View Poll Results: Would you use a multiplayer mod?
No, I hate multiplayer. 2 18.18%
No, I hate mods. 1 9.09%
Yes, I would give it a try. 5 45.45%
Yes, this is what I have been waiting for! 2 18.18%
Will we add the banana resource? 1 9.09%
Voters: 11. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Thread Tools
Old May 2, 2003, 12:33   #1
alexman
PtWDG Gathering StormCivilization IV CreatorsInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamApolyton UniversityIron CiversCivilization IV: MultiplayerApolytoners Hall of FameCivilization IV PBEMApolyCon 06 Participants
Firaxis Games Software Engineer
 
alexman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1998
Posts: 5,360
Multiplayer Strategy Mod?
From what I have seen so far from the multiplayer Civ3 community, especially for PBEM, it seems that AI civilizations are generally avoided. It also seems that there are a few aspects of Civ3 where strategic depth has been compromised because of the inability of the AI to deal effectively with complex situations. This creates a great opportunity for a mod that is free of the strategic limitations introduced to help the AI.

The main objective of this mod would be to provide a set of rules that challenge the player with a need for deeper strategy, while changing as little as possible to preserve the stock Civ3 flavor. To accomplish this goal, the mod would try to balance the existing elements of the game so that there is no one strategy that always works, nor one that never works. Ideally, the Civ3 multiplayer community would adopt this set of rules as a standard for games without AI-controlled civilizations.

I opened this thread because I would like to see if there is interest in such a mod, and also to solicit your input on what the changes of this mod should be. I already have some ideas of my own. Here are a few:
  • Double the free unit support for Wartime governments. The lack of war weariness in multiplayer has decreased the value of Monarchy and Communism. On the other hand, players often (but not always) have to build more units than in single-player when facing a human threat. Overall, doubling the free unit support for Communism and Monarchy (4/town, 8/city, 16/metro) should nicely balance the lack of war weariness. Democracy, which in single player mode has the most war weariness, should not be changed in this mod because players choosing to research two optional technologies should be rewarded now that there is no AI to research them.
  • Industrious workers cost 20 shields. The Industrious trait is the hands-down-favorite trait in multiplayer. The extra worker cost would reduce the overpowering early-game advantage of Industrious civilizations, thus giving players more choice when choosing their civilizations. The initial worker and the single population cost are still enough to give Industrious civilizations a head-start in terrain improvement.
  • Reduce defensive strength of citizens and improvements against bombardment, from 16 to 8. This change would be unfair to the AI in a single-player mod, but would go a long way towards making ground bombard units, ships, air units, coastal fortresses, and walls viable components in a combined-arms strategy in multiplayer Civ3. For example, after they have destroyed any walls (a 33% chance), subsequent Catapult attacks have a 33% chance of success (up from 20%) against citizens and improvements. Cannons have a 50% success rate (up from 33%), and artillery has a 60% chance (up from 42%). This change encourages the use of catapults and cannons against cities, not only against units in the open. Using bombard units, it becomes easier to reduce the size of cities to towns, thus lowering their defensive bonus.
  • Coliseums increase the effect of luxury spending by 50%. Coliseums are less cost-effective than temples and Cathedrals, even for non-religious civilizations. Players can afford not to build coliseums, as happiness is rarely a problem that cannot be resolved with luxuries, marketplaces, temples, and Cathedrals. This change would make coliseums more valuable and sometimes worth building even before temples (when a civilization is forced into high luxury spending). This is something that would not be handled well by the AI, since it doesn’t use the luxury slider.
  • Mechanized units are “wheeled”. Tanks, Mechanized Infantry, Panzers, Modern Armor, Artillery, and Radar Artillery would not be able to enter mountains and jungles without using roads. This would make Paratroopers more useful as special mountain and jungle troops after Infantry gets replaced by Mechanized Infantry. The AI would not handle these new natural barriers well, as evidenced by its incompetence in intercontinental invasions.
  • All Submarines and the AEGIS cruiser can transport and launch one cruise missile. This is a step towards making these three naval units (and the cruise missile) more powerful. It also enhances realism and gives another dimension in the strategy of naval warfare.
  • Hwach’a has lethal land bombard. Korea is the only civilization that cannot get a Golden Age militarily under stock rules. The lethal bombard ability would be indeed lethal against the AI, but not against other human players that know what to expect.
  • Power Plants replace walls. This would be a temporary fix until Firaxis resolves the “eternal wall” bug. (The defensive bonus of walls does not really expire after the city grows to size 7). Walls would still affect cities and metropolises with this change, but at least they would vanish when you build a Coal, Hydro, or Solar plant.

In addition to the above, I would favor some (but not all) other changes that are already incorporated in the AU mod.

Please post your comments and ideas, but keep in mind that we would probably want to avoid starting with something too radical.
alexman is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 14:05   #2
jshelr
Civilization III PBEMIron CiversC3CDG Ankh-Morpork
Emperor
 
jshelr's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: pittsburgh
Posts: 4,132
I have some super-secret, alleged empirical results of important consequence for this mod proposal, but I will only reveal them if Alexman promises not to use them on me in Strat 4.
jshelr is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 14:14   #3
alexman
PtWDG Gathering StormCivilization IV CreatorsInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamApolyton UniversityIron CiversCivilization IV: MultiplayerApolytoners Hall of FameCivilization IV PBEMApolyCon 06 Participants
Firaxis Games Software Engineer
 
alexman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1998
Posts: 5,360
OK, I'll use them on you in Strat 3 then...
alexman is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 14:21   #4
jshelr
Civilization III PBEMIron CiversC3CDG Ankh-Morpork
Emperor
 
jshelr's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: pittsburgh
Posts: 4,132
OK, I have to say that we believe we have found a bona fide case of war weariness inducing anarchy in PBEM. Moreover, there also appear to be happiness effects due to extended war under democracy. This goes against what others have reported, and I only think I know what I believe I'm seeing.
__________________
Illegitimi Non Carborundum
jshelr is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 14:45   #5
badams52
King
 
badams52's Avatar
 
Local Time: 16:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: May 2002
Location: near the magic kingdom
Posts: 1,001
I like your thinking alexman, making a mod for the MP players, but I'm certain that this mod with take much, much longer to play test. I agree that the industrious workers are a great advantage, but I don't think a 20 shield worker will have a great detriment to the overpowering advantage one gets with workers who are twice as fast. Also, it will create an unfair advantage to non-industrial civs who want to rush a building and use the rush worker first tactic. I would like to hear other ways to balance out a industrial worker before adopting a 20 shield change.

Also, I wonder if you also might let those in the other MP forums know about your attempt as I believe not all of them frequent the strategy forum.
__________________
badams
badams52 is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 15:09   #6
Panzer32
Civilization III Democracy GameCivilization III PBEMC4DG VoxInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamPtWDG2 SunshinePtWDG2 Monty PythonPtWDG2 MonkeyPtWDG2 Latin LoversPtWDG2 Cake or Death?PtWDG2 TabemonoPtWDG2 Mohammed Al-SahafC3C IDG: Apolyton TeamPtWDG Glory of War
Emperor
 
Panzer32's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Queens University, Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 3,183
Quote:
Mechanized units are “wheeled”. Tanks, Mechanized Infantry, Panzers, Modern Armor, Artillery, and Radar Artillery would not be able to enter mountains and jungles without using roads. This would make Paratroopers more useful as special mountain and jungle troops after Infantry gets replaced by Mechanized Infantry. The AI would not handle these new natural barriers well, as evidenced by its incompetence in intercontinental invasions.
The rest of the proposal is OK, but this I don't find appealing. Especially as treaded vehicles are essentially all terrain vehicles. I would say keep artillery and radar artillery wheeled, but not the other ones.
__________________
Proud Member of the ISDG Apolyton Team; Member #2 in the Apolyton Yact Club.
King of Trafalgar and Lord of all Isolationia in the Civ III PTW Glory of War team.
---------
May God Bless.
Panzer32 is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 16:07   #7
Jaybe
Mac
Emperor
 
Jaybe's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Henderson, NV USA
Posts: 4,168
Re the Industrious worker dilemma, have you considered just removing the trait altogether?

The wheeled mech units change works quite well, even in SP. Even when the AI messes up their attack routes through bombardment, it also messes with the player's capabilities. SAVE a few infantry from being upgraded!

ONE cruise missile capability seems awfully low. How about 3-6? When you run out of CMs, you have to go back home to reload unless you have a transport of them standing by. Another (off-the-wall) option would be to make it zero, and just give them the bombard equivalent of the CM.
__________________
JB
I play BtS (3.19) -- Noble or Prince, Rome, marathon speed, huge hemispheres (2 of them), aggressive AI, no tech brokering. I enjoy the Hephmod Beyond mod. For all non-civ computer uses, including internet, I use a Mac.
Jaybe is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 16:16   #8
alexman
PtWDG Gathering StormCivilization IV CreatorsInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamApolyton UniversityIron CiversCivilization IV: MultiplayerApolytoners Hall of FameCivilization IV PBEMApolyCon 06 Participants
Firaxis Games Software Engineer
 
alexman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1998
Posts: 5,360
badams, I agree that this mod would take a while to get it right. Hopefully with small changes, common sense and some friendly games between us, we can get it done.

As for the 20-shield industrious worker, I'm not sure I agree that the removal of a 10-shield unit for the rush-buying trick is a big deal. But I would like to hear alternatives as well. One way would be to slightly reduce the cost of terrain improvement so that the speed of industrious workers is not quite double, because of rounding. For example, if you reduce the cost of irrigation from 8 to 6 (for a non-ind slave), then the time required for a non-industrious worker to irrigate would be reduced from 4 turns to 3, but it would still be 2 turns for an industrious worker. Similarly, reducing the slave mining (on flatlands) time from 12 to 9 would reduce the non-industrious time from 6 to 5 turns without affecting the time for industrious workers.

panzer, the wheeled change you don't like was not proposed for the sake of realism (but rather to give special forces a new role and to encourage other strategies besides the ol' MA romp), but how often do you see tanks operating in jungles or in terrain mountains steep enough to be prohibitive for cities to be built?

Jaybe, I think ships carrying even one cruise missile would be very powerful. The ship could first bombard, reducing the HP of the enemy, and then use the CM to get the kill with no risk to the AEGIS or sub. Very powerful.

By the way, this thread could belong in the Multiplayer, PBEM, Creation, or Strategy forums. I chose the Strat forum because it is the one where I thought the subject would get the most discussion. Perhaps I will start a thread in the other forums too.
alexman is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 16:45   #9
Jaybe
Mac
Emperor
 
Jaybe's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Henderson, NV USA
Posts: 4,168
Quote:
Jaybe, I think ships carrying even one cruise missile would be very powerful. The ship could first bombard, reducing the HP of the enemy, and then use the CM to get the kill with no risk to the AEGIS or sub. Very powerful.
Very good point, I hadn't considered that. Of course, you could combine the CM capability with REMOVING bombardment.
__________________
JB
I play BtS (3.19) -- Noble or Prince, Rome, marathon speed, huge hemispheres (2 of them), aggressive AI, no tech brokering. I enjoy the Hephmod Beyond mod. For all non-civ computer uses, including internet, I use a Mac.
Jaybe is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 16:54   #10
alexman
PtWDG Gathering StormCivilization IV CreatorsInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamApolyton UniversityIron CiversCivilization IV: MultiplayerApolytoners Hall of FameCivilization IV PBEMApolyCon 06 Participants
Firaxis Games Software Engineer
 
alexman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1998
Posts: 5,360
True, and submarines don't even have bombard (AEGIS have a ridiculous 4 strength), but you could still bombard with other ships. I think we should try it with just one CM capacity first, and perhaps strengthen the CM (to 4 ROF like in the AU mod) instead.
alexman is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 17:03   #11
Frank Johnson
Civilization II MultiplayerDiploGamesCivilization IV: Multiplayer
King
 
Frank Johnson's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,261
Well if you're gonna address the Korean special unit, what about the americans? Since fighters can only kill units in a defensive stand, it puts the ability to trigger the golden age in the hands of the enemy instead of your own.

I don't know about doubling the support for the war time govs. Think about the advantage that gives religous civs. Plus, someone just said they saw war weariness. So.....double check that one since its your most drastic change.

The rounding solution sounds to be the best answer for industrious workers. Remember, even Civ2 multiplayer had much faster improvement production on any setting other than single player.

A resolution of cruise missiles and late naval bombardment might be nice, but its something that would have to be play balanced. I find the cruise missile to be pretty useless as it is, given its limited range. Its only helpful if in a first strike, since your mobile forces will usually out run a 1 move missile. I guess the best option would be to remove the bombardment feature of ships....and add the missile carry option. The ships would still have attack and defense values to represent the limited naval guns and torpedos they still carry.

However..... <- I've never even played a game where I got to aegis cruisers. There's quite a bit of room for more naval units.....but again that requires more play testing. The game needs a "modern destroyer" that comes in around rocketry....to challenge battleships for control of the seas with the cruise missiles.
Frank Johnson is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 18:03   #12
alexman
PtWDG Gathering StormCivilization IV CreatorsInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamApolyton UniversityIron CiversCivilization IV: MultiplayerApolytoners Hall of FameCivilization IV PBEMApolyCon 06 Participants
Firaxis Games Software Engineer
 
alexman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1998
Posts: 5,360
Quote:
Originally posted by Frank Johnson
Well if you're gonna address the Korean special unit, what about the americans?
Good point, although the Americans have one of the best (*the* best IMO) trait combos for MP. Still, I was thinking of giving all fighters lethal sea bombard as well, like in the AU mod. This would make aircraft carriers loaded with fighters a real naval threat.
alexman is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 20:19   #13
Kuciwalker
Deity
 
Kuciwalker's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 21,822
I'd be interested in making a multiplayer mod, though not necessarily as you described it. It would be VERY nice to be free of concerns over whether the AI can handle it.
__________________
[Obama] is either a troll or has no ****ing clue how government works - GePap
Later amendments to the Constitution don't supersede earlier amendments - GePap
Kuciwalker is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 21:10   #14
DaveMcW
Prince
 
DaveMcW's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 699
Wild suggestion: what do you think of adding the changes from my Balanced Accelerated Production Mod?

Playing with AP will greatly speed up testing and gameplay, maybe someone will actually get to try out the modern era changes.
DaveMcW is offline  
Old May 2, 2003, 22:23   #15
Kuciwalker
Deity
 
Kuciwalker's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 21,822
or my mod here
__________________
[Obama] is either a troll or has no ****ing clue how government works - GePap
Later amendments to the Constitution don't supersede earlier amendments - GePap
Kuciwalker is offline  
Old May 3, 2003, 02:31   #16
alexman
PtWDG Gathering StormCivilization IV CreatorsInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamApolyton UniversityIron CiversCivilization IV: MultiplayerApolytoners Hall of FameCivilization IV PBEMApolyCon 06 Participants
Firaxis Games Software Engineer
 
alexman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1998
Posts: 5,360
Quote:
Originally posted by DaveMcW
Wild suggestion: what do you think of adding the changes from my Balanced Accelerated Production Mod?
Dave, I cannot imagine playing with AP without the changes that you suggest in your mod. We should definitely make an AP version of this mod in addition to a standard version.

I have never actually played with accelerated production on, mostly because I would imagine that slow-movers on anything but a tiny map would become obsolete before they have a chance to move to their first target. Kind of like Deity used to be in the patch with the crazy tech whoring AI (1.16f, I think). Is it that bad?

Skywalker, your mod has many cool ideas, but in general I think they are way too drastic for the purpose of this mod.

Last edited by alexman; May 3, 2003 at 03:08.
alexman is offline  
Old July 3, 2003, 00:19   #17
alva
Civilization III PBEMPtWDG2 Cake or Death?PtWDG Gathering StormInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamC3C IDG: Apolyton TeamC4DG Gathering Storm
Deity
 
alva's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Republic of Flanders
Posts: 10,747
I think this thread deserves another chance
__________________
#There’s a city in my mind
Come along and take that ride
And it’s all right, baby, it’s all right #
alva is offline  
Old July 3, 2003, 01:50   #18
Dominae
BtS Tri-LeaguePtWDG Gathering StormC4DG Gathering StormApolytoners Hall of Fame
Emperor
 
Dominae's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,017
I'm not sure how I missed this thread the first time...

I would very much like to test the 20 Shield Industrious Worker tweak sometime. alexman, have you ever had the chance to try it out?


Dominae
__________________
And her eyes have all the seeming of a demon's that is dreaming...
Dominae is offline  
Old July 7, 2003, 11:11   #19
alexman
PtWDG Gathering StormCivilization IV CreatorsInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamApolyton UniversityIron CiversCivilization IV: MultiplayerApolytoners Hall of FameCivilization IV PBEMApolyCon 06 Participants
Firaxis Games Software Engineer
 
alexman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1998
Posts: 5,360
Yes, I have tried it out and it seems to work well enough. With this change, industrious civs are not nearly as powerful in the beginning of the game. Without help testing the change, I'm not sure if it makes the trait too weak though.

The only thing I don't like about it is that it changes the shields/food ratio you need for worker factories. For non-industrious civs, you could turn a high food, low production city into a worker factory, but with the change you need even more shields/turn than you do for a settler factory. Some players get annoyed with such changes to micromanagement issues that have become second nature (although I'm not one of them).
alexman is offline  
Old July 7, 2003, 11:17   #20
Arrian
PtWDG Gathering StormInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamApolyton UniversityC4DG Gathering StormPtWDG2 Cake or Death?
Deity
 
Arrian's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Kneel before Grog!
Posts: 17,978
Doubling the cost of industrious workers is pretty draconian, don't you think? Granted, I don't play much MP (demogames only right now), so you know more about it than I do, but it seems to me that your backup changes to speed up non-industrious workers are better.

Or just remove the industrious trait altogether.

-Arrian
__________________
grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.
Arrian is offline  
Old July 7, 2003, 11:29   #21
alexman
PtWDG Gathering StormCivilization IV CreatorsInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamApolyton UniversityIron CiversCivilization IV: MultiplayerApolytoners Hall of FameCivilization IV PBEMApolyCon 06 Participants
Firaxis Games Software Engineer
 
alexman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1998
Posts: 5,360
You may be right.

On the other hand, even with the change, one industrious worker is equivalent to two non-industrious workers (ignoring movement and support), but industrious civs still save one population point. I think that the reduced population cost is more improtant than the reduced shield cost of industrious workers.
alexman is offline  
Old July 7, 2003, 12:01   #22
GodKing
Civilization III Democracy GamePtWDG RoleplayInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamPtWDG2 TabemonoC3C IDG: Apolyton TeamApolyton UniversityC3CDG The Lost BoysCiv4 SP Democracy GameC4DG SarantiumC4WDG CalysiumC4BtSDG Templars
Emperor
 
GodKing's Avatar
 
Local Time: 20:38
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Detroit
Posts: 4,551
Instead of increasing the cost of teh worker, why don't you look at perhaps giving two workers to non indust civs at the beginning...... not sure if it is possible however, been a while since I played with the editor. Just an idea.
__________________
Try peace first. If that does not work, then killing them is often a good solution. :evil:

As long as I could figure a way to hump myself, I would be OK with that
--Con
GodKing is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 20:38.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright © The Apolyton Team