28-08-2001 19:57									#1
	Is MOO3 going to suck Suffering from ads?

Nowadays I am always worried about new versions of old favorites. So what do you think?

I am concerned that the starlane concept will bring the game one step closer to a warp point based game which I think always sucks. Although I am interested in seeing how they implement many things like the combat and the imperial focus.

	28-08-2001 22:31									#2
	Increase Your PM Length

Wait are you worried it is going to suck because it is not enough like the original or because you don't like the concepts behind the game?

If it is the first, I really wished Civ II had more deviation. As it was it was the same game I had played for 5 years. So I am not a big fan of entire conservative sequels.

If it is the second, I must say that I have enjoyed reading what they are trying to accomplish. Force the player to make overall strategy is what I would love to see in any game. I never saw a way to do it. The IFP could accomplish this and that would just be fantastic if they do.

Battles in RT again force the same type of thing. Overall strategy is decided by the player but actual implementation is up to the computer. The whole game is like the player is making the pencil marks on a painting of how he wants to see his civ develop and then the marks are filled in with the actual colors by the computer. It should be a great experience.

	28-08-2001 22:57									#3
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

The second. I am worried that some of the new concepts aren't going to work well. I agree with your assesment of Civ2.

Most of the new things look good, but not all. Plus, the ones that look good can be easily screwed up.

	29-08-2001 05:55									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Both.

Being the Yin26 of MoO , there are a number of concerns I have with the new sequel:

1. Sequels done by a different design team do not live up to their promises. There is no exception to this rule, yet.

2. Leaving the actual implementation of your directions to the computer is a dumb idea. It will be less dumb if this can be turned off.

3. Going overboard in adding complexity is yet another dumb idea. Not only it will make the game less fun, it will require more computing power.

4. Putting [2] and [3] together, i.e., making the game more complex and leaving the actual implementation up to the program is massively dumb.

While I wish them luck, it looks like the Quicksilver team is heading down a very bad path.

	29-08-2001 11:47									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I think the imperial focus is a very good idea. This feature help to eliminate the tedious end game management, when you have 50+ planets and 100+ starships to babysitt. Of course in the beginning you can micromanage every little details, anyway that is the time when somebody win the game.
We cannot realy say Alan Emrich is new to this MOO series. He helped with the first MOO to the original team, and he wrote the strategy guide, so he knows the MOO games inside-out. So I am certain we will get a very good and enjoyable game next year form his team.

	29-08-2001 14:08									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

I don't know which way to go. MOO2 sucked, and the original MOO was one of the greatest games ever made. I still play it.

but this is being made by an entirely different team. it might be good. I doubt it, though. this imperial focus thing looks like it would limit the player's ability to manage his empire. governors are OK, but they often would go and do things I don't want them to do.

When playing the moojr scenario for fantastic worlds, my governors would often build police stations (under a fundamentalism!!) and I would have to go in and tell them to knock it off. I try to imagine the horror as my governors go and do some crazy things and I can't get them to fix it because I've run out of imperial focus.

eventually, I predict the game bogging down into me screaming at a few of my governors to do something right, while the rest of them go ahead and do what they want, acting pretty much like any computer AI. not something I look forward to.

in the recent discussions on RTS vs. TBS, it has been pointed out that the greater strategy depth is in TBS because of the ability to look at everything that's going on, and tweak it minutely. Some people have played AOK on slow and pausing a lot, making it somewhat like plaing a TBS. it looks like MOO3 will take a TBS and force you to play it like an RTS. step backward, I say

	29-08-2001 15:04									#7
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

oh boy. Looks like you're going to have the same discussions we had at the QSI MoO3 forum.

IFP and handing control over to AI leaders has always the first and foremost topic people complain about. One thing you guys should remember though is that the enemy AI has the same problem too. It too has to issue commands to it's empire through the IFP system.

Basicaly, what IFP is is a way to prevent an empire on a roll from winning the game in the first quarter of the game just by getting substantialy bigger than the others early on (as it was in MoO3: reach critical mass, then spent several hours mopping up). In MoO3, it gets progressively harder to run your empire the larger it gets (both for human and AI players), evening out the odds between large and small empires somewhat. It's not the only mechanism too. You can read more about it on the official site (moo3.quicksilver.com)

	29-08-2001 15:14									#8
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Where is the "I hope/think not, but who knows" option?

	29-08-2001 17:00									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

That's what the maybe is for

UR, good points. Although I have always wanted a real "you be the emperor" game where you make the big descisions and get reports on what happened like it would be in real life. You points are probably valid as it could be a disaster, but I am interested to try!

	30-08-2001 04:23									#10
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger Both. Being the Yin26 of MoO , there are a number of concerns I have with the new sequel: 1. Sequels done by a different design team do not live up to their promises. There is no exception to this rule, yet. 2. Leaving the actual implementation of your directions to the computer is a dumb idea. It will be less dumb if this can be turned off. 3. Going overboard in adding complexity is yet another dumb idea. Not only it will make the game less fun, it will require more computing power. 4. Putting [2] and [3] together, i.e., making the game more complex and leaving the actual implementation up to the program is massively dumb. While I wish them luck, it looks like the Quicksilver team is heading down a very bad path.

Urban Ranger, You would have to try hard to be more wrong.

Yin is the Yin of Civ and not the Yin of Moo, because Yin has, imo, a very good brain.

To put Yin´s ideas upside down is massively dumb.

ad 1) Statistics come into play only with large numbers. How many 'sequels, but from a different design team' have there been lately?

A sequel from, I think, a different design team, was '
Dune II'.

ad 2) Have You ever played one of the old SSG wargames? The great thing about them was a correct perspective . If Your role was a general, You could *not* give orders to individual units, because a military hierarchy doesn´t work like that. You gave orders to Your (AI) sub-commanders, and they implemented them as they saw fit.

This is the reason why SSG games were realistic and exciting, and why Talonsoft games are unrealistic and boring. The most important thing with a good simulation is to put realistic limits on players` choices .

Let me repeat that:

The most important thing with a good simulation is to put realistic limits on players` choices .

ad 3) If You want little complexity, play Tetris.

Simulations are about complexity, and nothing much else. There can never be a strategy game, let alone history/sci-fi simulation, with too much complexity. Of course they have to organize it well so that the information is accessible. And they have to deliver a comprehensive manual.

	30-08-2001 04:34									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Fyunch(click) oh boy. Looks like you're going to have the same discussions we had at the QSI MoO3 forum. IFP and handing control over to AI leaders has always the first and foremost topic people complain about.

I suppose so. I really, really, really hope Alan Emrich is not going to water down his brilliant approach because of the complaints of those Attention Deficit Syndrome kids.

	30-08-2001 08:03									#12
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune ad 1) Statistics come into play only with large numbers.

Yes, but what is a large number? This is comparative in teams of the total sample space. Since there are not that many sequels by different design teams, the total sample space is small. Is this invalid? Not necessarily.

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune How many 'sequels, but from a different design team' have there been lately?

There are many sequels from a different design team than their original creator. Off the top of my head:

- XCOM 3
- Railroad Tycoon 2
- Call to Power & CtP 2
- Test of Time

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune A sequel from, I think, a different design team, was ' Dune II'.

Unclear on this point.

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune ad 2) Have You ever played one of the old SSG wargames? The great thing about them was a correct perspective . If Your role was a general, You could *not* give orders to individual units, because a military hierarchy doesn´t work like that. You gave orders to Your (AI) sub-commanders, and they implemented them as they saw fit.

I have played some SSG games but I'm not sure to which you are referring. At any rate you are making a wrong comparison since MoO 3 is not a wargame. It has elements of combat, but the game itself is not focused on battles and how military units are organised.

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune Let me repeat that: The most important thing with a good simulation is to put realistic limits on players` choices .

You can repeat that a million times without any effect whatsoever, because MoO 3 is not a simulation. Simulation?

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune ad 3) If You want little complexity, play Tetris.

Let me show you a very simple game. It's called Go.

You don't appear to understand that, just because a game is simple doesn't mean no deep strategy is involved.

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune Simulations are about complexity, and nothing much else.

Really? Played SimCity before?

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune There can never be a strategy game, let alone history/sci-fi simulation, with too much complexity.

First of all, there's no such thing as a sci-fi simulation. Secondly, MoO 3 will be far from a simulation. Shall we start discussing things such as flight models, population growth models, etc? Thirdly, surely there is such a thing as too much complexity. There is a limitation on human capacity afterall.

	30-08-2001 10:08									#13
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Yin is the Yin of Civ and not the Yin of Moo, because Yin has, imo, a very good brain.

Hey! Talk like that could get you in trouble around Apolyton!

So far, I think the MOO3 team is doing some things very well. I will admit that I have not followed the development as closely as I have with Civ 3, but I am FAR more excited about MOO 3 and feel that (with my limited knowledge of either game aside) MOO3 will be a game you keep on your hard-drive because you love it, while Civ 3 IF it stays on your hard-drive will be because the community modded it.

	30-08-2001 21:11									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Hmmmm...well, while I can't say I'm inspired much by the title of the poll, at least I'm glad to see that overall expectations are positive. I'd hate to think I'd spent so many hours working on a game that people would figure was going to suck.

	31-08-2001 05:29									#15
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by yin26 Hey! Talk like that could get you in trouble around Apolyton! So far, I think the MOO3 team is doing some things very well. I will admit that I have not followed the development as closely as I have with Civ 3, but I am FAR more excited about MOO 3 and feel that (with my limited knowledge of either game aside) MOO3 will be a game you keep on your hard-drive because you love it, while Civ 3 IF it stays on your hard-drive will be because the community modded it.

WOW ive never seen you so positive. I personally think civ3 will be a great game, but this isn't that forum is it.
I also have not been following the MOO3 production NEARLY as closely as the civ3, but I expect that it wil be good from what I have heard. byt the way. I LOVE COMPLEXITY, so while it may be big on your hard drive and system requirements (and most likely be delayed quite a bit) I will like the game.

Also, while I like the idea of IFP to some extent, and for some purposes, I really wish that there were an option to turn this off, for both you and the AI, like if you really wanted to have an incredibly long game, and micromanage everything.

	31-08-2001 05:46									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Well, maybe I'm so positive BECAUSE I haven't followed it closely? But seriously, some things I really like about the effort at QS so far:

** Directly and consistently working with the public to get feedback. I can't stress how important and how rare that is. It's amazing to me that companies have a virtually free means of finding out what their consumers want...and yet they design in a vacuum and hope. Makes no sense.

** The decision to release MOO3 3 months AFTER Civ3. Not only does this mean they are not worried about the Christmas window, but they will be able to play and learn some things from Civ3, watch the reception of its various features...and at the very least have the opportunity to polish and tweak. So while Civ 3's first major (and most likely NECESSARY) patch will be coming about 3 months after its release, MOO3 will be hitting the market. If the timing is good, they'll attract a lot of frustrated Civvers who otherwise might not have bought the game if they were released at the same time. Great move.

** Trying new stuff. Let's face it: This is industry is often sooo damn conservative it's a wonder it still makes any money at all. I will be the first to say that MOO3 could flop because of its "messing with the forumula." 10 times out of 10, I would rather buy a polished game that tries something new than a cookie-cutter game that takes another 4 months for patches because the designers and publisher never really cared about the gamer to begin with.

** Sending the message that the game is a labor of love. This is important. I want to think the a game's designers are loving every minute of the project and not just clocking in time or looking at this game as a step to the next one. Firaxis, if you ask me, has been a cold fish. Infogrames has forced them to a holiday (heck, OCTOBER!) release, and I have heard basically NO excitement from them about working on the project. Jesus, even Sid comes out and says stuff like: "Well, I thought Civ was behind me, but what the hell."

Hardly inspiring by contrast.

	31-08-2001 06:58									#17
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by yin26 Well, maybe I'm so positive BECAUSE I haven't followed it closely? But seriously, some things I really like about the effort at QS so far:

To the same token, I am probably really positive about MoO3 because I played the original two only on a rare occassion. I was more of a Civ and Stars! player. So for me MOO3 really represents a new game for me. So that is probably the reason I am most excited.

quote: ** Directly and consistently working with the public to get feedback. I can't stress how important and how rare that is. It's amazing to me that companies have a virtually free means of finding out what their consumers want...and yet they design in a vacuum and hope. Makes no sense.

I think this is in big part because Alan is really a game player not a game designer. He always wanted to be a part of the process and now that he has gotten that chance he is letting us all in on the ride. Which means that the difference is because they came from different places.

I think for MOO it is really important to have a big involvement of the community. It has always lived in the shadows of Civ. Now it is listening and caring about consumers, building a community before release. Firaxis said something about learning how to build communities from Maxis, they choose the wrong company. They should have looked at Quicksilver within the Infogrames umbrella.

quote: ** The decision to release MOO3 3 months AFTER Civ3. Not only does this mean they are not worried about the Christmas window, but they will be able to play and learn some things from Civ3, watch the reception of its various features...and at the very least have the opportunity to polish and tweak. So while Civ 3's first major (and most likely NECESSARY) patch will be coming about 3 months after its release, MOO3 will be hitting the market. If the timing is good, they'll attract a lot of frustrated Civvers who otherwise might not have bought the game if they were released at the same time. Great move.

To me I agree with Christmas stuff. Most great games are released after Christmas when companies missed their window. Blizzard is always doing so and they still sell a ton during the spring season. Maxis and the Sims. Black and White. Spring is the time for the best games, the ones that missed Christmas because they were still polishing and not in a financial rush to release the game.

But I must say the three months after Civ III release window is some what cheap. I mean if it is coming from Infogrames than I would say it is just because they don't want two TBS games competing against each other. But coming from Quicksilver it is kind of saying were going to come out after and do better. I don't know, it to me is kind of petty.

quote: ** Trying new stuff. Let's face it: This is industry is often sooo damn conservative it's a wonder it still makes any money at all...

Agreed.

quote: ** Sending the message that the game is a labor of love. This is important. I want to think the a game's designers are loving every minute of the project and not just clocking in time or looking at this game as a step to the next one. Firaxis, if you ask me, has been a cold fish. Infogrames has forced them to a holiday (heck, OCTOBER!) release, and I have heard basically NO excitement from them about working on the project. Jesus, even Sid comes out and says stuff like: "Well, I thought Civ was behind me, but what the hell." Hardly inspiring by contrast.

Again a big agreed. Quicksilver really wants to do this game. They are dedicated to it. It is this or none of them have a job. Many came within the forums and are now on developement. They love this game. This is their life.

I think similar things happened at Blizzard. There one of their map editor designers took a labtop to the hospital. He had to work on the game. Of course the problem with this is that his wife was in the hospital giving birth.

When she came out of labor he was still plugging away on the labtop working on the game. She asked him why didn't he put the damn game down for a little while. He told her that it wasn't a game, it was StarCraft.

Love for what you do is big and it shows in how the game turns out.

	31-08-2001 07:42									#18
	Tired of ads?

quote: I think similar things happened at Blizzard. There one of their map editor designers took a labtop to the hospital. He had to work on the game. Of course the problem with this is that his wife was in the hospital giving birth.

LOL! Yes, I read about that. Reminds me of Phil Steinmeyer's comment when his baby was born and the same day that Tropico was released. He said, basically, that the release of Tropico was a bigger deal to him because he has the rest of his life to see his son grow.

Thank God for those nut-case game designers / programmers who sacrifice everything for what they love!

	31-08-2001 08:10									#19
	The Savior of The TBS Genre Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

For what I know right now, I'd say ...the best feature is the combination of RTS battles and TBS overall management. I think it is THIS kind of gameplay mechanics, melted togheter on a powerful and highly playable engine, that should make MoO3 a great space-opera game. The IFPs are only there to allow playing in a galaxy of 10,000 colonies ,and thousands of ships around...and maintaining your leaders in line of course!

To answer the meaning of this thread, not only MoO3 is NOT going to suck ( perhaps the thread's title should have been more positive oriented: is MoO3 to be a huge hit???), it's going to be a surprise hit if they can implement all the inputs shown on the official site.

	31-08-2001 08:20									#20
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by dainbramaged13 Also, while I like the idea of IFP to some extent, and for some purposes, I really wish that there were an option to turn this off, for both you and the AI, like if you really wanted to have an incredibly long game, and micromanage everything.

dainbramaged13, I've just read a reply from Stormhound answering that and I quote him in my own words: you will NOT be able to disable the IFPs, either on multiplayer and single-player. He says that the whole game is constructed upon this points system.

	31-08-2001 08:54									#21
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by tniem But I must say the three months after Civ III release window is some what cheap. I mean if it is coming from Infogrames than I would say it is just because they don't want two TBS games competing against each other. But coming from Quicksilver it is kind of saying were going to come out after and do better. I don't know, it to me is kind of petty.

It's entirely Infogrames' call; they're the publisher, and they didn't want the games competing directly for sales. We're not in competition with Sid; if anything, we want both games to sell well as it increases the chances for a MoM2, which we're quite keen on taking a crack at. Both games need to be good sellers, so that Infogrames will remain committed to the TBS market.

	31-08-2001 09:32									#22
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Stormhound:

Their decision makes perfect sense to me. I'm just damn happy that MOO3 is the one being released LATER. You guys are really going to be in a sweet spot.

My only concern: What are the advertising plans? Seems like Civ 3 is getting better coverage just for being a Sid game. This is understandable, but PLEASE don't let MOO3 go quietly into that good night...

	31-08-2001 09:49									#23
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Hmm. When I read that moo3 was coming 3 out three months after civ3 i didn't think it was because of any strategy. i thought it was just because civ3 was still supposedly a long ways off, like the holy grail, and they were just a bit farther. Sorta like ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.



While I only breifely played either moo1 or moo2, i am willing to give the ifp system a chance. but it all depends on their implamentation of the ai. if they hired proffesionals (of which there are quite few ) for the ai, or put out a LOT of effort of their own, then it will work. If the ai is even the slightest bit stupid, then people will scream bloody murder.

Personalyl after following black and white with breathless anticipation for 3 years, only to be utterly disaspointed, i've avoided reading about moo3. as i did with diablo2exp. unfortunatly i couldn't contain my curiousity abotu civ3 and i'm already disapointed.

anticipation is a *@#^@.

	31-08-2001 09:53									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Okay, I haven't read the whole thread as first several posts are just down right Negative and close-minded....typical conservative who is afraid of change. So i may repeat some things. If you don't like MOO3, then simply go back to play MOO, simple as that. I can see how Negativity would annoy the Designers. Instead of complaining and repeat it all over the place, make suggestions and think POSITIVE. Give the team good karma, not bad

I wouldn't mind allowing the Governors run things...aslong as the AI ain't stupid. IFP will work, aslong as they have a good AI system. if MOO3 has bad AI, then of course the IFP will not work.
And there won't entirally ONE AI for the Overall thing...there will be multiple AI algorithms...one for the Emperor(which would be the most complex...hopefully), each Governor, each Minister, each Leader, each Admiral, each Captain, etc...

If you end up having one stupid Governor, then its your job as a Emperor to Fire him and get a new one...if you don't or cannot do to IFP, then the fault goes to the Emperor

As for the RTS thing, i prefer RTS then turn base...aslong as there is a Pause, Play, Fast-Forward, etc... buttons like in X-COM: Apocalypse. I rather have the Ship battles run something like Homeworld, Harpoon, etc then Turn base, which is unrealistic. In r/l, i wouldn't not allow the enemy to get into range and destroy half my fleet before i get a chance to Fire back. Thats one of the annoying things about MOO2. You practicly have to build Defensive and Offensive ships. Defence will be geared to have the ships be able to take heavy punishment and then whatever left for weapons. Where in Offensive, gear the ships to have the biggest guns in numbers s you can blast the enemy before they a get chance to fire back. That, in my opinion is pathetic.... sure may try a variety of designs in a fleet, but in Moo2, won't allow you to place the ships...so the darn game ends putting your offencers with low armor in front then the defencers with low guns at the back. Pretty annoying. Also, RTS allows the players to get through battles a lot quicker then spend an hour on some pathetic battle...... Birth of the Federation had the right idea about ship-to-ship battles, but they could of done better... but had fun with anyway....hey, i was able to get a small fleet of raider type ships to cause a lot of damage to the enemy battleships before being eliminated in BOTF....

If RTS battles in Moo3 will be something like Harpoon which Stormhound used as an example, would be hoot of lot fun
All little battles will leave to the Admirals...but the big huge important ones i want to be able to lead

-LMP

	31-08-2001 14:45									#25
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Fyunch(click) IFP and handing control over to AI leaders has always the first and foremost topic people complain about. One thing you guys should remember though is that the enemy AI has the same problem too. It too has to issue commands to it's empire through the IFP system.

get the mote out of your eye

the AI has to use the IFP system? that means it has to hand a lot of the micromanagement over to the AI. That means handing the job to itself.

Irrelevant in the big picture. I picture a game with large complexity I can't enjoy because of this ridiculous IFP.

	31-08-2001 18:26									#26
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

(answering various bits)

AI: We hired someone specifically for that a year ago. More people are working on it now.

AI handing the job to itself: Not quite. There's an AI that makes the "big picture" level decisions, simulating what the player does (trying to decide what's most important to do at any given time, and how to respond). Then there's the AI that simulates subordinates, which both the player and the AI-player have to deal with.

Advertising: I just answered much the same question on our forum. Infogrames has to gear their campaigns carefully. Besides, Civ3 is the big flashy title with the Grand Old Man of TBS at the helm, and all the pomp and circumstance. MoO3 will get its share of the limelight, don't you worry.

KC7MXO: That a Ham call sign? (g) KC0EKV here.

	01-09-2001 17:31									#27
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by [LordLMP] Okay, I haven't read the whole thread as first several posts are just down right Negative and close-minded....typical conservative who is afraid of change.

Nope, all wrong. Branding those who disagree with you?

	02-09-2001 02:06									#28
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

What an incredibly loaded polling question.

	16-09-2001 11:00									#29
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Father Beast I don't know which way to go. MOO2 sucked, and the original MOO was one of the greatest games ever made. I still play it. but this is being made by an entirely different team. it might be good. I doubt it, though. this imperial focus thing looks like it would limit the player's ability to manage his empire. governors are OK, but they often would go and do things I don't want them to do. When playing the moojr scenario for fantastic worlds, my governors would often build police stations (under a fundamentalism!!) and I would have to go in and tell them to knock it off. I try to imagine the horror as my governors go and do some crazy things and I can't get them to fix it because I've run out of imperial focus. eventually, I predict the game bogging down into me screaming at a few of my governors to do something right, while the rest of them go ahead and do what they want, acting pretty much like any computer AI. not something I look forward to. in the recent discussions on RTS vs. TBS, it has been pointed out that the greater strategy depth is in TBS because of the ability to look at everything that's going on, and tweak it minutely. Some people have played AOK on slow and pausing a lot, making it somewhat like plaing a TBS. it looks like MOO3 will take a TBS and force you to play it like an RTS. step backward, I say

You need to learn to win with disadvantages. In the real world, top brass has to let lower-downs make decisions. Some of them will be wrong. you just nchalk that up to size of empire and move along. Who cares about some police stations getting built if you are moving howies for an important battle.

Breath in deep. "LET THE PERFECTIONISM GO!"

	16-09-2001 11:09									#30
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Stormhound KC7MXO: That a Ham call sign? (g) KC0EKV here.

Hey cool! I couldn't get him to tell what that meant. Back on the AOL Civ boards, 4 years ago. Now I know!