06-07-2001 12:31									#1
	What online features are planned in Civ III? Get a bigger avatar today!

I have been out of the strategy genre for a few years So can someone tell me what improvements have been made on the online front? Has online gaming advanced very much? How useful are they? Is it popular? How many players play it? What technology is being used (peer-peer? client-sever? match-making?)

And lastly, what is planned for Civilization III? I can't seem to find much on what Civ III is going to be like (from an online point of view)...

Thanks!

KoalaBear33

	07-07-2001 02:39									#2
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

you're at this site... and you can't find anything?

someone get this man glasses.

anyway, Jeff said that they were working on some "cool multiplayer features we are not ready to discuss".

or whatever.

	07-07-2001 03:27									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by UberKruX someone get this man glasses. anyway, Jeff said that they were working on some "cool multiplayer features we are not ready to discuss".

lol hehe ... but you see that quote doesn't reveal anything... I need to know what is exactly going to be in the game... also, I need opinions on what has happened to the strategy genre?

KoalaBear33

	07-07-2001 03:37									#4
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

He hasn't told you because Firaxis haven't told US.

The state of the strategy genre is off-topic but you just have to take a look at sites like gamespot to see what they think of recent titles. Personally I think the genre has never been stronger even though they insist on calling real time clickfests with barely a hint of tactics "strategy games".

	07-07-2001 10:24									#5
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Grumbold Personally I think the genre has never been stronger even though they insist on calling real time clickfests with barely a hint of tactics "strategy games".

I'm actually a bigger a fan of RTS (real time strategy) games so I have to defend them I can't deny the fact that RTS games have less strategy but they are not as dumb as you are making them out to be. RTS games actually have more tactics than strategy games. Tactics like ambushing, rushing, retreating, counter-attacking, and so on play a much bigger role in RTS games.

RTS games do require you to be quick thinking and to have good mouse skills so it won't appeal to all. Nevertheless they aren't that simple...

KoalaBear33

	07-07-2001 11:49									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

[Australian rant]
I'm going to say what just about every Australian you'll meet online will probably have already told you. Koalas are not bears. They are simply called Koalas. There's nothing that looks stupider than some American celeb trying to endear themselves to an Aussie audience by speaking glowingly about our "Koala bears".

Having said that, I know it's quite possible that you're perfectly aware of the fact, and have perhaps even taken on the name just so that suckers like me write posts like this.
[/Australian rant]

	07-07-2001 15:06									#7
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by MidKnight Lament [Australian rant] Having said that, I know it's quite possible that you're perfectly aware of the fact, and have perhaps even taken on the name just so that suckers like me write posts like this. [/Australian rant]

hehe ... It's actually a test to see how many humans know the truth about koalas. For some UNEXPLAINABLE reason, Australians seem to know that koalas aren't bears. Unfortnately the same cannot be said for the rest of the humans

BTW, don't go cutting down the Eucalyptus(sp?) trees over there. Koalas will take over the world one day and they won't ever forgive you for that

KoalaBear33

	07-07-2001 15:32									#8
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by KoalaBear33 I'm actually a bigger a fan of RTS (real time strategy) games so I have to defend them I can't deny the fact that RTS games have less strategy but they are not as dumb as you are making them out to be. RTS games actually have more tactics than strategy games. Tactics like ambushing, rushing, retreating, counter-attacking, and so on play a much bigger role in RTS games. RTS games do require you to be quick thinking and to have good mouse skills so it won't appeal to all. Nevertheless they aren't that simple... KoalaBear33

I agree that the best ones are tactically strong but their emphasis on mouse skills always detract from the tactical strengths. Once they mature and will allow prearranged actions to be timed and interlinked and units themselves have sufficient AI not to get slaughtered if you happen to be looking elsewhere then they will be excellent. If they called themselves real-time tactical games I'd not be so peeved. They are not simple but few of them are large enough scale to be even vaguely strategic.

I also don't have a problem with Koalabears, but they are silly cartoonish stuffed toys like Teddybears, not real animals

	07-07-2001 16:22									#9
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Koala, this site is intended for people to talk about Civ3 related topics. Not to talk about the whole strategy genre itself. I know sometimes people do get off topic, I'm one myself.

Nobody really knows anything yet about the online features. For that matter nobody really knows that much about the game itself.

quote: you're at this site... and you can't find anything?

Yeah, no kidding. This site is loaded with stuff about Civ3.

	08-07-2001 01:26									#10
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Grumbold I agree that the best ones are tactically strong but their emphasis on mouse skills always detract from the tactical strengths. Once they mature and will allow prearranged actions to be timed and interlinked and units themselves have sufficient AI not to get slaughtered if you happen to be looking elsewhere then they will be excellent. If they called themselves real-time tactical games I'd not be so peeved. They are not simple but few of them are large enough scale to be even vaguely strategic.

The reason they are called Real Time STRATEGY games is because they are part of the strategy genre. RTS is a branch of strategy, just like action RPG is a branch of RPG. Most of them are still not strategic but from their (single player) story perspective they are strategic.

As far as mouseclicking is concerned, that won't ever go away. The pace and the nature of the game dictates that one be alert and be responsible for their units. This also adds fun IMO. I don't think the unit AI will ever be improved because part of the fun is in dictating the actions of them. There is a famous joke that goes something like this: in an RTS you can't even leave to get a drink because you might be dead when you come back. Strategy gamers are like armchair philosophers, while RTS gamers are like grassroots philosophers (hope that makes sense--don't know the opposite of armchair lol )

quote: I also don't have a problem with Koalabears, but they are silly cartoonish stuffed toys like Teddybears, not real animals

Are you insulting koalas? When koalas take over the world, you'll be sorry

KoalaBear33

	08-07-2001 01:35									#11
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by TechWins Koala, this site is intended for people to talk about Civ3 related topics. Not to talk about the whole strategy genre itself. I know sometimes people do get off topic, I'm one myself.

I take it that you are the admin. What's wrong with going off-topic? It's not as if this forum gets tons of messages. Hardly any new threads are being pushed off.

I'm just trying to gauge gamers opinions of online features. I have never played online so I'm wondering how the genre is doing. If you don't like that how about suggesting a forum where I can go?

KoalaBear33

	08-07-2001 02:47									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by KoalaBear33 I take it that you are the admin. What's wrong with going off-topic? It's not as if this forum gets tons of messages. Hardly any new threads are being pushed off. I'm just trying to gauge gamers opinions of online features. I have never played online so I'm wondering how the genre is doing. If you don't like that how about suggesting a forum where I can go? KoalaBear33

How about the off topic forum?

	08-07-2001 05:28									#13
	Tired of ads?

... zing ...

the sweed said what we were all thinking .

props to willie

	08-07-2001 06:50									#14
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by UberKruX you're at this site... and you can't find anything? someone get this man glasses. anyway, Jeff said that they were working on some "cool multiplayer features we are not ready to discuss". or whatever.

why do you alwasy have to be so critical of others like this? not everyone has the time/fast internet connection needed to look at every post ever made

































god i hope firaxis make multiplayer playable from behind a fiewall..

	08-07-2001 08:14									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Haha ancient
"screw you"
You silly dolt

	08-07-2001 17:55									#16
	Put an end to popups!

Give the guy a break. It was a ligitimate question related to Civ 3.

	08-07-2001 23:06									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

haha

	15-07-2001 05:45									#18
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by KoalaBear33 I take it that you are the admin. What's wrong with going off-topic? It's not as if this forum gets tons of messages. Hardly any new threads are being pushed off. I'm just trying to gauge gamers opinions of online features. I have never played online so I'm wondering how the genre is doing. If you don't like that how about suggesting a forum where I can go?

Go to the Other Games Forum. Tons of discussion on Strategy games that you might find very enjoyable.

Also, on the issue of what is going on with Multiplayer Civ III, the reason you cannot find everything is simply that it has not been revealed by Firaxis yet. Probably because they are still trying to get some things to work.