New Eight Civs analysis: just the facts ma'am - Page 2

kring · May 16, 2003, 12:35

In Vanilla Civ 3, the max was 31+ Barbs; the game came with 16 + Barbs. All PtW did was add 8 more civs.

The question is did they add the ability to play more than 31+ Barbs, or allow 32 with no Barbs? Other possibilities could include: having 32 civs, but a max of 31+ Barbs in any game; PtW and C3C civs are not playable together, etc.

Louis XXIV · May 16, 2003, 12:40

Kring, I think you were wrong.

I thought you had to replace civs (In a PTW chat they said they managed to increase the civ number to 31 max)

Spiffor · May 16, 2003, 12:51

IIRC, there was a problem in the early versions of Civ3 : the game was coded to host max. 31 civs + Barbs, but all colors past the 17th were buggy (i.e, your game would have bugged if you modded a Civ's colour to take a colour from the bottom of the list)

Stefu · May 16, 2003, 13:57

Can we be absolutely sure that the Hittites will be a regular game civ, anyhow? I mean, we know that there's going to be a scenario covering the Mesopotamian area. Couldn't the Hittites be a civ only for that scenario? I mean, since now we can do leaderheads, it's possible they'll do them for their scenarios, too...

The Templar · May 16, 2003, 14:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Stefu
Can we be absolutely sure that the Hittites will be a regular game civ, anyhow? I mean, we know that there's going to be a scenario covering the Mesopotamian area. Couldn't the Hittites be a civ only for that scenario? I mean, since now we can do leaderheads, it's possible they'll do them for their scenarios, too...

Good grief! The ancient middle east is going to be filled with third raters in Conquests if these aren't only scenario civs. Then again, if your going to pay for the art - why pay to make scenario-only civs?

Are there even enough city names to support all these ancient guys? How many civs are going to end up with a city named 'Ur' now?

History Guy · May 16, 2003, 16:57

I'd have to agree. Sumeria is pushing it with Babylon around. I'd never have thought it possible to make two distinct civ lists for them, since they are just the same bunch, really. The Hittites don't deserve a place in civilization (I'd say the same for the Mongols if I didn't secretly like the Keshik...whoops!), and I think they were the worst choice yet.

Stefu, no, I'm sure they aren't just for the scenario. Why go through all the trouble of making a leaderhead (and a very fine leaderhead it is too, despite the Ishtar Gate in the background) for a civ that only goes into a scenario that some players won't spend more than a few minutes glancing at?

dexters · May 16, 2003, 17:22

Maybe Civil war is possible in Conquests?

monkspider · May 16, 2003, 18:20

Interesting point Stefu, I never really thought about that. What you say is possible, if, and only if, they got the pictures switched. Otherwise the Hittitie leader shown is clearly in middle-age attire, implying that they are not a scenario-only civ.

Panag · May 16, 2003, 18:28

Sid Meier's Civilization® III: Conquests is the 2nd exciting expansion pack to Sid Meier's Civilization® III, the greatest strategy game of all-time!

Sid Meier's Civilization® III: Conquests takes players on a provocative journey through the ages as they pursue victory in the most famous conquests in history.

What does Civ® Conquests give to fans of the award-winning series? Simply put - more Civ: More to Build, More to Fight, More to Rule!

Civ fans will discover intriguing new civilizations, units, wonders, technologies, and abilities to help them triumph in eight professionally designed conquests throughout history. Compete as one of the eight new Civilizations, each with its own powerful leader, unique units and special abilities, and lead your nation to its destiny. New victory conditions, Wonders of the World, terrain elements, resources, city improvements, and governments offer endless variation in your quest to rule the world. Improved multiplayer and play-by-email support, intense diplomatic situations, and a slew of editor enhancements, round out what Time Magazine calls "the greatest computer strategy game of all time."

Do you have what it takes to lead a civilization to greatness? Or, will your nation be conquered by some greater power? You decide.

Take over the World - One Conquest at a time!

Eight professionally designed adventures challenge you to recreate the great conquests of history. Battle for control of Mesopotamia in the Cradle of Civilization, or for the rich and vast resources in the Americas. Then, embark on a campaign through time as you attempt to conquer some of the most powerful civilizations ever and earn a place among the greatest leaders in history!

GAME FEATURES

New Civilizations: Eight new powerful civilizations from the innovative Sumerians to the mystical Mayans.
New Units: Use Trebuchets to batter down the enemy's walls or Sumerian Enkidu Warriors to quickly gain military dominance.
Disasters: Beware the volcanoes, or Pompeii could become your reality.
Diplomacy Options: Locked alliances allow good vs. evil conflicts you'll never forget.
Map Features: Bombard the enemy and leave behind craters.
Resources: Fight for control over Tobacco, Jade, and Exotic Birds.
Wonders: Build the statue of Zeus to make your troops powerful.
Governments: Forming an Islamic Sultanate is just one of the new ways to rule your people.
...And much, much, more!
Civilization® III: Conquests requires the original Civilization® III product in order to play.

hi ,

, maybe they have put the barbs in a special coded corner and they dont count as a "civ" anymore , .....

have a nice day

Spiffor · May 16, 2003, 18:30

All this artwork must have taken much time and money. IIRC, It's because of artwork reasons that there were less playable civs in vanilla Civ3 than in vanilla Civ2.

I'm 99% positive Firaxis will sell the Hittites as one of the 8 Civs of the pack, because it would really not be profitable to do such a hard work for a mere small portion of the product.

kring · May 16, 2003, 18:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Louis XXIV
Kring, I think you were wrong.

I thought you had to replace civs (In a PTW chat they said they managed to increase the civ number to 31 max)

http://www.bclay.com/civ3maps/tutorials/AddingCivs.asp , this tutorial was designed for vanilla Civ 3, 1.29f patch. In the early game, the ability to add new civs (the add button) was hidden, but some people stumbled over how to do so. The add button was subsequently put in a patch.

This is from the the 1.29f Patch Readme:

Quote:

* Editor: Enabled Add/Delete buttons for Civilizations. Note that there is a maximum of 32 Civilizations.

Panag · May 16, 2003, 18:50

hi ,

all the new screenshots are in this thread > http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...20#post2004424

enjoy

have a nice day

bobbo008 · May 16, 2003, 19:26

"THE DUTCH SHOULD HAVE THE SLOOP or possibly FLUYT AS THEIR UU, A FASTER MORE ABLE CARAQVEL"

caravel? come on...

the the Man-o-War is an all but useless unit, i wouldnt want to see another sailing UU

Krakan · May 17, 2003, 00:11

Incans are definitely in; one screenie is the incan scout. Is the Gilgamesh leaderhead for Sumeria, or a different civ?

Louis XXIV · May 17, 2003, 00:20

Gilgamesh is Sumerian, the Sumerian UU is the funny looking Endiku warrior

The other leaderhead besides Gilgamesh is Mursilis of the Hittites
Also, there is a Mayan Javelineer

History Guy · May 17, 2003, 11:07

Louis, a Mayan Javelineer, an Incan Scout, and a trebuchet! One wonders if the trebuchet will be the only generic new unit in this X-Pack...

The Templar · May 17, 2003, 15:03

Quote:

Originally posted by dexters
Maybe Civil war is possible in Conquests?

One can only hope!

I would like to see more modern civs added. Perhaps Australia or Indonesia would do (also rounding out the map). Also, more modern American civs would be nice. How about Brazil? Chile? Argentina? Peru? These would also round out the map. And before you say Brazil or Peru are too small or too new, I'd poit out that historically the Hittites were a flash in the pan of their era - a brief moment of glory. Not everything can be Egypt, China, and India - civs that have endured in one form or another through a good chunk of history. But the focus in Conquests looks to be more ancient.

The Templar · May 17, 2003, 15:06

Quote:

Originally posted by History Guy
Louis, a Mayan Javelineer, an Incan Scout, and a trebuchet! One wonders if the trebuchet will be the only generic new unit in this X-Pack...

What exactly does a trebuchet add in terms of gameplay? Do we really need a bombard unit between catapults and cannon? Will the trebuchet be a sort of super-bombard unit that costs more and is more powerful than a cannon (think AoK here) and costs more?

Sounds almost like more padding in the game than substance.

Panag · May 17, 2003, 15:14

Quote:

Originally posted by The Templar

What exactly does a trebuchet add in terms of gameplay? Do we really need a bombard unit between catapults and cannon? Will the trebuchet be a sort of super-bombard unit that costs more and is more powerful than a cannon (think AoK here) and costs more?

Sounds almost like more padding in the game than substance.

hi ,

it shall probably be like a catapult with more chances of hitting something , two spaces away or so , .....

have a nice day

Louis XXIV · May 17, 2003, 15:39

It probably will be a catapult with a 6 (instead of 4) bombard

I would like them to pad the game with a ton of units (like DYP)

I don't think it'll be the onlu non-UU. PTW had 2

History Guy · May 17, 2003, 16:13

I hope it isn't the only one.

Templar, trebuchets will never be more powerful than cannons!

Tiberius · May 17, 2003, 17:38

I think trebuchets will be units that have more chances to destroy city improvements (especially walls) than a catapult and less chances to hit units. This is important, too, not only the attack/bombard value.

TOUGHUSAGUY · May 17, 2003, 19:53

THE ONLY CIVS SHOULD BE WESTERN CIVS CAUSE THATS WHERE THE IMPORTANT THINGS INVENTS AND HAPPENED IN!

ISRAEL, IRELAND, ITALY, POLAND, SACANDINAVIA, UKRAINE, SLAVIC PEOPLE, AUSTRIA, AND DUTCH

USA USA USA USA USA USA USA!!!!

bobbo008 · May 17, 2003, 20:43

"THE ONLY CIVS SHOULD BE WESTERN CIVS CAUSE THATS WHERE THE IMPORTANT THINGS INVENTS AND HAPPENED IN!

ISRAEL, IRELAND, ITALY, POLAND, SACANDINAVIA, UKRAINE, SLAVIC PEOPLE, AUSTRIA, AND DUTCH

USA USA USA USA USA USA USA!!!!"

you missed several big nations there.

Thirgaral · May 18, 2003, 04:50

Sacandinavia?, It's that small country south of Poland, right?

Anyway...Scandinavia is already in PtW....

Louis XXIV · May 18, 2003, 12:20

I have an idea for a Hittite UU

Hittites used Chariots (same as Egypt) so it is very difficult to think of a UU.

But Hittite Chariots were lighter.

Maybe they could be 20 cost, 1.1.3 requires Horses

Is that un-balanced?

The Emperor Fabulous · May 18, 2003, 15:32

With the inclusion of the Sumerians and Hittites from the Fertile Crescent, and the Incans and Mayans from the Americas, I'm willing to wager that there will be one from Europe, one from Africa, and one from Asia, leaving one more to come from any of those regions. That discounts the Hebrews. As far as other Native American tribes, its possible they'll do that, but I bet they'll go across the world more.

I'd say it'll be the Byzantines, the Slavs, the Nubians, and the Khmer.

Selanne · May 18, 2003, 16:13

I find the middle-east and Europe far too crowded already. The eight I'd suggest if I had control:

1. Ethiopia(Axum)
2. Mali/Songhai
3. Khmer
4. Java (Majapahit)
5. Inca
6. Sioux

The last 2 are harder...
7. Mwenemutapa (which would require renaming some Zulu cities ie Great Zimbabwe) - or if not them then Luba/Lunda or perhaps Congo to give Southern Africa greater representation.
8. Somewhere in South America, but the Inca encompass the area of the only older Civs I know about. Gran Columbia (however short lived) and Brazil would be ideas for modern Civs.

Zero · May 18, 2003, 16:31

Someone said way before that offensive spearmen would be a useless UU because of babylon bowmen.

I disagree. There would be alot of difference.

first the upgrade path differs. Second, your research strategy differs as well. And third, even if UU is exactly the same, if s=civ traits are different from babylon, you would still face a civ with different strategy, so I wouldnt mind having another 2/2/1 stat unit.

Also, Just IMO, but I think whoever is industrial/exp is gonna really rock. Unless they give that civ a UU thats worse than the F-15.... Americans are a pretty good civ "w/o a UU". Imagine if they have a viable UU.....

Trait combos that havent been doubled yet... Im guessing these are what the 8 civs are gonna try to be, cause having 8 more mil/exp or mil/rel civ would suck.

Trait Combo / Civs that currently have the trait

In/Exp (America) - probably would be my favorite
Mil/Com (Rome)
Mil/Ind (China) - beating china would be pretty hard
Sci/Exp (Russia) - If they have swordmen UU it would rock
Com/Exp(England) - Com/Exp trait civ with land UU? That could be nice
Mil/Sci (Germany) - Anicent UU on this combo would be NICE
Rel/Ind (Egypt) - somewhat later UU than egypt and builders would love it

And one more thing, I'd love to see upgradable or obsolete-able units that currently dont have UUs (pikemen, medieval infantry, riflemen, guerilla) should have a UU version. I intentionally left infantry out of the list cause even though Inf are upgradeable (to mech inf), they dont really go obsolete... and it would be unfair to have a land UU that will always be useful from there and on. (maybe very little advanatage could balance it out with the fact you wont have it for so long, but even so...)

The Templar · May 18, 2003, 17:30

Quote:

Originally posted by History Guy
I hope it isn't the only one.

Templar, trebuchets will never be more powerful than cannons!

I know that and you know that. I was thinking of Age of Kings (an old RTS game) where trebuchets blew the cannon units away (of course, they might have been very primitive cannon units). I just don't see much of a role for these In the game as it stands. If there is a glaring gap in this game, it remains in the Swordsman line. There needs to be a unit between medieval infantry (and longbowmen) and guerillas. Guerillas should be a modern unit (look at that assault rifle!) and a lot tougher.