 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Ralf
|
 |
Sweden
Mar 2000
time: 06:14
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by SoulAssassin
Sid hasn't made a bad Civ game yet, I don't see why Civ 3 would be any different. Sid making a bad Civ game is like George W. Bush becoming the president of MENSA. Although, if there were an electoral college for MENSA he just might. |
 OK, lets take it easy, shall we.
With all due respect; Civ-2 had its flaws. The SMAC-game certainly had its share of design-mistakes as well.
One of the more embarrassedly obvious ones, was that borders didnt extend over over water, allowing AI-civs founding bases directly outside your base-areas. Also, the hardcoded infinite railroad-move rule (I sure hope they make this one optional and editable, this time).
Sure, it was a better game then CTP, yes - but it had above and many, many other minor flaws in it.
Most important of all:
If the jump in AI-strength isnt bigger from SMAC to Civ-3, then it was from Civ-2 and SMAC - then I will get tired of this game VERY quickly. Thats for sure. Heres my list of indirect complaints of the old Civ-2/SMAC-series:
1: Artificall Intelligence in Civ-3
- Better AI production-strength and better civil improvement emphasis.
- Better AI advantage-taking of tech-allowed production possibilities.
- Avoid dust-collecting AI-fortunes: put excess into practical use.
- More efficient AI city-placements and much better land-area exploitation.
- Better AI trade-diplomacy: greedy AI-exchanging rather then gullible.
- Better AI treaty-diplomacy: No more erratic rubberband-rules.
- More or less internal AI quarrels depending on weak or strong HP position.
- Less potshot border-quarrels; more penetrating stacked army AI-attacks.
- Better HP-one-square-away AI-decisions; attack, or flee and/or fortify?
- Better HP city-strength AI-estimations; pillage and/or sieges?
- Better AI-response to extensive HP military build-ups with obvious intentions.
- Quality-before-quantity AI-unit build-strategy: less draining upkeep.
2: Game-customization in Civ-3
- Extensive and flexible checkbox preference-screens, ala SMAC.
- More extensive and more enhanced game-rule text-tweak files.
- Player-editable AI-build & emphasize files; allow AI spoon-feeding.
- Map-editing invisible pre-designated potential AI-city locations.
- More advanced and extensive tools for the scenario-experts out there.
- Drag-and-drop for newbies allowing quick standard-rule scenarios.
- At the moment, I cant think of anythíng more. Feel free to add...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The Rusty Gamer
|
 |
Christchurch, New Zealand
Apr 1999
time: 17:14
|
|
Venom,
Have a go at Tropico. It's neat.
Also, you might want to get hold of Europa Universalis.
Even in Anno 1602 there is some enjoyment to be had.
And for a different slant on colonization try Conquest of the New World.
For space conquest try Imperium Galactica 2.
And I suppose you've already played Master of Orion 2.
Last edited by The Rusty Gamer on 24-05-2001 at 07:34
|
|
| |
|
|
|
me_irate
|
|
I understand about you lack of desire to play civ, at one point i wasn't looking to forward to it. but about 4 months ago or so i started looking stuff up on apolyton and i got the civ bug. so i went out and bought ctp2 (not a bad game at least for multiplay). and that helped me for a while. now that has worn off im a little burnt out but still cant wait for civ3.
also are you the same venom i played ctp2 multiplay with?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ralf
|
|
Sweden
Mar 2000
time: 06:14
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Venom
I'm concerned again now. |
Ok, lets put it like this:
Im not corncerned at all about visible Civ-3 stuff, like graphics, the interface, trade & diplomacy, and so on. Im very confident that the team make the best of it, in these areas. And by the looks of it, they are basically on the right track.
What Im STILL rather concerned about, is all the invisible under-the-hood changes and tweaks that really could help making the AI-strength so much more rewarding and worthwhile, in all the areas listed in my previous reply. Im worried about that not enough emphasize is put into finding and implementing all kinds of shortcuts an innovative solutions in order to achieve substantially better AI-results. Im worried about that they have adapted a lame "something like SMAC" kind of AI-approach from the very start.
I havent heard any update-information yet, talking about ideas & tweaks, solely implemented to boost the AI - significantly above SMAC. At least in overal strategical & logistical areas of the game.
One somewhat reassuring thing though, is that more emphasize seems to be put into urging programmers regurlary playing complete Civ-3 games, as much as reasonably possible. If a good Civ-programmer simultaneously is a weak, or mediocre Civ-player, then... - well, "garbage in garbage out", as they say.
By the way; Click on this This stopped me from playing SMAC. Is CTP-2 any better? thread, that I wrote before the CTP-2 release. Then read Pyarays (staff-member in the CTP-2 team, at the time) rather ambiguous & non-reassuring answer further down, where he tries to dance around my main point.
Last edited by Ralf on 24-05-2001 at 15:46
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14.
Apolyton Time is 00:14. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-05-2001 23:04
|