What do you want most?

Mr. Schwang · September 7, 2002, 16:30

Just out of curiosity, I am wondering what is the most important thing everyone wants from PTW?

Mine personally is the editor. If Firaxis makes the editor what we all want it to be, then everything else won't matter...we can fix it all in the new editor.

Nubclear · September 7, 2002, 17:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Schwang
Just out of curiosity, I am wondering what is the most important thing everyone wants from PTW?

Mine personally is the editor. If Firaxis makes the editor what we all want it to be, then everything else won't matter...we can fix it all in the new editor.

That depends on how much Firaxis would improve the editor.

I personally go for improved warfare...I get odd results eveyr time I fight a war that I just dont fight wars anymore.

Second would be editor though.

alva · September 7, 2002, 18:45

there are a few things you can do if you don't like civ3 combat. Change the amount of hitpoints a unit has is 1.

there are a few others too.

Andrew_Jay · September 7, 2002, 19:22

I want a better editor too, especially one geared towards scenarios. what would be nice if firaxis actually put in a lot of the new things people want but made them an option in the editor. that way you could have a different, more accurate combat system.
I really want scripts (which would allow almost anything you want: eg: privateer (player X) sinks ship ANY, then player X +gold 50) but apparently there won;t be any.

Mr. Schwang · September 7, 2002, 19:28

Yes, scripting would probably improve the game/editor/scenarios more than anything.

Blue Moose · September 7, 2002, 23:47

Sadly, from what has been said about PTW, we won't be seeing any of these in the expansion.

Adagio · September 8, 2002, 06:12

I voted Better Diplomacy, but I don't really care about more options, I just want the AI to be better, cuz I really hate the AIs trading:

AI Wants:
World map
500 gold
70 gpt
Flight
Radio

We want:
World Map

Nubclear · September 8, 2002, 06:49

Quote:

Originally posted by ADG
I voted Better Diplomacy, but I don't really care about more options, I just want the AI to be better, cuz I really hate the AIs trading:

AI Wants:
World map
500 gold
70 gpt
Flight
Radio

We want:
World Map

I have gotten soo many ridiculous demands....I wanted a MPP with the AI (it was pretty one sided...Being the sole superpower i was capable of defeating anyone in the world..so out of my

for others, I decided to offer the weak Americans a MPP) and what did they want? something along the lines of my world map, 22,000 gold, 5 gold per turn, all the medieval advances he could get (i was in modern, he was in medieval)....It was ridiculous.

Needless to say, I rejected. Then the forces of evil chinese maoists captured washington, I destroyed the evil chinese maoists.....and the entire world (Russia and Egypt) was at peace yet again

Anyway...yeah, better diplomacy is a must. Making deals with the Ai is so...frustrating sometimes. Although I still want a better COMBAT systemas opposed to this, thats just me

Proteus_MST · September 8, 2002, 06:50

I voted for more realistic Warfare.

I´d like to see a more complex System of Warfare in Civ 3, such as it was implemented in CTP 2.

btw.
I think, a Combination of CTP 2 and Civ 3 ans SMAC would rock.
Take from Civ 3 the Ressource and Luxury-System, the breakdown of Wonders in Small Wonders (which everyone can build) and Great Wonders (which only one Civ can build), the cultural Borders and of course the strong AI.
Take from CTP 2 the Warfare System and the Public Works

and take from SMAC the Society Models and the Diplomacy.

and expand the Tech Tree so that it covers the Futeure, such as in CTP 2.

and you´d have a game, I would love

(oh and btw. make the damned Manhattan Project a small wonder

)

Gen. Maximus · September 8, 2002, 10:16

I really agree that the CTP2 concept of warfare is superior to that of Civ3, the principle of armies and so on. I think Civ3 do not dare to copy direct, so we ended up with the Army unit we have now... which I think is still insufficient. Artilleries, flankers and forwards all fight differently and need to be taken into account.

Andrew_Jay · September 8, 2002, 10:36

Armies are cool, but I never use much strategy in making them, just load them up with my veteran and elite modern armour. Would be nice if an Army group was something that encompassed artillery, defenders and attackers.

XarXo · September 8, 2002, 11:34

Not enough options.

Kramsib · September 8, 2002, 14:02

The editor must be, at least, as good and complete as the one from Civ II MPGE.

XOR · September 8, 2002, 14:29

The game is basicly a war game for a good half of it, let's have better war and units!

althena1 · September 8, 2002, 15:58

A better AI is what i would like.

An AI with war strategies different from simply "send all units to x city".

Also the creation of "coalitions" would be nice.

Imagine if a sole superpower is bullying everyone and nation (AI or you) could create a "coalition" against the aggression of some nation(s).

Because right now it is stupid how the... chinese can be at war with japan, the germans against japan, and yet the germans and chinese fight each other as well... stupid stupid.

althena1 · September 8, 2002, 16:04

A MUST HAVE we could get is the ingame ability to make units disapear from the potential things to build when we want it to.

I hate having to scroll down to build a battleship when the game still offers ironclads and other crappy boats.

Hagbart · September 8, 2002, 16:09

I think the diplomacy needs to be improved. In SMAC we had a council, environmental pacts and so on. Of course it should be better than SMAC!

The_Aussie_Lurker · September 8, 2002, 20:56

Well, I chose the editor, but only by a close margin, over more diplomacy! I have to say, though, that it was a tough decision!
I really chose the editor because I still want a little more felxibility in designing new units and buildings-such as building prerequisites for units, and improvement obsolesence (and mixed flags for all buildings).
I also want the abiltity to script events and set diplomatic stances in the game for scenarios!
I must say that I definitely want greater options for diplomacy in PtW, not to mention Civil Wars!!

Anyway, there you have it!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

Andrew_Jay · September 8, 2002, 21:02

I'd like more diplomacy too, but I think a better editor is the one thing that stands a chance to being included. With that anything could be possible, if they do it right.
If there were events you could make civil wars through using IF and THEN scripts based on the conditions you want.

Mr. Schwang · September 9, 2002, 00:05

Quote:

[SIZE=1] Originally posted by althena1 [/SIZE
I hate having to scroll down to build a battleship when the game still offers ironclads and other crappy boats.

Problem solved to this one: use the editor. I never play the single player campaign anymore, too horrible. I always make my own games, adjusting different things here and there. And one of the things I always do is make sure there are no useless units from the medievel age in the modern era. I just them upgrade to the modern units, even though sometimes they don't make much sense (I have the cavalry upgrade to tanks, for example).

The_Aussie_Lurker · September 9, 2002, 01:05

You're right A_J that, if they have an event editor, and if it is robust enough, then you should be able to script for things like Civil Wars within the editor! I, for one, would have no problem doing the work, so long as they gave me the tools!! I'd even be tempted to post it here as a mod!

The other thing I'd script for is a Dark Age to balance off the Golden Age! i.e, if you loose your capital or if you loose about 3/4 of your cities (as an example), then you loose production or techs or something! Again, I don't mind doing the extra work myself, so long as I have the right tools!
Anyway, I sit here with baited breath and fingers crossed.

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

ammt603 · September 9, 2002, 02:09

I thought diplomacy was going to be slightly improved in PTW? I didn't think new options and things were going to be added but I thought the AI was suppose to be better at negotiating, etc.

Mr. Schwang · September 9, 2002, 18:15

The AI better be smarter in PTW. back before civ3 came out, the number one thing we apolytonians wanted from civ3 was a good, smart AI to play against.

Inverse Icarus · September 9, 2002, 22:13

i want more diplomacy, for human players.

i should be able to sell tanks to a friend, rather than give him the techs / resources to build them. that way i could control his army

Blue Moose · September 9, 2002, 23:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Schwang
The AI better be smarter in PTW. back before civ3 came out, the number one thing we apolytonians wanted from civ3 was a good, smart AI to play against.

Yeah, it annoys me that the main (only!?) difference between difficulty levels is how much the AI can cheat.

Propaganda · September 10, 2002, 01:23

I voted for more diplomacy options, but I'd also like a better combat system, most likely based on percentages. For example, a Tank has an 80% chance of beating a rifleman regimen, Infantry has 30% chance of destroying Tanks..etc.etc..

Or at least, a rip-off CTP2-style combat system. I love CTP2 for that(that and all the great mods!)

planetfall · September 10, 2002, 18:41

So much of civ3 is based on taking X number of turns, NOT YEARS, for MPP, Peace, trades,
etc. Why can't we have at least one screen that tells us what turn we are on. Ideal would be to have that information visibile from map, but anywhere is better than nothing.

I hate always contacting a civ and checking active agreements to see how many turns are left. What a waste of game time!! Give me the
turn count upfront. With variable years/turn too often I miss count by one turn.

Is this too much to ask? It is so simple and would make game play so much easier.

-PF

Mannamagnus · September 11, 2002, 08:08

Better Diplomacy and to be able to still discover empty continents to settle after the first age (not realistic to expect I'm affraid)

WarpStorm · September 11, 2002, 08:34

Quote:

Originally posted by planetfall
I hate always contacting a civ and checking active agreements to see how many turns are left. What a waste of game time!! Give me the
turn count upfront. With variable years/turn too often I miss count by one turn.

Is this too much to ask? It is so simple and would make game play so much easier.

http://apolyton.net/view.php?/civ3/i...tw02aug-03.jpg

In PTW, that will be there.

planetfall · September 11, 2002, 10:02

Quote:

Originally posted by WarpStorm

http://apolyton.net/view.php?/civ3/i...tw02aug-03.jpg

In PTW, that will be there.

Not quite, this just looks like a list of Active trades like we now get on F4, contact civ, list of running trades.

I am looking for something even simplier. What turn of the game is it? 100, 140, 198 or what? I would like to compare different games and have a simple tally sheet:

turns at war == XXX
turns not at war == ZZZ

And then compare results of high % warfare games versus lower warfare games.

--PF