 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
vovan
|
|
Personally, I am not bugged at all by the amount of "free" information. In fact, I like it. It brings some sort of diversity to the game. Of course, you could bring diversity using other methods, but think of it this way:
There is too much information to understand and remember the first time you play the game. In fact, you (/I/the player) don't even notice it. You only see the important information. Then you start getting used to the game. You don't read the warnings the game shows you any more. You just know where to look for the name of the building and the name of the city, etc. You don't read the "we have built..." stuff. This is all cool, makes the game faster and all. But it gets boring. That's when this "free" information gets useful. No matter how diverse you make a game, by your 20th civilization (or 50th, or 100th, whatever) you start getting bored and noticing the extra info. That is when it comes in handy.
I agree with you on this, though:
There should be an option of turning the extra info off.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CygnusZ
|
|
I think at the very least with an embassy you should know what techs the other civilizations have.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ludwig
|
|
I think a lot of the free information is just data that would realistically be available to you in the actual situation or event.
In a strategic combat situation, you would generally have a rough idea of the size and composition of the armies in your visual or scouting range.
While exploring, if you entered another civilization, Joe Peasant [or whoever else was the first guy you ran into] would have a fairly good idea of the location of the nearest major city.
If something is so hot that it's a wonder of the world, the odds are that somebody in your civilization - a merchant, a missionary - would have SOME idea of where that wonder was located. If not, it isn't very "wondrous", now is it?
Actually, I think the dearth of available information in CivII sometimes made for unrealistic situations - like Ancient scenarios where you start as the Romans but have no idea of the shape of the Mediterranean, or wars where you have no idea of the unit abilities or size of the enemy state you're facing.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
rah
|
|
Apolyton Prince of Moderators, Master of Reason
|
 |
Lord of the Ferrets
Jan 1970
time: 23:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ludwig
I think a lot of the free information is just data that would realistically be available to you in the actual situation or event.
In a strategic combat situation, you would generally have a rough idea of the size and composition of the armies in your visual or scouting range.
While exploring, if you entered another civilization, Joe Peasant [or whoever else was the first guy you ran into] would have a fairly good idea of the location of the nearest major city.
If something is so hot that it's a wonder of the world, the odds are that somebody in your civilization - a merchant, a missionary - would have SOME idea of where that wonder was located. If not, it isn't very "wondrous", now is it?
Actually, I think the dearth of available information in CivII sometimes made for unrealistic situations - like Ancient scenarios where you start as the Romans but have no idea of the shape of the Mediterranean, or wars where you have no idea of the unit abilities or size of the enemy state you're facing. |
Realistic 
Maybe when the troops are next to your city or if you have a unit next to them you would have a clue what you're facing. But here the army is 10 squares away from your city, and you know the entire make up of the attacking force.
Borders.
You don't even know the civilization exists but you know their borders. Maybe if you've met them for them to tell you, but not before. Stumbling onto a city in CIV II used to be a surprise and would usually cost you the unit if they decided they didn't like you. I miss that.
I'll give you the scenario thing but, I'm sure the first Romans had no clue about the size of the complete Mediterranean. And the first army that ever faced a catapult had no idea what it was until it unleashed a little flurry.
Part of the Fun of previous civs was the discovery. Information is power and something should be expended to get it. At least having to have an embassy with a civ before you know all the techs they have. 
RAH
All the free info will hurt MP. (If this game is ever fixed for the promised exiting an new concepts for MP) 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jolard
|
|
I think that most of this free info is realistic. I might be persuaded on the military stacks issue, but the others are much better this way I believe.
Borders, of course you would know when you cross a border, that is what a border is. Even if it was in ancient times, and there may not be an actual border post, you would come across people, or buildings, or other signs of civilization, and of course you would know that these belong to a different civilization. You may not know the exact location of a city, but the people would be able to point the way!
As for the Wonders of the World, everyone should know exactly where these are. If you have contact with the civ, then you should know exactly which city, if you don't have contact with them directly, but a civ you have contact with has contact with them, then you should at least know which civ has it. This is entirely realistic, as the whole point of the culture bonus you get from these is the idea that other civs are in awe of your wonders. You would promote these like crazy, and everyone would know where they were. In modern times this is especially true, but in ancient times it was the same. The Colossus, or the Pyramids, every government of their time knew where they were.
I believe that techs are the same way. If I am an Iraqi, or an Afghani, I am extremely pissed off, and fully aware, that the United States and Europe are far ahead of me technically. I understand which areas they outstrip me, and I am doing all I can to catch up, buy, steal whatever those technologies. I would be willing to trade money, luxuries, whatever it would take to catch up technically. Of course I know what techs other civs have.
Now, whether all this realism makes for better game play is another question, and I believe that could make for a good discussion, however I think it does make for better gameplay. Just me. However it is definitely more realistic this way. Just my 2 cents!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
kmj
|
|
Maybe when the troops are next to your city or if you have a unit next to them you would have a clue what you're facing. But here the army is 10 squares away from your city, and you know the entire make up of the attacking force.
There is a fog of war, so you must have access to it somehow. If they're within your borders, then you would certainly be able to know all about the army.
Borders.
You don't even know the civilization exists but you know their borders. Maybe if you've met them for them to tell you, but not before. Stumbling onto a city in CIV II used to be a surprise and would usually cost you the unit if they decided they didn't like you. I miss that.
Well, you're wrong, realistically speaking. An army would never "stumble" into a city. This is countries, not cities. You're thinking CivII. If you miss CivII, go play CivII. When you reach a country's border, you'd know you were entering another country... borders represent outlying areas "peasatry", etc.
I'll give you the scenario thing but, I'm sure the first Romans had no clue about the size of the complete Mediterranean.
The first roman armies knew. They knew where they were going before they went there, I'll bet. I'm no history buff, but I'd bet explorers had scouted out the areas long before any invasion forces were even mobilized.
Part of the Fun of previous civs was the discovery. Information is power and something should be expended to get it. At least having to have an embassy with a civ before you know all the techs they have.
I still think there is alot of discovery in the game. I wouldn't have a problem with the option to turn this "free" info off, but I would never use that option.
All the free info will hurt MP. (If this game is ever fixed for the promised exiting an new concepts for MP)
how so?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
rah
|
|
Apolyton Prince of Moderators, Master of Reason
|
|
Lord of the Ferrets
Jan 1970
time: 23:16
|
|
KMJ
"There is a fog of war, so you must have access to it somehow. If they're within your borders, then you would certainly be able to know all about the army. "
I laugh at your ignorance. Throughout history invading armies have tried and sometimes succeeded using methods to disguise just what is included in invasion armies. Without good intel, the defenders did not know sometimes till it was too late. Yeah a scout may be able to decern an elite unit from conscripts but I doubt it could tell a vet from elite unit and the exact proportions in an army. Who are you kidding?
"Well, you're wrong, realistically speaking. An army would never "stumble" into a city. This is countries, not cities. You're thinking CivII. If you miss CivII, go play CivII. When you reach a country's border, you'd know you were entering another country... borders represent outlying areas "peasatry", etc."
I disagree. A scout is on a mountain (in CIV III) and at the end of his vision he sees the border line and can pinpoint the city based on the border config. He can't see past the line yet, so how could he have talked to their local peasantry on top of the mountain. He hasn't come near the border yet so how would he know?
What does CIV II and your ignorant insult have to do with it?
"The first roman armies knew. They knew where they were going before they went there, I'll bet. I'm no history buff, but I'd bet explorers had scouted out the areas long before any invasion forces were even mobilized. "
Thanks for proving my point, HAD SCOUTING OUT THE AREAS (in your own words) all I'm asking is that we have to do the same
"I still think there is alot of discovery in the game. I wouldn't have a problem with the option to turn this "free" info off, but I would never use that option. "
Agreed, but I would always turn on the option. (different stokes for different folks)
"how so?"
I don't know how much you MP but the free info available IN CIV II was the biggest complaint by MPers. In fact one of the patches gave you the option of turning off all the free info in diplomacy screens. Knowing were a city is of a civ that you've never had contact with and never scouted their territory is kinda silly, and very useful info for planning sneak attacks in MP. Knowing what their best possible defensive unit is critical when deciding the makeup of an attack force. Some people may dissagree and that's there right. But ALL of the people that I MP'd with were in agreement on the info issue. You have to earn that valuable info.
RAH
|
|
| |
|
|
|
kmj
|
|
"I laugh at your ignorance."
And I laugh at your arrogance and inability to understand the concept of abstraction. You shouldn't have to manually do everything in the game; some level of intellegence should be taken for granted. That statement sounds kind of like one of the Civ AI quotes... you been spending a little too much time on the computer?? Spend some time in reality, learn about tact, learn some social skills. If you expect anyone to respect your words then you should be a little more careful how you use them.
"I disagree. A scout is on a mountain (in CIV III) and at the end of his vision he sees the border line and can pinpoint the city based on the border config. He can't see past the line yet, so how could he have talked to their local peasantry on top of the mountain. He hasn't come near the border yet so how would he know? What does CIV II and your ignorant insult have to do with it?"
Firstly, what insult? You're the one who's being arrogant and insulting. Second, the border configuration doesn't necessarily imply the exact location of a city. Is it impossible that two cities borders could expand to form something which appeared similar to the border of one city? My reference to CivII was in reference to your statement that you miss stumbling onto a city, by the way... that's what CivII had to do with it. You're the one who brought it up. Like I said, this is a different game, and if you like the old one better, go play it.
"Thanks for proving my point, HAD SCOUTING OUT THE AREAS (in your own words) all I'm asking is that we have to do the same"
Again, abstraction... a scout is one single person, and not necessarily a representative of the military, and shouldn't require a concerted effort. There are only so many turns in the game, and it would be a tremendous waste of resources to have to go through creating special units for scouting, in my opinion.
"Some people may dissagree and that's there right. But ALL of the people that I MP'd with were in agreement on the info issue."
Fair enough; I played very little multiplayer civilization, so I'll take your word for it.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Deity Dude
|
|
Westland, Michigan
Aug 2000
time: 00:16
|
|
OK I'm a little confused by some of the comments.
The world is black until you explore it. Once explored, if it is in a unit's "vision" it is bright, if not it is dark but viewable. Anything that happens in the dark but viewable area you don't see because it is not in a unit's vision. That concept, in general, makes sense and I like that elemet of the game.
Should a player be able to determine pieces in a stack? I don't have a problem with this because the only time you can is when they are in the piece's sight or the "bright area" That makes sense to me - In real life, if you can see a plain, you can certainly see if/what troops are marching thru even if they are in a group. An interesting twist to add realism might have been to make units in jungles and forests invisible.
Should you be able to see city defeders? This to me is similiar to a forest or jungle. I would say unless you have somehow sent a spy in or flew over on a recon mission that you shouldn't have exact info on city defenders.
Should you be able to see a civs border? I don't mind borders being seen. Certainly in modern times you know if you are crossing a border and I think in ancient times you probably would have had a good idea that you were entering into someones territory.
Should you know luxeries/techs/treasury etc about other civs? On this one I agree 100% with RAH. You should have to earn that knowledge at the very least.
Should you be able to tell if a unit is reg/vet/elite? There is an argument to be made both ways on this but in general I would go with RAH on this one and say you shouldn't know that just by looking at them.
Should you know if someone is building or has built a wonder? I would say No, unless you did something to proactivley gain that knowledge. (Remeber, in civ ii MP, it told you if the AI was but not if humans were)
So if it were up to me, I would make the fixes I recomended  before multi-player starts.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
kmj
|
|
Ok, I read your first post and found it insulting. You were critisizing an opinion. So I apologize for my next post and ignore your insults in the next one since you were just responding.
Fair enough; and I the same. I also apologize for coming across as insulting; hopefully you'll allow me to blame it on lack of sleep due to a certain game...
Boarders aren't lines on the ground that can be seen from the mountains. And I don't want to hear about abstract. I'm more concerned with realism on information. (granted realism takes a back seat in this game, but we can still discuss it)
This is definitely a preference issue... although removing them would make problems w/ diplomacy it seems (your army wandering up to an enemy city would (should) piss them off).
Knowing the best defender in a city without expending any resources to do that is something that I don't agree with.
How can you do this w/o spending money on "investigate city"? Did I miss something? If Top 5 or Wonders somehow allow you to see what units are in a city, well, then I agree that's silly. I don't recall any other way of gathering that info.
[b]
Meeting a civ for the very first time and knowing every city/tech/luxury/resource/treasury seems so unrealistic.
[b]
This is true, but I can see why they left it in... diplomacy would be a pain in the ass trying to guess what they have. Maybe if you have to establish an embassy first. (or perhaps if each civ could choose to "display" a subset of each, for bragging rights, or to initiate trades)... but then again I don't mind it since the current way simplifies gameplay, I think.
Of course, if you come from a multiplayer background you may be taking different things into consideration, which lead to different conclusions. In civ2 there were many "cheats" or tricks that I didn't take advantage of simply because it made the game less fun. In a multiplayer environment, things are different.
Ah, well. Again, I apologize for coming across as insulting.. the main reason for my abrasiveness (aside from lack of sleep) is due to the fact that there are so many people who act as if Fireaxis' only responsibility was to make them happy. There are alot of people to please, and overall, while there are things here and there that annoy me, it's still a great game, IMO.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
rah
|
|
Apolyton Prince of Moderators, Master of Reason
|
|
Lord of the Ferrets
Jan 1970
time: 23:16
|
|
Garth Vader,
You hit that one on the head. Played it a few times and didn't particularly like it.
I liked the original MOO though.
DD, Thanks for the comments. I guess my real problem with seeing the borders is real early in the game you have the decision to explore in different directions (hut hunting) you move you scout to the top of a mountain and you see a border. If you're looking to explore virgin terrain you will move in the other direction. If you're trying to meet someone you move towards it. Without that border, you might have made the wrong decision and wasted moves going in the opposite direction. I guess I just feel like you got the info for free. This is a war game. (somewhat anyway) and Information is sometimes more important than troops. I would like the person that takes the extra effort to get the information to make a better decision be rewarded. Old school thinking I'm sure. You have to work for it.
KMJ
No problem. Again, I apologize, As long as you lack of sleep is from Playing
Don't get me wrong, I think the game has some good features.
I think you shouldn't see borders till you have contacted the civ. After that I agree that the borders provide a useful purpose.
You're right about the diplomacy somewhat, but I was definately thinking more along the MP lines, but it is an easy way to see what everyone has and plan your next path.
And seeing how many cities they have, their names and the order they were built in can be real useful.
You can see the best defender when you get near the city. In previous versions you had to send a spy in or actually attack the city to see what was defending.
RAH
Last edited by rah on 07-11-2001 at 18:17
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Barry Brenesal
|
|
I don't see any problem with all the info being presented, provided much of it could be toggled on or off. I seem to recall that some of these options were part of the control set in SMAC. Hopefully, that will be part of an early patch.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Strollen
|
|
I think in general Firaxis did a pretty good job in balancing playability and fog of war.
Border seem like an obvious addition, how do I know if I wandered into somebodies terrorities if there is not a line?
The best defender in a city is a good compomise since I don't know the more important information HOW MANY until I attack, or pay a lot of money. Compared to SMAC or CIV2 this is far more uncertainity.
Actually I find the espionage options in CIV3 to be so expensive they aren't worth doing. Probably cheaper just to rush build a couple of more units than to pay good money to see the defenses.
I think knowing about technological advances are probably unrealistic but again less info than the other Civ games. From a playability aspect, not knowing what resources or tech they have to trade would be pretty hard.
The top 5 cities and wonder building seems very reasonable. I am sure even in ancient times that rumors would travel far. "Do you know what the Egyptians are making these really big pointy buildings." My Uncle told me stories of a friends trip to the most amazing city called Athens it was filled with great temples, courthouse.....
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Thantos
|
|
Grand Junction, Co, USA
May 2000
time: 05:16
|
|
The problem with that war4weaver is that twenty turns is a very long time period even in the modern era were it is only 1 turn = 1 year and in the ancient era where each year represents decades of time. The pace of transfer would be down right glacial.
As far as the available information I dont really have a problem with it overall. Afterall it is only a rationalization to assume that your warrior in the mountains comes across a couple of goatherders who point them in the right direction for another civilization.
Neither do getting the unit specs bother me unduly after all it is either display the information in the open to see at a glance or force the player to consult the book for the unit stats, or worse yet leave the stats invisible completely and annoy the hell out of the players as they look for them in the program text files.
Knowing all of the units in a stack is probably a bit unrealistic but this simplification allowed them to spend coding time elsewear, and lets face it a lack of certain elements such as MP out of the box kind of tells me they were a bit more rushed for time than they would have liked.
As far as knowing the other sides techs and resources absolutely. A bit unrealistic but not so much that I feel that they would need to develope a much more detailed and code intensive work on it. Especially since it would detract from ease of play and speed of play. Not to mention being unrealistic in its own way. After all any major country in the world has a fairly good idea of what the other side has in at least an abstract sense if not an absolute sense. Even if you never want to trade tech for airplanes its kind of hard to hide a commericial airport between two cities for instance.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
kmj
|
|
I think showing borders after contact would be a fine compromise. The same with wonder construction and completion, except that I think if a civ you contacted has contact w/ another civ, then you could know via word of mouth about that other civ's wonders.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
barefootbadass
|
|
I don't have the game yet but from what i have read about this 'free' info, I think all of it makes sense(in an abstracted sense) including what kind of units are in an enemy stack, except for the part of telling which units are elite or veteran. If a stack has some tanks in it, you can see them, quite easily and this is not unreasonable. But it is a little silly that just looking at them you could tell that they were seasoned fighters(although you might be able to guess it if they were 'beat up'(abstracted to the hp bar I guess).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CharlotteCivver
|
|
I would like to offer one point in the heated boreders conversation.
A border is not necessarily a national border like we have today. The border indicates that nation that has the most cultural influence on the area. This would be information that the area peasants would know about, so the scout would able to figure this out in his decade of scouting the area.
Imagine you had a scouting unit from Canada end up in Fargo, ND - a city that is really too small to be modelled in Civ. It might be in the cultural sphere of Minneapolis or Chicago/Milwaukee, I suppose.
If you went to somebody in Fargo, would they be able to tell you "I'm an American"? Of course they would. Similarly, folks across the border in Canada know that they are Canadian. If Canada's influence had not extended that far, they would at least know "I am NOT American!" but they would know if there were people nearby who are American.
I can certainly see where you would like an option to disable this functionality, but I really don't have a problem justifying it at all and I think it is a nice improvement. One improvement I really like over SMAC is that when you build a city near the border, the other country's borders do not suddenly implode.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-11-2001 02:07
|
|