23-01-2002 08:36									#211
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune Heh; I take the view that the best games are those designed by one (1) person, from start to finish. Btw, I have finally decided to really do it! More info coming soon. On the other hand, I plan to stay open for suggestions from the community throughout. In fact I will soon open a few suggestion threads for your input.

That's virtually impossible these days. Unless of course that person is an expert programmer, a highly skilled graphic artist, an animation expert, a marketing genius, etc, etc, and is prepared to spend a good portion of the rest of his/her life completing it. Pick up any game in your collection and look at the credits. You'll see that there were quite a number of people that made a contribution to it. Computer gaming is becoming a very sophisticated business, and for the most part one person just can't have all the skills necessary to produce it and market it.

	23-01-2002 08:38									#212
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune I agree that stunning graphics donīt hurt. Everything else equal, that is. But everything else isnīt equal, and I still prefer content over form. Btw, TBS gamers are more or less used to less-than-stunning graphics; CivIII graphics are not that wonderful, after all, even if they tried to improve them. The only TBS game with stunning graphics is the HoMM series; you can go directly to an HoMMIV screenshot here: http://strategyplanet.com/homm/imag...s/chh4shot3.jpg Donīt ask me, how they do it, though; I wish I knew.

Teamwork.

	23-01-2002 08:52									#213
	Increase Your PM Length

Willem, I said designed. I said nothing about programming, artwork, marketing and all the other stuff.

Iow: The rules and formulas should be created by just 1 person, to keep things logical and coherent.

Edit: And teamwork doesnīt really explain why the HoMM series has great artwork, and CivIII doesnīt.

	23-01-2002 09:03									#214
	Re: Re: Part V Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Mark_Everson Da Comrade, come the revolution the Marketing people must be the first up against the wall!

It is good to see the people finally rise up; the working classes are the Spearmen, I mean spearheads, of the revolution.

quote: But seriously, I do agree that that is much of what's wrong with the games in the genre put out by the commercial houses. But worse than the fluff is the Evil Christmas Deadline. I realize games must be shipped sometime, but one of the major reasons for crappy games is the timing issue. And unfortunately given the $$$ involved giving games enough time to be concieved and gestate properly will be tough. That's why my best hope is for the amateurs. Of course it helps a Lot that I don't care much about graphics

Yes; and no one is depending upon the game to pay his bills; so you can take your time to really get things right.

	23-01-2002 09:13									#215
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune Willem, I said designed. I said nothing about programming, artwork, marketing and all the other stuff.

What's the difference? All of these are elements that have to work together in order to have a successful game. You might be able to come up with the best game rules ever created, but if it can't be programmed, you don't have a game. And the same goes for the rest of those things. You have to look at it as a whole, not just the sum of it's parts. And if any one of those areas doesn't gel with the rest, then you've just wasted your time.

	23-01-2002 09:18									#216
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Ghengis-Sean Contrary to popular belief the pyramids were not built by slave labor, instead the populace was required to provide a certain amount of their time for public projects.

Hard to tell; most of what we know about that period is based on somewhat questionable evidence.

However: Regardless of our assumption how Egyptian society worked, I was safe to assume many people died building the Pyramids: Undertaking such a vast project, there must have been lots of accidents etc...

quote: Negative aspects of wonders is all well in good, but the benefits should outweigh the negatives otherwise only the computer will build them, and smart players will let them.

That is a given. But I want to get rid of the 'Wonder races'. The formulas will be twisted until the Pyramids can be beneficial, but they are certainly not for everybody. You will have to build your entire strategy around them, if you want to make them work; otherwise they will be more of a disadvantage. This game will be all about specialized strategies that must be very well thought out, or you will die.

Remember: Most Civs that have ever existed are now gone. I donīt see a reason why players should necessarily do better.

	23-01-2002 09:27									#217
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune Remember: Most Civs that have ever existed are now gone. I donīt see a reason why players should necessarily do better.

Because if they don't feel they have a chance of winning , they won't play it.

	23-01-2002 09:29									#218
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Did I say they will have no chance?

	23-01-2002 09:45									#219
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune Did I say they will have no chance?

Well no, but it if you make it feel that way it will have the same result. You'll have to tred a very fine line between rewards and setbacks otherwise they'll just become frustrated and quit. Look at the reactions of people with this culture flipping, and losing a bunch of troops. People start fuming and sometimes give up on the game altogether. And that's just one small aspect of Civ III. By the sounds of it, you want to make it a major premise.

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of "two steps forward, one back" but a lot of people might not have the patience for it.

	23-01-2002 09:53									#220
	Re: Jumping back in Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by GePap Well, why not get back into this doozy of a thread?

It seems quite lively; I have a hard time catching up.

quote: Dark Ages: History does not always move forward- it sometimes moves backwards, when something really bad happens. Many civs don't survive, but some do, and return, and then fall again. It nice to play a game with a certain amount of forward movement, but if you want a history simulator, you must be ready to allow for backsliding.

I am not sure there are examples of history actually moving backwards technologically. Of course, infrastructure gets destroyed in war and such, but we do have that even in CivIII. As to Empires falling and reviving again, this has happened very scarcely, and even in those few cases, I am not entirely sure they should be treated as the same Civ.

quote: No control of technological advancement: Unfortunitelly for gamers, politicians and generals don't get to tell folks when new techs should be ready by. Blind research ala SMAC is a must, though perhaps an even less directible course would be proper. You take care of your economy and state, and some of your citizens might come up with something new.

There is something to what you say; however, I believe it would make a bad game feature: Things would become too random. In this case I must admit I am inclined to put gameplay over realism.

quote: Power hierarchies. People get to power because of certain reasons, and certain backers. History has endless examples of civs doing not what was best for them in the long term (as we can see with 20/20 historical vision) but what was key to maintaining the power structure. Revolutions are big historical stuff precisely because they run counter to the conservative tide of states.

You are playing the backers. And yes, you are given the advantage of hindsight. In so far, you will do better than your historic equivalents. (Even if it wonīt satisfy Willem.) As to revolutions, unlike Civ, a successful revolution against you will certainly be possible. In that case, Guess what?, you lose.

	23-01-2002 09:59									#221
	Re: Re: Jumping back in Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune I am not sure there are examples of history actually moving backwards technologically. Of course, infrastructure gets destroyed in war and such, but we do have that even in CivIII. As to Empires falling and reviving again, this has happened very scarcely, and even in those few cases, I am not entirely sure they should be treated as the same Civ.

So what, you've never heard of the Fall of the Roman Empire? Catching a few zzz's during history class were you?

	23-01-2002 10:11									#222
	Re: Jumping back in Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by GePap I must also ask, how far are we willing to go? Many have complained that civ3 awards sneaky, underhanded strategies. I would agree, I like playing the good guy- but I challenge anyone to go out there and find me more than a handful of leaders that would fit todays 'nice guy' standard. History is filled with massacres, attrocities, slavery, genocide, and all sorts of horrible inhumanities- and most of them worked. They worked because no one saw much that was wrong with them- remember that our current values are as much a product of this history we want to simulate as this history we want to simulate was shaped by our values. It might sound radical, but a trully effective history emulator would be one in which, by the end, the likes of Ghengis Khan, Stalin, or Hitler could, depending on how history was shapped, would be considered great statesment and moral leaders of mankind. That not a pretty reality, but one from which we are separated by less than we whish to accept.

My personal preference are leaders that are essentially benevolent, but not without a Macchiavellian streak, such as the historic Elisabeth Tudor. But back to topic:

I would like to use a comparison with Chess here: There are a number of openings that are equally viable. They can all succeed, if you execute them well, and they can all fail, if you donīt.

I am definitely committed to make 'Good Guy' strategies and 'Bad Guy' strategies about equally powerful; it will all depend upon the quality of execution. So I think I am going to satisfy you on that count.

	23-01-2002 10:16									#223
	Re: Re: Re: Jumping back in Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Willem So what, you've never heard of the Fall of the Roman Empire? Catching a few zzz's during history class were you?

Huh? When did they come back?

To quote myself: As to Empires falling and reviving again, this has happened very scarcely, and even in those few cases, I am not entirely sure they should be treated as the same Civ. In the Roman case, I go much farther: Ancient Romans and modern Italians are certainly not the same Civ.

	23-01-2002 10:26									#224
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by yin26 I would caution, however, if they take that route, they cannot do it the same way they did with culture flipping: That is, we need to understand HOW and WHY these things happen.

I see no reason why the manual appendix should not include all of the formulas, like was custom in the good old days.

quote: Otherwise its just dumb luck, which should not play that important of a role in a strategy game.

Totally with you. Luck will rarely determine the outcome of anything major.

	23-01-2002 10:29									#225
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: 4) So all you are doing is: a) Managing your Empire at the highest level b) Managing your Home Province c) Moving your Armies (as a stack, of course ) and fighting battles

Ugh!

Indeed, this does sound a bit too much like EU. If managing your empire and home province is seriously reduced to high level functions, then what you have left, for the most part, is moving your armies. This seems to describe a war game, not an empire building game.

However, I am genuinely curious about your model. Would you mind elaborating on points 4a and 4b? Perhaps you're willing to give some specific examples?

	23-01-2002 10:36									#226
	Re: Re: Re: Re: Jumping back in Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune Huh? When did they come back? To quote myself: As to Empires falling and reviving again, this has happened very scarcely, and even in those few cases, I am not entirely sure they should be treated as the same Civ. In the Roman case, I go much farther: Ancient Romans and modern Italians are certainly not the same Civ.

Yes, you have a point there. Actually the only instance that might apply I can think of is the rise and fall of the dynasties in China.

	23-01-2002 10:50									#227
	Re: hmm Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by pg if you are going to include nonlinearity what happens if your civ goes into long standing anarchy? you lose?

Unfortunately, yes, you do lose; otherwise the game wouldnīt be much of a simulation. The models will be designed to resemble grim reality, so, if your civ falls into permanent anarchy, there is so much wrong with it that it is beyond repair, anyway. There is simply no point in carrying on. I like the comparison with Chess: If a position is hopeless, itīs hopeless.

On the plus side, loss doesnīt equal loss. You never lose Victory Points, you only accumulate them, so you can still meaningfully compare fallen Civilizations. A fallen Civilization may have greatly contributed to human progress, and that *will* be reflected in your Victory Points. A Civilization may fall in 500AD, and still conceivably have more Victory Points than a mediocre Civ that somehow manages to survive to the very end, but has never accomplished anything worth a mention.

	23-01-2002 11:14									#228
	Support Apolyton

quote: The models will be designed to resemble grim reality, so, if your civ falls into permanent anarchy, there is so much wrong with it that it is beyond repair, anyway.

There are certainly people who would contend that if your civ falls into permanent anarchy there is a lot right with it and it should be a winning condition!

Anarchy should be a proper "government" type if you're going to do a simulation style game ... government from a grass roots level by the people for the people, and with no private ownership. - as anarchist theory describes.

	23-01-2002 13:56									#229
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by OneInTen There are certainly people who would contend that if your civ falls into permanent anarchy there is a lot right with it and it should be a winning condition! Anarchy should be a proper "government" type if you're going to do a simulation style game ... government from a grass roots level by the people for the people, and with no private ownership. - as anarchist theory describes.

SimSomalia?

	23-01-2002 23:12									#230
	Re: Re: hmm Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune Unfortunately, yes, you do lose; otherwise the game wouldnīt be much of a simulation. The models will be designed to resemble grim reality, so, if your civ falls into permanent anarchy, there is so much wrong with it that it is beyond repair, anyway. There is simply no point in carrying on. I like the comparison with Chess: If a position is hopeless, it's hopeless.

HEH. honestly that doesn't make any sense to me. in a simulation you really don't have win or lose situations. especially if you are simulating history there is no such thing as permanent anarchy or a hopeless position. there are periods of time where certain conditions persist but it eventually changes for better or worse.

if you are going for chess ideals mixed with simulation you will fail imo. chess is pure strategy, while a simulation is something that is fun to play with because of all the possibilities and interesting results. you can't really win a simulation, but the whole purpose of chess is to win.

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tribune On the plus side, loss doesnīt equal loss. You never lose Victory Points, you only accumulate them, so you can still meaningfully compare fallen Civilizations. A fallen Civilization may have greatly contributed to human progress, and that *will* be reflected in your Victory Points. A Civilization may fall in 500AD, and still conceivably have more Victory Points than a mediocre Civ that somehow manages to survive to the very end, but has never accomplished anything worth a mention.

victory points to me sound about as fun as culture points in civ3. wow, if i get 20,000 culture in one city i win! talk about artificial, and breaking the feeling of playing in a real working alternate history simulation.

	24-01-2002 04:12									#231
	Re: Re: Re: hmm Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by pg in a simulation you really don't have win or lose situations. especially if you are simulating history there is no such thing as permanent anarchy or a hopeless position. there are periods of time where certain conditions persist but it eventually changes for better or worse.

Absolutely. It depends on your goal in the game. I play a lot of games just to have a little bit of conquering in the ancient age, or to build J.S. Bach. I've played games where I was beaten back to one city, fighting all the way, just glad to have survived. Just because you are "losing" doesn't mean the game can't be fun.

BTW, did I ever tell you about my Luxembourg strategy?

"Hey Joan, Baby, give me some saltpeter."

"Catherine, my dear, you look lovely today."

"Herr Bismark, would you please tell your Elite Panzers to stay off the lawn? Donkashane.

	24-01-2002 04:23									#232
	Re: Re: Re: Re: hmm Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Zachriel Absolutely. It depends on your goal in the game. I play a lot of games just to have a little bit of conquering in the ancient age, or to build J.S. Bach. I've played games where I was beaten back to one city, fighting all the way, just glad to have survived. Just because you are "losing" doesn't mean the game can't be fun. BTW, did I ever tell you about my Luxembourg strategy? "Hey Joan, Baby, give me some saltpeter." "Catherine, my dear, you look lovely today." "Herr Bismark, would you please tell your Elite Panzers to stay off the lawn? Donkashane.

I've used that approach myself. The odd "donation" just out of the blue can go a long way to keeping the neighbours off my back for awhile. Until I'm good and ready. It's especially effective when they have next to nothing in their treasury. Even 25 gold can jump them from Annoyed to Polite.

	24-01-2002 06:11									#233
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I haven't read all eight pages but I did read the original post. I agree with most of the criticisms on the game and all of your ideas for new/improved features.

I dunno if this has already been covered, but relative to the standard in other empire/conquest games I own or have played, the AI in civ III is stunning. However, I am increasingly more irritated by the diplomacy, which I must admit, compared to other games is pretty good. It would just be nice to be able to do more. Such as exchange units other than workers, donate scientists, donate shields to help build a friend's wonder, to ACTUALLY be able to cancel agreements after 20 turns without being called untrustworthy (as we are told by the diplomacy screen itself).

I guess what I mean, is that while there are a few more options (trading without caravans being the best by far) the actual way communication with the AI is conducted is STILL on it's terms - regardless of who contacts whom (is that grammatically correct? I never could grasp it). My main gripe on this point is that whilst you can start a 'total war' through diplomacy - you can't campaign for world peace, or a least peace around your own borders.

Another idea would be random (and by random, I don't mean one every five turns or so) natural disasters, along with improvements/wonders to protect against thier effects. And then aid packages (amongst other things) organised through a U.N. council (that actually does something). To expand on the U.N., the mandatory retirement year would have to be extended to 2100 or 2150, and if Eras as a concept stick, a new one added (maybe two if turn/years increment was made 1 turn every six months).

A small thing I would like to see back is the thing from civ 2 where you could change your titles for all govt. types. That was good - I liked that.
A Non-Agression feature would be nice whereby land combat units and transports loaded with combat units cannot enter a rivals territory without a formal declaration of war permission (done with a popup box for both human and AI?). Air units should probably have exemption so you could still surprise attack and then roll in the tanks.

Culture. Currently, it is just a thing that expands your borders and assimilates cities. It has no uniqueness and is summarised to a ridiculous extent. People tend to move from one place to another because of fairer laws (which I will come to) and better job opportunities, amongst other things. NOT because there are pretty or big buildings there. If that were the case I would be living in America, Egypt or China - as England apparently has no 'Wonders' of it's own. Stonehenge? Those limestone picture thingies on hillsides in that green place outside London? The giants causeway? Need I go on? OK, it's an American game but hey, come on.

What about laws and ordnances? Unless I am very much mistaken, if this is the case I will find the nearest whole in the ground that will swallow me, laws are considered on of the hallmarks of 'civilization' and seem to have been COMPLETELY overlooked. This strikes me as odd - given the name attached to the game. It wouldn't have to be an entire book of 'the law', just some sort of ten or twenty 'commandments' affair in order to capture the essence of 'law'. Possibly different options for each government type?
Ordnances - where our tax goes. In the UK, for the moment at least, monies raised through tax are 'supposed' to determine the efficiency of structures such as hospitals. This could also bring (although I grant it may be a bit tooooo hard to do) the effect that 'big business' has on government, privatised services and so forth.

Lastly, but I think importantly, why is it that you can build a city next to a border and claim territory from another civ without the slightest reaction? Surely every nation/empire ever to exist would go to war or a the very least complain about such an offront. Am I wrong?

In conclusion, I would wait as long as it took to make a game so complicated, and would buy the nescesary hardware needed to play it (sad? Yep)

Phew. I think that's my longest post ever.
Apologies if I repeated anyone.

	24-01-2002 07:35									#234
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Ghengis-Sean Contrary to popular belief the pyramids were not built by slave labor, instead the populace was required to provide a certain amount of their time for public projects.

Slaves were not used to build the pyramids, but local farmers and people who were paid to do this heavy labor. It probably took thousands of men using many ropes, levers and logs on which the blocks were rolled up the ramps, in order to construct this enormous structure!

Archaeology.org:
http://dig.archaeology.org/drdig/egypt/2.html

The workers worked projects when the land was flooded.

	24-01-2002 07:46									#235
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Gromit Lastly, but I think importantly, why is it that you can build a city next to a border and claim territory from another civ without the slightest reaction? Surely every nation/empire ever to exist would go to war or a the very least complain about such an offront. Am I wrong?

The fact that people build settlements near one another is historical. For instance, the establishment of European colonies along the coast of India, or any of the European colonies in the America's.

And yes, it often leads to conflict.

	24-01-2002 07:56									#236
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Gromit Lastly, but I think importantly, why is it that you can build a city next to a border and claim territory from another civ without the slightest reaction? Surely every nation/empire ever to exist would go to war or a the very least complain about such an offront. Am I wrong?

Are you sure that by doing so, you're not affecting your diplomatic standing with that civ? You might find if you look that he/she is suddenly annoyed with you. I've never thought to check myself but it wouldn't surprise me.

	24-01-2002 08:09									#237
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Good point. I never noticed anything, but since the AI is always 'displeased' with me, it sorta stopped checking. Incidentally, anyone ever play without ever talking to the AI?

	24-01-2002 08:34									#238
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Gromit Good point. I never noticed anything, but since the AI is always 'displeased' with me, it sorta stopped checking. Incidentally, anyone ever play without ever talking to the AI?

Try giving them 25 gold once in awhile just out of the blue. This doesn't work quite as well with Bismarck though, the guy's nothing but a sourpuss. Joan however will be jumping through your hoops in no time, especially if she's broke. Cleo's pretty good that way as well.

	24-01-2002 23:27									#239
	***Notice*** Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I have started a thread about my project in the Alternative Civs section. Please post any Questions/Ideas/Critique/Comments here: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...&threadid=40675

I will answer questions etc that have already been posted in this thread here, but post any future answers answering my answers etc in the new thread, please. Thanks!

	24-01-2002 23:31									#240
	Re: hmm Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Pg: i can't quite get a firm mental grasp on how your game would play comrade. maybe you can do a better job elaborating on more of your game ideas and the core of your gameplay? you have given some good examples of how it would differ from civ but i can't quite figure out how it'd play.

Soon to come in the Alternative Civs Forum.