|
Author
|
|
Topic: Borrow from other games.... |  |
|
Seeker
King
Canada(UWO)
b.02-15-99
|
 |
posted September 03, 2000 01:56
     | 
 |
 |  |
This is yet another rebirth of my cry to have Firaxis look at features of other games to improve Civ3.
Such as:
1. Imperialism 1: market, resource based economy. Simultaneous turns.
2. Panzer General: good simple strategic model.
3. Warlords 2, Carriers at War: AI builds taskforces, attacks weakpoints.feel free to add any others |
Shadowstrike
Prince
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Jul 2000
|
|
posted September 03, 2000 13:24
|
|
| |
The Imp 1 market economy was good (I still play Imp 1 all the time) but it would slow down Civ3. Civilization's free-flowing nature is important to Civ 3 (i.e. as little deviation from the map as possible with exception of city screen). |
Seeker
King
Canada(UWO)
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted September 03, 2000 21:16
|
|
| |
Slow it down?? How?!
In the current model, dozens of caravans, chosen from dozens of resources, must be built, tieing up resources. They must be taken to their destinations, which can invlove many turns, railroads, transports ect. Dealing with the Civ 2 "caravan economy" eats a HUGE amount of time and is grossly inefficient.in Imperialism, your transport capacity is an abstract representation of all means of transport in the empire, rail, roads, wagons, barges ect. with which you can move goods. Also, in Civ, you never really know what that coal caravan will be worth, in Imperialism you can choose to reject an offered trade. Also: in imperialism, trade is simultaneous, so players can actually negotiate (amount, price ect) and its faster (no moving caravans manually) Also: you must face real historical problems of gluts, deflation, shortages, and skilled labour. You can do strategies you should be able to in Civ. In Imperialism, you can dominate markets, if, for example, your empire has a virtual monopoly on the price of coal in the 19th century, it doesn't matter what your enemies military is like, because you can wield REAL economic power (in civ, economic power is only bribing and rush-building, which have virtually no historical counterparts) |
Empress
King
cause markos wont let me be queen
Apr 2000
|
 |
posted September 04, 2000 00:20
|
|
| |
No No NO! civIII should merely be an extension of civII  |
Christantine The Great
Chieftain
Senate Chamber, Chrisonian Capital Christantinopl
Jun 2000
|
 |
posted September 04, 2000 00:58
|
|
| |
NEVER! (Christantine unsheaths his sword). Ahem....I don't think that Civ III should be a Civ II clone but it should never use things from other games. First of all that should hike up the price a good 20$ to 30$ more to compensate for the copyrights and crap but most importantly it would ruin a perfect chance to make a original and very advanced game. Picture this: Sid Meier infront of a line of computer moniters. Franticly he goes from each keypad to another. He takes files from every new strategy game and melds them together into one titanic game called: Master of-Civili-Craft I.P.S. My name $&*^s but I think you get the idea. ------------------
"Freedom, Trade, Christantine!" |
Seeker
King
Canada(UWO)
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted September 04, 2000 02:35
|
|
| |
uhh, developers use other developers ideas all the time...it isn't copywritten.Why can't civ 2 use a free market system or simultaneous turns or good AI? Those things aren't copywritten!! |
Adm.Naismith
Prince
Milano - Italy
Oct 1999
|
 |
posted September 04, 2000 09:24
|
|
| |
True! Ideas aren't copyrighted, where not owned source code reuse or reverse engineering for reason different from study and research is forbidden, AFAIK.About having great new ideas for CIV III, I want to remember and adapt that old saying: Great games are usually 10% inspiration, 90% perspiration  So Firaxis can invent, reuse, mix, listen to Apolytoner suggestion, but please give to us a good CIV III! (With some real info about it in the meantime, thank you very much!) ------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant |
Patriqvium
Prince
Zen!
Dec 1999
|
 |
posted September 07, 2000 05:08
|
|
| |
I don't think we should have a General-esque battle system, as it would slow down waging war very much... however, an economy like Imperialism sounds good. |
Temudschin Dschingis Khan
Settler
Stolberg, Germany
May 99
|
 |
posted September 07, 2000 08:24
|
|
| |
Hey, read the list! I think the ideas there arenīt far away from your ideas, but I think CivIII needs a very special economic system due to the main action on the strategic map.
And so: !!!PLEASE NO TACTICAL COMBATS!!!------------------
----Mongolia Rules------ |
UltraSonix
Prince
Melbourne, Australia
May 2000
|
|
posted September 08, 2000 23:02
|
|
| |
Does Civ3 need to shamelessly borrow form other games when Firaxis has also got the List, plus all the other ideas WE've posted since then? Just use our ideas  .------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... |
Ribannah
Chieftain
Castle Gobs, Enroth
Aug 2000
|
 |
posted September 09, 2000 21:06
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker on 09-03-2000 01:56 AM
This is yet another rebirth of my cry to have Firaxis look at features of other games to improve Civ3.
Such as:
1. Imperialism 1: market, resource based economy. Simultaneous turns.
|
Not to forget international relations. I hate it when a tribe goes from Worshipful to Hostile in a single turn after giving them 22 techs ...
And colonization - more interesting than popping huts. I still play Imperialism 1 on occasion. Perfect General might be worth to look at for the combat system (elevation, artillery, shooting at moving targets), although some of this was already implemented in SMAC. ------------------
If you have no feet, don't walk on fire |
UltraSonix
Prince
Melbourne, Australia
May 2000
|
|
posted September 09, 2000 22:49
|
|
| |
Oh yeah! Colonisation! I've made references to it in the past - it's a great game! Especially in its trading system - the production and sale of goods is very simple, and yet it's effective and a joy to use. Civ3 should perhaps take Colonisation's idea of a central market that the cities can trade with to generate income.------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... |
Seeker
King
Canada(UWO)
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted September 10, 2000 03:49
|
|
| |
Colonization is good---but I think he was talking about how you could make the Minor Powers your colonies in Imperialism (you subsidize trade, give gifts, declare war on their enemies. What you get: they always support you, they sell their stuff to you at cost, you can develop their land with out needing to use your transport network)The big downfall of Imperialism 1 was that there was no world map...I mean, the colonies of the imperialist powers are limited to North Africa! Where was India, East and West Indies, Brazil, South Africa, ect? |
Ribannah
Chieftain
Castle Gobs, Enroth
Aug 2000
|
 |
posted September 11, 2000 09:25
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker on 09-10-2000 03:49 AM
Colonization is good---but I think he was talking about how you could make the Minor Powers your colonies in Imperialism ...
|
Yes, she was
Still, the reference to the game Colonization isn't bad either.
There's an interesting system for diplomatic relations in "Birthright: the Gorgon's Alliance", btw.
------------------
If you have no feet, don't walk on fire |
Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
