 |
|  |
 |
|
Roy H Smith
|
|
From: MrFixitOnline
"All previous versions of Civilization shipped with a map editor, but scenarios were very tricky to design, and so this time there is a full scenario editor included. It feels a little shoddily made, and compares rather poorly with the contemporary scenario editors of games like Age of Kings, but is a huge improvement upon the text file fiddling of old. Unlike other scenario developers, Civilization III is vastly customisable, and this is a facet of the game often overlooked. If you don't like an aspect of the game, like the suffocating corruption, then simply edit the rules and make the game play as you want. Civilization II was modified so much that almost entirely new games were formed from its chassis, and the more powerful editing tools of part III offer hope for even more variation."
What do you think?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dida
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Roy H Smith
From: MrFixitOnline
"All previous versions of Civilization shipped with a map editor, but scenarios were very tricky to design, and so this time there is a full scenario editor included. It feels a little shoddily made, and compares rather poorly with the contemporary scenario editors of games like Age of Kings, but is a huge improvement upon the text file fiddling of old. Unlike other scenario developers, Civilization III is vastly customisable, and this is a facet of the game often overlooked. If you don't like an aspect of the game, like the suffocating corruption, then simply edit the rules and make the game play as you want. Civilization II was modified so much that almost entirely new games were formed from its chassis, and the more powerful editing tools of part III offer hope for even more variation."
What do you think? |
LOL. Another overhyped aspect of the game.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Libertarian
|
|
quote: I'm saying it's able to vastly customise the existing game. |
Yes, and I can declare that pigs fly by redefining "fly" to mean "wallow in mud".
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
DrFell
|
|
'This is not Civ2. You will never be able to build scenerios the same way as in Civ 2. (Maybe you should go back to Civ2?)'
Shame isn't it, no scenarios at all. And to think I thought this game was supposed to be an improvement over civ2. Ah well, looks like this games going to get boring a few years earlier than it could have.
'Do we have to answer that again!!!!!'
Yeah exactly, it doesn't happen. No more ridiculous deign descision in the whole game than that one.
'For the 999th time. WHAT CHEATING? I've already exposed most of what you call cheating as you inability to understand the game.'
Hmm, maybe the unsinkable galleon on sea/ocean squares, the number of units the AI gets early in the game (for free) and production bonuses. I'm not complaining about the cheats as they're neccessary for the AI to be even close to challenging, but you can't deny the AI cheats.
'Do yourself a favor, go back and play Civ2. You are obviously not mature enough for this game. '
Or like me, so disenchanted by the poorly thought out rules, the caps on strategic descisions comapred to civ2, the slowness of the game, the lack of scenarios, and a load of other things I won't bother to mention.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Libertarian
|
|
quote: A ship can't be sunk because it represents a whole fleet. |
Perhaps. You'd think, though, that a "whole fleet" might not ever fail in its bombardment of a seaside road.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DrFell
|
|
'I'm sure that the vast majority of Civ players have never played a scenerio and never will.'
I'd be suprised to hear that, considering scenarios came with all incarnations of civ2.
'A ship can't be sunk because it represents a whole fleet. Never ever has a whole fleet been sunk. never...'
An aircraft carrier represents a whole fleet of carriers?
'The "unsinkable galley" is a bug and slated to be fixed.'
It's a bug that AI units can move harmlessly over sea and ocean? Seems to me more a cheat because the AI cannot handle the human rules.
'Extra units are there for balancing. These are all well known and not really "cheats" as much as design/play balancing decisions.'
Getting free units and cheaper techs/units/improvments are still cheats, even Firaxis calls them cheats.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ACooper
|
 |
In a dark and scary hole!
Apr 1999 time: 23:17
|
|
I too would lilke to see ships be able to be sunk. If you can destroy an army of tanks, why not a fleet of ships? The point is you can't. You need to bomb them and then finish them off with one of you naval units (which is realistic)
Trust me. The majority of people who have played and still play Civ don't even know all these scenerios exist. The people who come here and other sites like this are the minority by far.
Whether you call something a cheat or not it doesn't really matter. I will not argue that point.
The whole point was that Enco has made absurd claims to the AI "cheating" which have been exposed as his lack of knowledge on how the game works. If he makes generic statements that the AI cheats and has been proven wrong repeatedly in the past. His future statements should be challenged.
Last edited by ACooper on 12-02-2002 at 22:07
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ironikinit
|
|
When you trade maps with the AI, you see their map. Painfully obvious, yes?
Well, take a look at those maps. Are they exploring more than they should?
When you see AI galleys on ocean squares, I think you'll find that the AI civ in question has mastered navigation. Your galleys can sail open seas after getting navigation, too.
So I'm told. I never kept a galley around to check. I believe it, though.
Anyway, that's just one of the so-called cheats that Eco rants about, ignoring explanations.
I don't pretend to believe that the AI plays by the same rules as the human. But not everything is a "cheat", either. Sometimes it's playing by the exact same rules, and Eco, among others, will insist that it's cheating, and that gets tiresome, esp. if the accuser is obnoxious and unwilling to listen.
Eh, at least Eco seems to play the game, unlike some of our enfants terrible.
And yes, DrFell, an aircraft carrier represents more than one ship IMO. I don't think of a rifleman unit as a single guy with a rifle. Do you?
I did play the scenarios that came with Civ 2 a couple times. I think it had one for Rome and one for WWII. I much preferred the random maps, personally. Maybe someday I'll look into the scenarios people have made up for it, if my version will play them.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Libertarian
|
|
quote: I too would lilke to see ships be able to be sunk. If you can destroy an army of tanks, why not a fleet of ships? The point is you can't. You need to bomb them and then finish them off with one of you naval units (which is realistic). |
I see. Perhaps the U.S. Navy suffers from a psychosis:
quote: The U.S. Fleet's Pearl Harbor base was reachable by an aircraft carrier force, and the Japanese Navy secretly sent one across the Pacific with greater aerial striking power than had ever been seen on the World's oceans. Its planes hit just before 8AM on 7 December. Within a short time five of eight battleships at Pearl Harbor were sunk or sinking, with the rest damaged. Several other ships and most Hawaii-based combat planes were also knocked out and over 2400 Americans were dead. |
Surely, if one ship represents a whole fleet, then one plane must represent the equivalent of a Japanese carrier force. No?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Soren Johnson Firaxis
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD
May 2001 time: 00:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DrFell
'The "unsinkable galley" is a bug and slated to be fixed.'
It's a bug that AI units can move harmlessly over sea and ocean? Seems to me more a cheat because the AI cannot handle the human rules.
|
It is neither a bug nor a cheat. The AI can move galleys over oceans because it has discovered Navigation or Magnetism. The human can also move galleys over oceans once s/he has discovered Navigation or Magnetism.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Libertarian
|
|
quote: Perhaps because the "seaside road" is a representation of "all roads within a 100x100 miles area"? |
Of course. That would explain why it takes so long to circumnavigate the map. One water tile represents the Pacific Ocean.
quote: And did the plane (Japanese carrier force) sink the battleship (A fleet in Pearl Harbor), or only heavily injure it by sinking 5 of 8? |
Good thing they didn't use two planes, eh?
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17. Apolyton Time is 00:17. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|