Thread Tools
Old October 30, 2000, 18:32   #1
MarkG
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
12th POLL: How many civs in a game?
it's a "rerun", but with a bit different choices...

results below
[This message has been edited by MarkG (edited November 22, 2000).]
 
Old October 30, 2000, 20:25   #2
Narck
Emperor
 
Local Time: 19:38
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Posts: 6,639
Interesting comment from Monk in the list of comments

Anyway, I note that some people actually want more than 64 civs... What I want to know is: WHY???

Is a game with that many civs enjoyable to play, or, for that matter, playable at all? I have some serious doubts about this
Narck is offline  
Old October 30, 2000, 21:09   #3
jrhughes98
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
quote:

Originally posted by Narck on 10-30-2000 07:25 PM
Interesting comment from Monk in the list of comments

Anyway, I note that some people actually want more than 64 civs... What I want to know is: WHY???

Is a game with that many civs enjoyable to play, or, for that matter, playable at all? I have some serious doubts about this


Yes, Narck! We want more civs because it enhances the top 3 aspects that Civ fans feel are most crucial: AI, Customisability, and Diplomacy. And on a personal note, I feel realism is most important, and this will also add realism to the game.

------------------
JRH
 
Old October 30, 2000, 22:44   #4
UltraSonix
King
 
Local Time: 10:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,728
Good to see MarkG's finally got rid of the old poll that I started...

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary...
UltraSonix is offline  
Old October 30, 2000, 23:45   #5
Narck
Emperor
 
Local Time: 19:38
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Posts: 6,639
quote:

Originally posted by jrhughes98 on 10-30-2000 08:09 PM
Yes, Narck! We want more civs because it enhances the top 3 aspects that Civ fans feel are most crucial: AI, Customisability, and Diplomacy. And on a personal note, I feel realism is most important, and this will also add realism to the game.

And you don't think this option would make the games way too long, and complicated?

I don't know, I think there should be a lower limit than 64 or even higher... I have a feeling it's going to add too much realism to the game (as in: games will take FOREVER to complete - I don't think I would like that)

Narck is offline  
Old October 31, 2000, 02:21   #6
Roman
King
 
Roman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia
Posts: 1,292
We want as many civs as possible to be able to create accurate historical scenarios. You don't have to play with all these civs in the ordinary game. After all if you don't like so many civs, you can simply select fewer, but if the option of having many civs is lacking, people who like making scenarios, or playing long games will be most unhappy.
For me personally having more civs in the game at the same time is the no. 1 priority.
Roman is offline  
Old October 31, 2000, 02:52   #7
ContradictioN
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Exactly Roman, you can't go wrong with allowing unlimited civilizations.

1, computers will get better all the time, in 2 years, I could still play Civ3 and have 100 civ's playing at once.

2, it makes scenarios better.

3, you can choose whatever number of civs you want!

4, it applies to everyones wants!

5...6..7..

List goes on and on, to vote for anything else is closing windows on the game. Now, if there was only a way to unvote and revote. ;]
 
Old October 31, 2000, 03:01   #8
Tiberius
PtWDG LegolandCivilization III PBEMInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamCivilization IV CreatorsC4DG Sarantium
Emperor
 
Tiberius's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 4,496
With more than 64 civs (or even 100+, like somebody suggested), we will play finallly a REAL TIME CIV: one turn will last one year, both for our civ and for us!
Tiberius is offline  
Old October 31, 2000, 03:04   #9
UltraSonix
King
 
Local Time: 10:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,728
Good to see more people voting for 16 civs... see my comment!

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary...
UltraSonix is offline  
Old October 31, 2000, 03:37   #10
Tiberius
PtWDG LegolandCivilization III PBEMInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamCivilization IV CreatorsC4DG Sarantium
Emperor
 
Tiberius's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 4,496
Now that I see so many people voting 64+ civs, I almost feel sorry that I didn't vote 16 instead of 32.

Though, I understand this question "How many civs in a game?" a little different: "What should be the MAXIMUM number of civs from which I choose the civs I play with when I start a game?". So, if the max. number is 32 or 64, I still want to have the possibility to choose only 16, when I start a game.

And there is another issue that was many, many times discussed: the number of civs in a game MUST change dinamically, as new civs emerge and large empires collapse. RISE AND FALL OF EMPIRES!!!
Tiberius is offline  
Old October 31, 2000, 04:43   #11
UltraSonix
King
 
Local Time: 10:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,728
quote:

RISE AND FALL OF EMPIRES!!!
You guys jusrt love that!

I, on the other hand...

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary...
UltraSonix is offline  
Old October 31, 2000, 07:40   #12
Deathwalker
Prince
 
Deathwalker's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 671
Personally I think 16 would enough. Over twenty it would get to wierd, as you tried to keep track of things.

------------------
I have walked since the dawn of time and were ever I walk, death is sure to follow
Deathwalker is offline  
Old October 31, 2000, 08:14   #13
jrhughes98
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
quote:

Originally posted by Narck on 10-30-2000 10:45 PM
And you don't think this option would make the games way too long, and complicated?

I don't know, I think there should be a lower limit than 64 or even higher... I have a feeling it's going to add too much realism to the game (as in: games will take FOREVER to complete - I don't think I would like that)




No, it doesn't have to take forever. For more information, follow this link ---> More civs, long turns? No way!

------------------
JRH
[This message has been edited by jrhughes98 (edited October 31, 2000).]
 
Old October 31, 2000, 11:06   #14
chrispie
Warlord
 
chrispie's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Manchester UK
Posts: 125
*cough* 32

32 is easily enough for any scenario, I mean 100 civs...there is no way you'd be able to have relations with that many civs and not come out of it with a headache.

I understand what everyone is saying about be able to choose etc., but 100 is just way to many.
chrispie is offline  
Old October 31, 2000, 16:05   #15
korn469
Emperor
 
korn469's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:38
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: In the army
Posts: 3,375
well civs are made up of cities, each city needs a certain amount of space to be viable...so if we have 100+ civs at twenty cities a piece, that would only be about 2000 cities...and for there to be between 1000 and 2000 normal sized cities on a map we'd need one huge map, on a mpa that big we'd need to have different rules for movement (otherwise it's going to take decades for armor units to move across europe) and you'd have to change rules for wonders...(talk about unbalancing), also we'd need to change the find city option, and the goto city option...even 32 civs is going to be maybe too much for civ's rules to handle unless they are changed

i just don't think it would be possible on a 300 mghz pII machine with 64 MBs of ram...which is what i think that civ3 should be able to run on

what does everyone else think civ3's minimum requirments should be?

korn469
korn469 is offline  
Old October 31, 2000, 16:24   #16
jrhughes98
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
quote:

Originally posted by korn469 on 10-31-2000 03:05 PM
i just don't think it would be possible on a 300 mghz pII machine with 64 MBs of ram...which is what i think that civ3 should be able to run on

what does everyone else think civ3's minimum requirments should be?




The minimum requirements should be right about what you think it should be, korn, however, Firaxis has mentioned that it will support the capabilities of higher-end machines. Take Civ2 for example, which had the option to turn heralds on or off. For more information click here --> Civ3 FAQ and look for "What will the system requirements be for the game?"

------------------
JRH
[This message has been edited by jrhughes98 (edited October 31, 2000).]
 
Old October 31, 2000, 17:42   #17
Dr.Oogkloot
King
 
Dr.Oogkloot's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,005
To all you people who are arguing for 8-32 civs: what's wrong with having the OPTION to play with more than 64 civs? Why do you want to deny other people the chance to play a game with lots of civs, just because you don't want to play that way yourself?

More is better!
Dr.Oogkloot is offline  
Old October 31, 2000, 18:08   #18
jrhughes98
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
quote:

Originally posted by Dr.Oogkloot on 10-31-2000 04:42 PM
To all you people who are arguing for 8-32 civs: what's wrong with having the OPTION to play with more than 64 civs? Why do you want to deny other people the chance to play a game with lots of civs, just because you don't want to play that way yourself?

More is better!


Oh yeah! Man, that was good!


------------------
JRH
 
Old October 31, 2000, 18:27   #19
jrhughes98
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
***E-MAIL RESPONSE FROM FIRAXIS***

Subject: RE: Question about Civilization III
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 10:55:47 -0500
From: "Kelley Gilmore" kgilmore@firaxis.com
To: jason-hughes@home.com

Hi Jason.

Well, in our minds the question is not whether or not it's technologically possible for Civ III to support 100+ civs in a single game, but what will make the gameplay most fun. In this case, more is not necessarily better, so the number of civs will be determined by what the development team feels will be best for the game.

Thanks for your note.


Kelley Gilmore
Communications Manager
FIRAXIS Games
(410) 891-3001 x131
Email: kgilmore@firaxis.com www.firaxis.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Mr. Jason R. Hughes [mailto:jason-hughes@home.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 11:57 AM
To: pr@firaxis.com
Subject: Question about Civilization III


Dear Kelley Gilmore,

What are the chances that Civilization III could support up to 100+ civs in a single game? Is it technologically possible? Is this in Firaxis's plans for Civ3? If not, is Firaxis even considering such a thing?

Cordially,

Jason Hughes
Civilization Fan
[This message has been edited by jrhughes98 (edited October 31, 2000).]
 
Old October 31, 2000, 19:19   #20
chrispie
Warlord
 
chrispie's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Manchester UK
Posts: 125
Hmmm, reading the FAQ page and that email...I'm starting to see a pattern...summed up well in the phrase "we want to be sure the game is fun before we commit to a specific set of features".

Has anyone seen any solid info about the game yet? Anything???

chrispie is offline  
Old October 31, 2000, 19:41   #21
jrhughes98
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
quote:

Originally posted by chrispie on 10-31-2000 06:19 PM
Hmmm, reading the FAQ page and that email...I'm starting to see a pattern...summed up well in the phrase "we want to be sure the game is fun before we commit to a specific set of features".

Has anyone seen any solid info about the game yet? Anything???




I haven't, but here's an idea. Firaxis has mentioned in the FAQ that they develop all their games starting with months of prototyping because they want to be sure the game is fun before they commit to a specific set of features. Well, what if they released a prototype of Civ3 in the form of a beta. The beta doesn't have to be for a price, or with a limited set of features. It can be FREE fully functional beta that will stop functioning by the time beta 2 is available, and beta 3, and will probably stop there. This way the customers (fans, players) can play the beta and comment, make suggestions, and/or report bugs to Firaxis. BESIDES, THE CUSTOMERS ARE THE ONES THAT REALLY KNOW WHAT'S FUN AND WHAT'S NOT!!! TELL FIRAXIS TO GET TO IT!!!

------------------
JRH
 
Old October 31, 2000, 21:02   #22
ContradictioN
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Firaxis: That is a pile of rhino poo, and you know it.

"Opens txt file, changes civ limit from 24 to 100 as he pleases".

 
Old October 31, 2000, 21:25   #23
jrhughes98
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
quote:

Originally posted by ContradictioN on 10-31-2000 08:02 PM
Firaxis: That is a pile of rhino poo, and you know it.

"Opens txt file, changes civ limit from 24 to 100 as he pleases".




LOL!! Would a beginner know how to do that? Besides, what about support for huge maps to accomodate those 100+ civs?

------------------
JRH
[This message has been edited by jrhughes98 (edited October 31, 2000).]
 
Old October 31, 2000, 23:25   #24
ContradictioN
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
half a year after playing civ2, I found out I could edit the *.gifs, shortly after I found out I could edit the txt files. Its nice and easy. They can do it, they can programme it so that it is customizable to your wants.

You can say, I want the computer to generate 50,000 by 50,000 and if your computer is powerful enough to handle that and 50 civilizations at once, then do it. You know in 2 years we're gonna have 5ghz computers. Ram won't be a problem either. They should be allowing the possibilities instead of limiting the games capabilities.

They will be making a mistake if they don't allow this, unless the games engine is going to be completely different.

Don't think that they can't do it. And if they can't, then they need to keep up with the times.
[This message has been edited by ContradictioN (edited November 01, 2000).]
 
Old November 1, 2000, 01:20   #25
Adm.Naismith
King
 
Adm.Naismith's Avatar
 
Local Time: 01:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Milano - Italy
Posts: 1,674
I'm supposing that because of Minor Civs presence (already announced by Firaxis times ago) we can throw away village huts (trade and diplomacy with a minor civs, no more hut quest for treasury) and, perhaps, barbarians (troops that have a Minor Civ as origin).

Of course we will have less huts, but minor civ will add benefit (or trouble, if enemy) for more than one shoot!

Adding some special to minor civ (to balance their presence in game, making less useful to simply crush and conquer their cities), we can realistically manage as many as a grand total of 32 (main+minor civs).

Main civs must be no more of 16 because of playability reasons, while minor civ can easily appears during game by empire split, refugee founding a new city, etc. as long there is enough room on the map).
I don't want to dispute about PC resources and AI ability to manage so many Civ as more than 64.
I simply think that few human players can manage and enjoy more than 64 diplomatic relations, trade, global (UN) council, front of war.

While at the beginning you probably know as few civ to keep things under control, very quickly the number of units and different borders on the map will bog down you, IMO.


------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant
Adm.Naismith is offline  
Old November 1, 2000, 02:34   #26
JESSVG01
Settler
 
Local Time: 00:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 8
Depending on how the "server" is implemented support for 100's of players is possible - can't do any of this one player at a time crap though.

100 player turns, each player with 1000 orders should take a 500mhz machine with 64 megs of ram about ten minutes to proccess ... giving ample time for ICQ wheeling and dealing.
JESSVG01 is offline  
Old November 1, 2000, 02:45   #27
Tiberius
PtWDG LegolandCivilization III PBEMInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamCivilization IV CreatorsC4DG Sarantium
Emperor
 
Tiberius's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 4,496
quote:


Well, in our minds the question is not whether or not it's technologically possible for Civ III to support 100+ civs in a single game, but what will make the gameplay most fun.


Thank God that the people there at Firaxis didn't lose their commom sense.

How could you even come close to enjoy a game with 100+ civs? It's a diplomacy nightmare, an AI nightmare, a trade nightmare, and maybe the most important, a time-nightmare (a single game could last several month!).
Tiberius is offline  
Old November 1, 2000, 17:55   #28
zyxpsilon
Warlord
 
zyxpsilon's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Laval,Quebec,Canada
Posts: 128
quote:

Originally posted by Roman on 10-31-2000 01:21 AM
For me personally having more civs in the game at the same time is the no. 1 priority.


Historically... the world developped having well-over Eight Civ's. Knowing that "actual" economic models, polarize some if not many COUNTRIES to their interest, it is fair to say that less than 32 civ's is tediously unaccurate.

I agreed with you 3200% at the priority... for the new challenge.
zyxpsilon is offline  
Old November 1, 2000, 18:06   #29
Lodi
Warlord
 
Lodi's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:38
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 152
I echo the call for a CHOICE above the recommended limit on civs. Some of us can handle a higher limit, and it would be more fun and realistic to boot. What is wrong with that?

Another recurring theme here is the long turns argument. The only plausible way this could effect Civers like me is if we do play a MULTIplayer Civ III game with well over 16 players. Obviously this would be slow, but who would drag themselves into this? If you play multiplayer you are obviously gonna have a choice of how many civs in the game. So if you wanna stay out of long games you have the logical choice of keeping the game short by choosing a low civ limit. I don't wish to see a low limit of major civs (8 or 16 in my opinion) just because some shortsighted people have a momentary lapse of reason when it comes to imagining future multiplayer games.

Choices is what this should come down to. Please just try to imagine a choice on the number of civs. If you understand my argument then the compromise on number of civs can placate many different civers. The number of civs should not be predecided at a low limit where the game is planned for you like you were living in a communist state. It is bad enough we have to be warmongers in a "civilization" game, but we should not be limited in the numbers of civs to war against.



------------------
I am the Roman Emperor, and am above grammar.
-Emperor Sigismund
Lodi is offline  
Old November 2, 2000, 10:36   #30
rremus
Warlord
 
rremus's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:38
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 154
Even if the game starts with more civilisations (say 32+), it should reduce this number during play time, and not only trough conquest . A more than 10-15 turn alliance between two AI civ can result in a new, united civ. Usually, a big civ would disolve a small civ. Altough this model is not 100% historically accurate, it would be easier to play. In the beggining you will have to deal with more small civs, latter will have to deal with several (10-15) civs left.
rremus is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 20:38.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright © The Apolyton Team