The Apolyton Standard

Worthingtons · February 27, 2002, 02:31

Right, i've been playing around with this idea in my mind for some time now. Basically I dont like the values that Civ III ships with, Things like the cost of Espionage, and the Super Corruption. For me (and many others) Firaxis got things wrong,In some ways Historically, and in others the fun in gameplay is simply reduced.

No problem though, There's an Editor right.... well there is a problem. How many people are reluctant to change things in the Editor, because they feel they are 'cheating' and it would somehow take the shine of victory. I know i do, I make many changes in the Editor , but i think twice always before doing so, and havent made many i would like to. I have seen people say before they wish FIRAXIS would make these changes, because they dont want to do it in the Editor.

Well, What i propose is we build a New Standard for Civ III - The Apolyton Standard. Here , a Team of us could take votes on issues, on changes we'd like to make to the game. We should vote according several criteria (I'll list them later) and if the Majority agree with the change, it goes into the standard. We Could then publish the final (although there is no reason why this project cant be ongoing) changes for all to see and attatch a Civ3mod.bic for people to download. Even if one doesnt wish to download this, they can at least look at the changes and, if they wanted to implement some of them, they will have piece of mind it had been voted as fair to do so.

We could perhaps even use this new rule set in Tournement games??? Who knows.

The Criteria on which i think i should an idea should be judged should be
1. Does it unbalance the game
2. Will the change make the game more fun and/or Less Tedious
3. (and least important IMO) How does this affect Realism

Have a think about it.....

Terser · February 27, 2002, 02:41

There's going to have to be some kind of accord reached when (if?) multiplayer finally arrives, even if it is among the fans of various mods or editor changes. Otherwise, you really will have a Tower of Babel situation: thousands of players with different CivMod files groping in the dark for someone to multiplay with...

I look forward to it, though.

Dis · February 27, 2002, 03:31

This could be a great idea.

I've thought about this myself. especially if I post on the strategy forum. I use different strategies if I have different mods. So I can't post good answers often. My game is different from their game.

notyoueither · February 27, 2002, 04:30

Excellent proposal, once they are done the game. Either that or prepare to flush a lot of work every time there is a patch/XP.

Of course someone the likes of Markos or Ming would have to be the *Keeper* of the standard. Can they do more?

Maybe we could nominate one of us mere mortals. How about korn? Or Yin

Salve

Technoron · February 27, 2002, 04:40

mmmmmmm.

Kinna sounds like the "Apolyton Pack" over in the CTP section.

No idea how that pack became "the standard" (popular feedback, downloads, shrugshrug)

It seems to me that a standard needs to be "established" only if there has been no good solution thus far, and that good solutions naturally become standards all by themselves.

Sooooooooo......If something was good enough to be deemed part of the "Apolyton Standard"....wouldn't it ALREADY BE the standard? It's kinna like officially declaring Mountain Dew the greatest liquid ever invented - everyone already knows it is, so what's the point....

dunno. It's 2:30Am and my brain is going all fuzzy.

Anyway, I'd be a little gun-shy about creating "the apolyton standard" given the diversity of players/styles on a site this populated.

Harovan · February 27, 2002, 05:46

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
Or Yin

Yin would be a good choice, alas, he doesn't possess the game (anymore/yet).

Rothy, your idea is really good. The features could be chosen by a couple of polls (maybe the admins spend us a forum?!

), and finetuned by some of the experienced modders, elected by a poll too. My vote would be Willem, his ideas are excellent.

aahz_capone · February 27, 2002, 06:14

Good idea, however difficult to impliment. Especially gonna create hassel when (if? no lets keep it when) the multi (or is it really if?) player (but it SHOULD be when) comes (could they REALLY make it if?) out (DAMN IT!).

Another catch is that on MP everyone should have the same version of the game. With the HUGE amount of mods concerning everything from govs to unit tweaking to new buildings I think civ3 has become a game not made by the few for the masses, but by the masses for the few. When (if/when/ugabooga) MP comes everyone is gonna have to play the original, and I hope to God FIRAXIS tweaks the original by then.

Bill9999 · February 27, 2002, 08:53

I like the idea. It would be terribly difficult to pull off though, as there are many different opinions what would be the best numbers to use.

I would start it all off by adopting the 2 - 3 - 5 - 7 hit point scale

(instead of 2 - 3 - 4 - 5)

sachmo71 · February 27, 2002, 12:14

Uh oh...I guess a decision will need to be made about naval combat one and for all...

"All hands to battle stations! This is not a drill!"

Rhuarc · February 27, 2002, 12:21

I think this is a wonderful idea! I have been wanting this for quite some time now. Would this "MOD" have new things in it such as new units, governments, or techs, or woud it be soley used for the purpose of changing the balance of thigns already in existence ion the game? I think it would be a good idea to add new things that we feel firaxis left out as well, such as a wider variety of governments, and anything else we can think of! Just my opinion though, thoughts anybody?

ACooper · February 27, 2002, 12:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph

Yin would be a good choice, alas, he doesn't possess the game (anymore/yet).

and the fact Yin doesn't know what he is talking about.

Here's an idea: How about a discussion (or poll) on each aspect of the BIC file?

Harovan · February 27, 2002, 12:54

Right, but nye wrote about the "Keeper", not the "Maker" of the standard. As for the polls, you are right and that was what I wanted to suggest. Perhaps a special forum would be good for this (like for Democratic games), to make sure all polls count and nothing is lost. But there must be somebody (or a team of 2, 3) who puts this thing together and makes the fine tuning. This/these person(s) should be recruited from the modder scene. That was why I voted for Willem. Korn would also be a good choice.

ACooper · February 27, 2002, 13:06

Willem and/or Korn are very good choices. May I also suggest Gramphos? He seems to have excellent knowledge of the editor.

Not Yin, Lib, Enco or any of the others that enjoy "getting off" on how bad the game is and how they quit playing.

Ming · February 27, 2002, 13:09

Good luck finding a "standard"...
From reading much of what is printed in this forum, I'm not sure what you are going to get people to "agree" on.

I'm not sure you could get a majority of the people to agree that the sun rises in the East

Good luck... it will be interesting to see if it can be done.

Rhuarc · February 27, 2002, 13:39

I think that polls would be a good way to do it. Does anyone think that MarkG would post up a new forum so we can keep all the threads about this in one place? I also think taht Gramphos would be a good candidate for teh "Keeper of the Standard" as it were.

Willem · February 27, 2002, 13:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph

Yin would be a good choice, alas, he doesn't possess the game (anymore/yet).

Rothy, your idea is really good. The features could be chosen by a couple of polls (maybe the admins spend us a forum?!

), and finetuned by some of the experienced modders, elected by a poll too. My vote would be Willem, his ideas are excellent.

Why thank you very much! I'm not sure whether I'm up to the task of finding a compromise to all the ideas floating around the forum though. Although there are a lot of good ones, there are also a lot of ideas that are simply nonsensical, or not possible with the current game mechanics. It would take a huge amount of time sifting through everything to come up with a consensus.

I think the best approach really is what Firaxis is doing now, asking for mod submissions so that a number of people can try them out and provide feedback. Maybe there should be some sort of final committee, like 3 different people playtesting submissions, and they would decide which features they like and then add them to an "official" mod.

Willem · February 27, 2002, 13:44

Quote:

Originally posted by ACooper
Willem and/or Korn are very good choices. May I also suggest Gramphos? He seems to have excellent knowledge of the editor.

Oh you guys are being so kind. I...I...think I'm... going to cry. _sniff_

Ming · February 27, 2002, 13:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Rhuarc
Does anyone think that MarkG would post up a new forum so we can keep all the threads about this in one place?

Hard to say... usually, he doesn't like adding new forums.
I would recommend "somebody" put together a very complete proposal with supporting reasons... and then contact MarkG.

Just posting a thread in the Apolyton Community forum about it isn't the best or most effective way. It's best to deal with him directly by PM or Email... and supply him with the logic and valid reasons for doing so. One person should be elected the point person, so as not to overwhelm MarkG. His time is limited...

Again... good luck. It might actually be easier to get a forum then it is to get people to agree on the standards

Tarquelne · February 27, 2002, 14:13

Rather than a "standard" of some sort I think you should just try to drum up support for a particular mod... not one generated via the polls (I shudder at the idea), but instead a good mod made/maintained by an idividual or small, tight, group. The mod maker(s) could solicit ideas from others, and take part in public discussion about the mod, but wouldn't be bound by a public vote. A good mod should gain a following.... not everyone who buys the game, and not everyone at Apolyton, I'm sure, but how many do you need? I imagine that if a mod generated enough discussion it could also count on some support from the moderators here. A forum, or mention in the news, whatever....

A vote might be a good way to pick someone to be in charge of the mod - esp. someone who isn't currently planning to make one. Think of it, I suppose, as a petittion encouraging someone to both make a mod and, at the beginning, at least, try to incorporate a number of "popular" changes.

lockstep · February 27, 2002, 14:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Bill9999
I like the idea. It would be terribly difficult to pull off though, as there are many different opinions what would be the best numbers to use.

I would start it all off by adopting the 2 - 3 - 5 - 7 hit point scale

(instead of 2 - 3 - 4 - 5)

Hit points are a good example of the difficulty to set a new standard. Vel's no-name mod uses a 3/4/5/7 scale, korn's blitz mod a 4/6/9/12 scale. I suggested to korn that he change his scale to 3/5/7/9 because, IMO, animated battles (esp. between armies) take forever in the modern age. OTOH, maybe I'm the only one who feels that this is a problem. Then, maybe some people wouldn't change the hitpoint scale at all because of the minor graphical glitches introduced by higher numbers of hitpoints.

At the moment, I'm hoping that Firaxis continues to include fan suggestions in the basic game. They did so with v.1.16f and v1.17f:

Police stations reduce corruption (v1.16f);
Tweaked stats for privateers and submarines (v1.16f);
Forbidden Palace with lower shield costs (v1.17f);
Ability to upgrade to civ-specific units (e.g. pikeman to musketeer) (v1.17f);
Blitz ability conferred to armies (v1.17f).

The feature I'd like to see the most in future versions of Civ3 is a Military Academy that doesn't require a victorios army so that every player could build armies by researching Military Tradition.

Harovan · February 27, 2002, 14:37

I think the way should be by polls "top to bottom". First, we have to solve general questions like:

- Should the Apolyton-Mod change the corruption model? If yes, how much, and what is reasonable?
- Should new units been added?
- Should the unit balance and/or the upgrade tree been changed (e.g. Cav->Tanks)?
- Should government types been added?
- Should the tech tree been changed?
and so on.

Then, the polls should be more precise:
- How to fight corruption?
- What units/gov'ts to be added?
- What changing in the tech tree?
etc.

If this is done, I would think the modders should discuss what and how to do, put together a bunch of features (without any modding yet), or even a few alternative models, and let the community discuss it. The discussion should be limited in time. At the end there should be one or a couple of polls.

Next should be an Alpha version. It should by tradition be called 1.07f

, and been playtested by the community. The complaints should be used to form the Beta version, 1.16f. May be next will be the Beta2, 1.17f... and after a while we will have the One and Only Recommended Apolyton Mod (OORAM) version 1.99f. Kidding of course.

The keeper team of the standard should make an official bug list, release fixes and check the OORAM after every patch by Firaxis. And hopefully there will be Apolyton tournaments, using this common mod.

lockstep · February 27, 2002, 14:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Tarquelne
Rather than a "standard" of some sort I think you should just try to drum up support for a particular mod... not one generated via the polls (I shudder at the idea), but instead a good mod made/maintained by an idividual or small, tight, group.

I have been participating in the discussions of korn's blitz mod (currently at v1.06 beta7.2, available in the 'files' forum). IMO, korn's work is outstanding and I recommend everyone to give it a try.

lockstep · February 27, 2002, 14:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
I think the way should be by polls "top to bottom". First, we have to solve general questions like:

- Should the Apolyton-Mod change the corruption model? If yes, how much, and what is reasonable?
- Should new units been added?
- Should the unit balance and/or the upgrade tree been changed (e.g. Cav->Tanks)?
- Should government types been added?
- Should the tech tree been changed?
and so on.

Then, the polls should be more precise:
- How to fight corruption?
- What units/gov'ts to be added?
- What changing in the tech tree?
etc.

IMO, at the beginning we need to indentify features of the basic game that are particularly unbalanced, annoying or lacking choice. This way, the corruption model will be discussed, but we won't forget about 'little' things like unproductive specialists or jungles that doom any civ that starts nearby.

Harovan · February 27, 2002, 15:21

Yes, that was what I meant.

1st - discuss what to do.
2nd - discuss how to do it.
3rd - do it.
4th - check it, if necessary, return to 3.
5th - play it.

dengidavai · February 27, 2002, 15:23

All very good ideas. Despite views to the contrary, I think a poll is a good place to start. Let's keep it simple: four or five good issues each with four or five alternative suggestions for improvement. This would give us and Firaxis a clear summary of the key issues and the desired direction for change. While this information can be gathered by reading through all the postings, it helps when it's in one place with an indication of the number of respondents and the percentage of votes in favor of each proposed solution. Whether this results in an "Apolyton" standard that is different from the current default rules, or a revision of the default rules by Firaxis itself, the end result would be better than the status quo.

My pet peeve: corruption. The current model is a gross exaggeration of the reality existing under any form of functioning government (except, perhaps, on the eve of revolution or of the dissolution of an empire).

Willem · February 27, 2002, 15:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Yes, that was what I meant.

1st - discuss what to do.
2nd - discuss how to do it.
3rd - do it.
4th - check it, if necessary, return to 3.
5th - play it.

And by the time you've finished all the discussion, the XP will be released, the default rules will have changed, and you can start all over again from the beginning. I'd say just skipping to step 3 would be the most valuable approach.

Harovan · February 27, 2002, 15:31

Good point, Willem. There are already existing mods slumbering at various hard disks. We just need to poll which one to take... C'mon, give us Willems Mega Cheat to discuss!

Rhuarc · February 27, 2002, 15:40

How about adopting one of the current mods ( I had in mind either the BALANCER, or the LWC mod) and asking the creator if we could use it and then adapt it as we saw fit. I know that both of those mods have had a lot of owrk go into them, and I feel are close to what we want, but they don't have a lot of support behind them to become the standard.

Willem · February 27, 2002, 15:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Good point, Willem. There are already existing mods slumbering at various hard disks. We just need to poll which one to take... C'mon, give us Willems Mega Cheat to discuss!

Well it's going to be called the Builders Dream mod actually. And it's going to be awhile yet, I'm still in the process of redoing it after they changed the gov specific buildings on me. And there's going to be a lot of entries I'll have to add in the Civilopedia.

Worthingtons · February 27, 2002, 21:23

Pleased the response to this.

As somebody suggested it may be an idea taking and modifying an existing mod such as the balancing mod, but there are a heck of a lot of changes there. I think as well just balancing things tho, an effort ought to made to make things a tad less tedious (pollution!!) as this seems to be most people's gripe with Civ III.

So perhaps we should put a proposal to MarkG then??