 |
|
Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto
|
|
Salt Lake City, USA
Oct 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
Ive posted this thread to see what are the top-10 of everyones choices for change in civ3. since the other polls only give you one choice, Im giving you 10. Heres my top-10:
1. AI
2. historical accuracy
3. Customizability
4. Diplomacy
5. units
6. graphics (units, map, etc)
7. terrain improvements (bridges, canals, etc)
8. combat (ranged combat, realistic combat, battlemaps, flanking attacks, sneek attacks, ambushes, etc)
9. cities (improvements, 3D graphics, etc)
10. national stuff (borders, governor regions, etc)
well, thats mine, what everyone elses?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
hHydro
|
|
Vancouver, Canada,
Nov 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
My top 10:
1. Make It Fun
...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
UltraSonix
|
|
Melbourne, Australia
May 2000
time: 15:12
|
|
I think the techs and units of civ2 were sufficient... but the AI and diplomacy needs to be dramatically improved.
------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary... (And no, koalas don't usually speak!)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DrFell
|
|
1 - when i first see the game, i want to be able to say, 'thats definitely a civ game', dont change TOO much!
2 - improve ai
3 - improve diplomacy
4 - more ai civs playing at once (15 seems a good number + barbarians)
5 - barbarians playing a bigger role
6 - more tech (but no silly futuristic techs please)
7 - more city improvements
8 - bigger maps!
9 - more realistic ai (so they dont get 'hostile' in just 1 turn, or give you anything you ask them)
10 - better graphics
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto
|
|
Salt Lake City, USA
Oct 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
I have to edit my top-ten, change my 9., to:
9. more civs playing at once = larger maps. (combine these 2, so having more civs would automatically create larger maps, since more civs would need larger maps)
then take off the 'cities', now, I think mine is complete.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ralf
|
 |
Sweden
Mar 2000
time: 06:12
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by UltraSonix on 12-22-2000 06:11 PM
I think the techs and units of civ2 were sufficient... but the AI and diplomacy needs to be dramatically improved.
|
I certainly agree about the latter. I would add...
- At least 25% bigger tech-tree, 25% more units and city-improvements.
- ICS dead and buried, once and for all - but preferably not by "expanding" city-areas, or by fiddling with radically untested city-area model overhauls.
- Something thoroughly and cleverly thought-out, has been done about the Bigger-Is-Always-Better empire problem.
- Some new challenging and hardly manageable rise-and-fall parameters; specifically targeted at dealing with those enormous human player Eternal-China-Syndrome empires.
- Military world-domination is now much more of an uphill struggle, with help of whole range of gradually added parameters.
- At least two carefully selected totally new city-screen game-parameters (one of my favourites is the health-concept; which includes new CI:s, and some other nice addons).
- An expanded and much improved economical model, with economical warfare, market-cornering and a nice camel-replacing advanced trade-section (or tab) in that huge city-screen.
- A timeline that DOESNT go beyond 2040 AD. Firaxis concentrates their efforts on a really powerfull and userfriendly scenario/map-editor, instead. Some nice futuristic scenarios is added in the box.
- A new combat-model that have done something about the turnbased Stan & Oliver fighting-syndrome (yet not real-time), stack-able units of course, a combat-screen, and more.
- The interface: Few clicks, few tabs, large manager-screens, standard windows controls, skins...
- And LOTS of minor tweaks and changes - yet not changing for the sake of changing. Not like CTP.
------------------------------------- edited:
- Extensive game customize-ability and tweak-ability of course. Even more then in SMAC.
[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited December 23, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
markusf
|
|
A improved version of Simultaneous play. The multiplayer community loves it, also a way better TCP/IP play. Currently there is large amounts of lag between players (don't see why since very little info is actually sent back and forth)
GNP linked to Units strength etc. I believe if you have a stronger economy your units should be more powerful!!!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
hHydro
|
|
Vancouver, Canada,
Nov 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
Darkcloud;
I fully support you on 1 & 2. Give us;
1. Unit Workshop
2. Terrain Workshop
I don't know about an improvement workshop.. That sounds tougher to implement.
Instead, my third request is;
3. Social Engineering table similar to the one in SMAC. NO FIXED GOVERNMENTS.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
hHydro
|
|
Vancouver, Canada,
Nov 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
That makes total sense, and unfortunately, I figure there's a good chance that they won't use 'Social Engineering' like in SMAC, but really, don't you find CIV2-style 'absolute governments' restrictive? Or at least overly simplistic?
Besides. If they aren't willing to make changes, then why make a sequel? 
The aspect of S.E. that I liked in SMAC was that you could change an aspect of your civ without changing everything. You could take an industrial war-driven democracy, and turn their focus from war to research, and then 100 years later, when pollution becomes a problem, you switch your focus from freemarket to more green-friendly practice, while retaining the democracy and research-driven orientation.
I don't care how they do it.. add more slider bars, or copy the SMAC system outright. But it's unrealistic to have to change governments outright just to go to war. When WWII broke out, the allies didn't all change to communism or Fascism. There were changes in the structure and economy to be sure, but they weren't outright revolts or revolutions!
Ah well. I still have a while to play SMAC and get sick of SE I guess.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
hHydro
|
|
Vancouver, Canada,
Nov 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
Oops. Forgot one of the main things I was going to say -
Civ is Civ because it let's you build an empire to stand the test of time - Not because it uses 2d units instead of 3d ones, or because of the way it approaches government types.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12.
Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
22-12-2000 02:35
|