and change the alliances
C) Gramphos will find that byte and open that hidden editor-menu

Jon Shafer · July 19, 2002, 08:16

We'd better get Gramps working, it seems he has quite a bit to do.

I wish there was some way to put objectives in though.

I'm afraid no one but Firaxis could do that. Kind of makes many scenarios pretty interesting eh?

sabrewolf · July 19, 2002, 09:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip
We'd better get Gramps working, it seems he has quite a bit to do.

I wish there was some way to put objectives in though.

I'm afraid no one but Firaxis could do that. Kind of makes many scenarios pretty interesting eh?

i can imagine, that they didn't want to bring too many things from PtW now already.

if you could edit objectives, you could simulate "king of the hill" by capturing a city or "regicide" by catching a leader unit.

but not to include diplomatic stances just doesn't make sence.

trip: here's a possible solution, can you tell me if this might work.
i was thinking of something like a honeypot. i have noticed, that the AI very commonly takes an undefended city, even if you're friendly with that civilization. so if you want e.g. the axis to be at war against the allies, let the one who makes to first move after the human player have a honeypot of each civ he should be at war against. it's definetly not elegant, but it might work. i only tried it in a simple example with 3 civs, but don't know if it will go with big armies and lots of cities...

dunk · July 19, 2002, 09:25

Quote:

Originally posted by sabrewolf
PtW would come with some scenarios, some from firaxis and some from the community...

How can the community (us) make any scenarios if for PTW if there isn't a full scenario editor available before PTW comes out?

Jon Shafer · July 19, 2002, 09:29

I really don't think this is some kind of scheme by Firaxis. They had 2 months and 1 guy to made an entire editor. I'm not sure anyone could have made a full-fledge scenario editor by themselves in that short aamount of time. At least for my Civil War scenario diplomacy isn't really necassary (who will stay at peace for this kind of scenario?

) because there's only two sides. Something like WWII would be much more difficult.

Solver · July 19, 2002, 09:33

They are all a bit strange, if you look at it. They have 1 guy working on all the Editor. They have only 1 guy to program the AI - and Soren also did a fair amount of other programming on the game, I really admire his programming powers.

Jon Shafer · July 19, 2002, 09:53

All those poor guys must be overworked. You'd think Sid would have a big enough wallet to be able to pay a few more people to work on his games.

No wonder Mike's favorite thing in the world is beer.

rflagg · July 19, 2002, 09:56

First off, thanks for the patch, Firaxis. It gave us (more or less) what we were asking for, and not too many companies are willing to do so much for their fans, especially after the game is released. I hope you don't take the complaints personally, and enjoy hearing from some that you continue to do good work.

I'm a bit disappointed on what's not there, mainly the diplomacy option, but as you can see there are already ideas to work around that, and believe it or not, we'll all survive, and scenarios will be made, just not to the full extent that some wanted.

Anyway, thanks for the patch, and for making the editor work! I'm looking forward to PtW!

-Rflagg.

Willem · July 19, 2002, 15:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip
All those poor guys must be overworked.

I suspect that if you'd ask them, they'd probably just say they were having fun doing something they enjoy.

Machi · July 19, 2002, 16:07

Anyone able to shed light on the "Accelerated Production" option now? I would appreciate any explanations or descriptions.

cbraund · July 19, 2002, 16:27

Accelerated production doubles the speed of production but not of research, meaning you can build twice as much between techs.

Chris

Machi · July 19, 2002, 16:48

Does the AI get that benefit as well? If so, then it's really just a tool to have more things in general in the world, as though they just halved the costs for everything.

El hidalgo · July 19, 2002, 17:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Colwyn
Also hate road/rail sprawl + no terain bonus's should be like CTP ie as per needed only ie mainly connecting cities resources etc. (though railroads gave a bonus there too)

Workers are a pain and a waste of time, public works as per CTP is definetly needed.

I just can's see why the game needs to turn every inch of the planet into railroads and plains. Looks ugly and unreal.

If the above things were done the game would be very good (events and the ai always not building a large enough army later in the game aside)

I always thought that if they would just add an upkeep cost for roads and railroads then it would stop making sense to plaster them everywhere and you'd only place them where you absolutely needed to, i.e. to connect cities to each other and to resources. Oh well, I'm dreaming again.

Willem · July 19, 2002, 18:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Machi
Does the AI get that benefit as well? If so, then it's really just a tool to have more things in general in the world, as though they just halved the costs for everything.

It's just a preamble for PtW, something to get used to. Otherwise MP games will take forever. I guess they figured we might appreciate one of the features a bit early.

cbraund · July 19, 2002, 18:27

I love it, it means more battles in the ancient age before you enter medieval.

Chris

Machi · July 19, 2002, 18:48

Does the AI get that benefit as well? If so, then it's really just a tool to have more things in general in the world, as though they just halved the costs for everything.

Thrawn05 · July 19, 2002, 19:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Jaybe
AUTO saves are no longer compressed. You can designate how many auto-saves there are (new in 1.29). The time taken in compressing the auto-saves was drawing complaints since they were automatically happening every turn. You still have the option (I think?) of whether to compress your manual saves.

People can't wait a second to save?!?

I'm going to have to uncheck auto saves and have to do a manual saves every turn. FIRAXIS FIX THIS!!!!!

, oh, and

cbraund · July 19, 2002, 19:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Machi
Does the AI get that benefit as well? If so, then it's really just a tool to have more things in general in the world, as though they just halved the costs for everything.

Yes the AI gets it too.

Chris

Machi · July 19, 2002, 19:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem

It's just a preamble for PtW, something to get used to. Otherwise MP games will take forever. I guess they figured we might appreciate one of the features a bit early.

What do PtW and MP mean?

Spiffor · July 19, 2002, 19:44

Machi :
PtW means Play the World, Civ3's expansion due this fall.
MP means MultiPlayer.

Level · July 19, 2002, 19:44

Play the world and Multi Player

Willem · July 19, 2002, 23:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Thrawn05

People can't wait a second to save?!?

I'm going to have to uncheck auto saves and have to do a manual saves every turn. FIRAXIS FIX THIS!!!!!

, oh, and

Why? It's much better this way, turns were already long enough without adding the autosave compression on top. If you're not happy with this, then you're definitely in the minority!

tatterdemalion · July 19, 2002, 23:22

I haven't played Civ3 in a while, so I am out of touch. Do I need to load each of the patches in succession or is the lastest patch culmulative for all patches?

Willem · July 19, 2002, 23:30

Quote:

Originally posted by tatterdemalion
I haven't played Civ3 in a while, so I am out of touch. Do I need to load each of the patches in succession or is the lastest patch culmulative for all patches?

All you need is the latest one, iit will include the changes made in the others.

tatterdemalion · July 19, 2002, 23:33

thanks for the quick reply, willem!!

nano_time · July 20, 2002, 12:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Amadan

Firaxis desreves some respect for the time it puts in to creating FREE upgrades to their games!

I aggree!

Steve Clark · July 20, 2002, 13:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Was it advertised as a scenario editor? All they said was "editor." I don't recall them making a big deal about scenarios.

At any rate, I did get my biggest wants (civ placement, minimap, adding units), but am a little disappointed you can't set diplomacy. But most of the changes/additions are VERY welcome.

Boris, you have been around a little while (unlike some of the ignorant posters here) to know that Firaxis and some here were hyping this as a scenario editor. They even said that they expect fans to create custom scenarios to be included in PtW and they said that the community will get a head start on making scenarios. The problem is that...

we still cannot make scenarios.

Firaxis apparently have forgotten what Civ scenarios are because it is insulting to think that with the advanced map editor, one can make true Civ scenarios. I wish everyone here, including Firaxis, would stop kidding themselves. But with Firaxis promoting "scenarios" and with the mod community thinking that they are making "scenarios", I really wonder what to expect in PtW? Will they keep promoting this lie?

And you wonder why those that made hundreds or thousands of posts in Civ3 forums are not around anymore (with an exception of a few)?