 |
|
Libertarian
|
|
That could be nondeterministic in instances where you have, say, a tank and a marine stacked. Would you have the tank move two and the marine one, or what? I think the way they say they've implemented it makes sense.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Mike Breitkreutz FIRAXIS
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD
May 2001 time: 00:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph
I had heard before, that there was a bug, saved the game and sunk the galley. A message popped up, that the Russians have been destroyed, after which the game crashed. |
Do you still have this save? If so, please post it and I will look at it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999 time: 23:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Libertarian
While you're at it, though, you might want to do a bit of editing in this thread. |
I thought Libertarians believed in the freedom of the individual as long as he isn't hurting anyone else? And being annoyed by someone's actions doesn't count as being hurt, otherwise people would pretty much not be allowed to do anything, which kind of defeats the purpose of being libertarian?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Snorklis
|
|
Stockholm
Jan 2002 time: 06:17
|
|
Ohh.. And I was hoping for Multiplayer to be in there.. well.. it seems like it wont be real until summer?.. :-(
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Alex
|
 |
Brasil
Mar 1999 time: 02:17
|
|
Wow, this patch seems really good... Good work, Firaxis.
The stacked movement as implemented with this new patch will alleviate a lot of hard work, but of course will not address the problem in its entirety. I mean, only units of the same type can be grouped and moved together. Since we use much more combined arms in Civ3 than we ever did in any of the previous titles, that means that if I have 3 tanks and two infantry units on a tile, I still have to move the tanks and then the infantry. But is much, much better than to move one unit at a time, I have to say, and that (as Vel usually says) cannot be overstated!
Overall, I'm happy with the changes. Seems like the editor will be finished on a next patch or on an expansion pack, though.
Again, nice work. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Libertarian
|
|
quote: I thought Libertarians believed in the freedom of the individual as long as he isn't hurting anyone else? |
Libertarians believe that rights accrue from property. Mark, who owns Apolyton, doesn't seem to appreciate the sort of viscious and vulgar posts that infest the cited thread. We are not exercising any so-called "freedom of speech" here. We are merely exercising a privilege that is extended to us by Mark.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ralf
|
 |
Sweden
Mar 2000 time: 06:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Alexnm
I mean, only units of the same type can be grouped and moved together. Since we use much more combined arms in Civ3 than we ever did in any of the previous titles, that means that if I have 3 tanks and two infantry units on a tile, I still have to move the tanks and then the infantry. |
Huh? I sure hope not. If this is true, then they havent solved anything at all. One should be able to move mixed stacks within each military branch. By "type" I think (well, I HOPE) they mean land, sea and air-type.
Last edited by Ralf on 14-02-2002 at 03:28
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pembleton
|
|
Cyberspace
Apr 1999 time: 23:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Libertarian
Libertarians believe that rights accrue from property. Mark, who owns Apolyton, doesn't seem to appreciate the sort of viscious and vulgar posts that infest the cited thread. We are not exercising any so-called "freedom of speech" here. We are merely exercising a privilege that is extended to us by Mark. |
Yes, I agree with your assessment of freedom of speech and this forum as a privilege. Just wondering what your view was.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Libertarian
|
|
Well, the pot was banned for much less. What happens to the kettle is up to Mark.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Libertarian
|
|
quote: Yes, I agree with your assessment of freedom of speech and this forum as a privilege. Just wondering what your view was. |
I appreciate the question. I thought it was a good one. Our base ethic is noncoercion. Property ownership is the only ethical means for establishing rights.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Dr Zoidberg

|
 |
Communist Party of Apolyton
Jan 2002 time: 06:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Libertarian
I must say, Kamrat, that group movement and sensible unit activation sequencing have completely shifted the balance, in my opinion, toward making the game worth another try. I'm going to try it, anyway. (Though first, I might await reports of wild crashes and whatnot... Don't forget patch before 1.16f.) |
Yes, well it *looks* quite impressive, and I´m actually quite pleased that Firaxis has listend to complaints in such extent. But I still don´t feel that "YES! Let´s play some Civ3" Maybe I´m just tired of the whole Civ-genre, and that thought actually makes me sad, ´cause I really do want to enjoy this I have played Sid Meier games for the better part of a decade, so...
But then again, I´m playing SMAC right now, and I´m enjoying it immensly so who knows? Maybe I´ll give it a go. I HAVE payed 45$ for it after all 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Libertarian
|
|
That's pretty much how I look at it. It's paid for. Most of our complaints were allegedly addressed. I'm not all gung-ho about it, but I'll be interested mainly to see whether those of us who held fast to our criticisms were right. If we are, the game should be more enjoyable in the modern age.
The Domestic Nag was an oversight on their part, but they took care of quite much.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
bloodysmurf
|
|
Chicago, IL
Jan 2002 time: 05:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Mike Breitkreutz FIRAXIS
Do you still have this save? If so, please post it and I will look at it. |
Mike, I've experienced this bug (twice) myself. It is discussed in some detail in this thread at civfanatics (see page 2 post by Brocky and thereafter): http://forums.civfanatics.com/showt...&threadid=12173
I was one of the folks that offered up a savegame in that thread, but I deleted it after a few weeks. I'm sure someone from that thread must still have a save though...
-ollie-
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Libertarian
|
|
My problem isn't with the messages, but with the modality. It just seems incredible that important messages, such as pollution notices, resource disappearances, and the like, fly by too fast to read, while petulant nagging about a trivial matter — even if you're nearly finished with a wonder, she'll ask if you want to build a hospital! — is forced upon you, and the game halts until you respond.
For each city. One at a time.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Venger
|
|
Keeper of the Can-O'Whoopass
Jan 1970 time: 23:17
|
|
I sure hope they quantify some of this stuff, such as exactly HOW many military units it takes to quell culture flipflop nonsense. I also hope the "stacked movement" thing works. But as someone else mentioned, if they've left armies as unupgradable unreloadable unusable items, I'll be a bit disappointed...
Venger
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Libertarian
|
|
The record will show that I have consistently praised Soren and the AI, which I believe is on par with the game's value. All my criticism has been about the clumsy interaction between user and game — i.e., the interface. I have also criticized Firaxian PR, which is utterly Neanderthal. But I've never had a problem with the game's design, per se, merely with how the interface made it exceedingly difficult to play the game the way it was designed.
For example, to build an industrious empire, you need workers. Lots of them. And yet, handling these was tedious beyond reason. Now it won't be.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
TechWins
|
 |
Arizona
Apr 2001 time: 22:17
|
|
quote: Ralf: I'm with you on this issue, I surely HOPE that they mean land, sea and air-type... Otherwise, as you say, the patch will not solve anything at all. I had not seen your earlier post about this, so I did not even think about this possibility when I first read the readme content. |
I'm assuming it's the actual unit type and not genre (meaning knight, tank, galley...). In fact, not only am I assuming that it was done this way, but I'm hoping it was done this way. Now hear me out on this: Lets say you have 7 units in a city, 2 swordsmen, 2 pikemen, and 3 horsemen. You only want to move the 2 swordsmen and 3 horsmen, though, but that is no problem because you don't have to move all of the land units, you only have to move a certain type of unit. If you would have to move all land units then you wouldn't even be able to use the stack function in that case because you don't want to of your units moving. Not to mention, that it would create a lot more programming work to make it be all land units, because there would have to be a system created for the various movements. So more than likely Firaxis took the better route in adding stacks, which would be only moving a specific unit type.
Also, I'd like to give a big thanks to Firaxis for listening to the fans ideas for the creation of this patch. Many of the additions/changes/fixes for this patch were all listed in the "Future Desires for Civ3 patches" thread (by the way I was the one who was editing the list, however, I didn't edit the list for quite sometime). Thank you Firaxis for continuing to support Civ3 and the fans, even though, at times it may seem like quite the contrary. 
|
|
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|