 |
|
Artifex
|
|
Kentucky USA
Apr 2002
time: 05:20
|
|
I Dev posted that the commercial trait was gonna get boosted. Did you decide not to boost it after all? Or is this gonna happen with PTW? I thought commercial was getting buffed up THIS patch.
I do think Commercial needs fixed. Poor Romans.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Hagbart
|
 |
Copenhagen, Europe
Feb 2002
time: 06:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Clark
After all this time, we still will not have the ability to create scenarios. I don't understand why Firaxis and some of those here believe we can. If anyone (including Firaxis) has any experience playing Civ2 scenarios or at least know about them, they should be aware that events/macros/scripts/whatever you like to call them are the foundation for creating scenarios. Without them, then they are just custom maps.
I see that events are on the wish list, but if they are holding this to the PtW to make that a major selling point, than I would understand and would wait. In the meantime, don't insult our (Civ2 vets) intelligence by calling what can be produced with this new editor - scenarios. |
I agree with what you said, the scenario makers need some kind of scripts to make real scenarios, but this patch still makes the editor alot better than it was before.
I really hope they'll include a complete scenario editor in PTW. We know that they at least will make the editor a little better in PTW, because WW and Japanese scenarios will be included in the x-pack.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
whosurdaddy
|
|
New York
Jun 2001
time: 00:20
|
|
What about simply being able to set the diplomacy in a scenario so that before a scenario starts, country A will be at war with country B, or country C will have good relations with country D, etc. This simple ability is crucial to any scenario, and without it, SCENARIOS STILL CANNOT BE CREATED.
I dont see how Firaxis could have spent soooo much time working on all the new features for this patch, and come sooooo close to making an editor that could create functional scenarios by adding so many features, and then leave out only one such crucial and easy feature.
Maybe they simply forgot about this necessary feature and will realease an updated patch within a few weeks with this feature included, now that it has been brought to their attention by the fans.
Oooh, and something else I want to "remind" Firaxis about. It is crucial that an option be made to turn off city razing in scenarios, so that, for example, the Germans can't just raze all of the cities of France in a ww2 scenario, leaving nothing behind for the allies and germany to fight over.
Ok, later.
Last edited by whosurdaddy on 18-07-2002 at 03:43
|
|
| |
|
|
|
whosurdaddy
|
|
New York
Jun 2001
time: 00:20
|
|
Here's a question to any Firaxis member who is willing to answer. I'm just curious if in the new editor, can saved games be opened up and edited in the editor, or just specially made scenario files made from scratch in the editor?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Soren Johnson Firaxis
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD
May 2001
time: 00:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Artifex
I Dev posted that the commercial trait was gonna get boosted. Did you decide not to boost it after all? Or is this gonna happen with PTW? I thought commercial was getting buffed up THIS patch.
I do think Commercial needs fixed. Poor Romans. |
yes, the Commercial trait was improved for this patch.
and there are a bunch of AI improvements (most of which don't typically get mentioned in readme's as they are quite under the hood), including faster pathfinding and improved AI build priorities (i.e. more knights/cavalry/tanks).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Soren Johnson Firaxis
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD
May 2001
time: 00:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Flinx
My point was that ALLWAYS renegotiate after 20 turns is just and bad (my opinion worse) than the current situation (yes I know it is an option, and I plan to leave it off).
The feature I would like to see implemented is a notice from the diplomatic advisor that 20 turns have passed and a deal can now be renegotiated if I choose.
I am currently playing on a huge map, I have probably 40-45 cities, and I am modilized against the Russians and producing new units in all of my cities every 2-8 turns. A mutual protection pact dragged me into this war, but it is only going to end when I have captured all of the Russian cities on my continent leaving them with three cities on a small island off-shore (Catherine is a royal pain in the ass once you have been at war with her). A turn can take 10+ minutes, and this war while ending in my favour (I got 7 of the other 8 civs to declare war too) will take a while. I am 100% focused on this war. It might be nice if my diplomatic advisor reminded me of my trade situation from time to time without AUTOMATICALLY opening negotiations on a deal that the other civ is willing to live with, but is never going to accept paying so much now that negotiations are open again. 
 where did that little rant come from???  |
well, I am pretty sure that "renegotiate every 20 turns" will only benefit the human over the AI. The reason is that if you had a lopsided deal with the AI, IT would decide to renegotiate the deal. In other words, there will never be a situation in which you would benefit from "just being quiet" about the deal expiring because the AI will always ask to renegotiate if it doesn't like the deal.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis
cities and metropolises get an _additional_ extra commerce or two and the "Optimal # of Cities" is increased by 25% instead of 12.5%. |
This question has been asked plenty of times:
Will you be able to edit diplomacy in the editor? This is essential for scenarios.....
|
|
| |
|
|
|
rflagg
|
|
Alexandria VA
Nov 2001
time: 05:20
|
|
I'm guessing Soren doesn't know whether that's been implemented or not, and I also assume most firaxians are home for the evening, but still hoping they'll check in, and answer regarding the diplomacy editing abilities.
On a side note, I disagree about scripts. If I remember correctly, it was *years* before that was available for civ2. Plus, you must remember, this is an all new beast of a program - completely different from civ2. For all we know, they could've had scripts/events planned from the beginning, but it took a back seat to things like culture, better ai, etc. And, after being released, it took a back seat to fixing bugs and dealing with the *many* complaints as well as praises and suggestions - not many other games have quite a tightly knit group of hardcore fans as the civ series. So, PTW is now well in front of events scripting as far as priority goes, and that's fine with me. Scripting is good, but I couldn't imagine the amount of work that had to go into creating a programming language for civ2, let alone for civ3. Relax, there will still be plenty of good scenarios. Understand they want it as much as you want it, but they just don't have the time and resources and extensions on deadlines to be able to pull it off in a patch.
On a different note, anyone hear anything about the diplomacy issue? Please let us know Firaxis, I promise even if it's not available, I won't yell at you. 
-rflagg.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Daniel Frappier
|
|
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Jan 1970
time: 05:20
|
|
Great Patch.
Pardon my ignorance but is it possible to create a scenario with a different number of turns that of a full game and at a different year (4000 BC) ?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DilithiumDad
|
|
Well, the boost to commercial just became my favorite new feature! I already thought the trait was underrated by most players. Expansionist really sticks out as a weak trait now.
The fortify all/wake all right-click commands will see a LOT of use by me!
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
nbarclay
|
 |
Huntsville, Alabama
Dec 1999
time: 23:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mike Breitkreutz FIRAXIS
Yes. For example, the Rifleman has both the offensive and defensive strategies. When the AI builds a rifleman, it will build either an offensive rifleman or a defensive rifleman. Likewise, when you place a rifleman on the map in the editor, you need to tell the AI whether it is an offensive or defensive rifleman (or set it to random and it will choose randomly when you play the scenario). |
I can see this being a MAJOR weakness if the offensive/defensive flag is locked in permanently. Consider the following hypothetical example. An AI civ doesn't have saltpeter, so it uses offensive infantry rather than cavalry as its primary offensive forces. When it reaches Motorized Transportation, it has 50 offensive infantry and 50 defensive infantry. It now wants to add ten more units to its military, five offensive and five defensive.
Given that its offensive forces are already overloaded with infantry, the logical move would be to build ten tanks and convert five of the offensive infantry to defense. (There might be exceptions if a city can build an infantry in two turns but a tank takes three, but even that seems iffy given how much better tanks are for offense.) That gives it both extra offense and extra defense, and, in the process, makes its offensive forces a lot more mobile. In contrast, if the AI is blind to the possibility of converting offensive infantry to defense, it might very well keep building infantry even though it already is overbalanced toward infantry to begin with.
Similarly, the AI really ought to be able to shift units from offense to defense or vice versa if game conditions call for a different balance of forces. If an AI is struggling to hang onto its cities, wasting "offensive" infantry in near-suicidal attacks on enemy infantry can be really stupid, especially if the attacker doesn't have lots of artillery to negate infantry's defensive advantages. Conversely, if the balance of power shifts heavily in an AIs favor, that may free up some units previously committed to defense for use in supporting an offensive.
And there's one other strategy that such a flag could easily get in the way of. If I got in a war and half my offensive riflemen were on the wrong end of the nation (without railroads for instant transportation), I would have my "offensive riflemen" trade places with any "defensive riflemen" in cities along the way across my nation. That way I could get two units' movement in a turn instead of one. But if the flags are locked in, that would get in the way of the AI's doing such role swapping, and would thus slow down its ability to bring forces to the area where they are needed most.
I really hope the actual design is more complicated than Mike makes it sound. Otherwise, key opportunities to improve the AI's strategy are almost certainly being missed.
Nathan
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-07-2002 02:07
). If this was not a fact, renegotiating every 20 turns wouldn't be such a bad thing for us, would it?
|