|
Author
|
|
Topic: Time for new polls... |  |
|
Theben
Emperor
"Life is a swirling cesspool of despair."
b.02-15-99
|
 |
posted February 10, 2001 00:32
   | 
 |
 |  |
...especially since the current one is moot. There won't be a workshop in civ3. I've 2 other suggestions, based on current threads:1) Throne room or Palace? 2) Futuristic tech or no? The 2nd can be broken down further:
- future tech ala civ2
- future tech with small bonuses (+1%/tech to important game areas, reduced costs, &/or some hidden items in FT line)
- future tech with futuristic names, new units, wonders, etc.
- NO future tech at all. Diversify existing tech tree!
|
MarkG
Apolyton CS Co-Administrator
Greece
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 10, 2001 03:17
  |
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Theben on 02-10-2001 12:32 AM
...especially since the current one is moot. There won't be a workshop in civ3.
|
eeer that's the idea. to comment on the decision to have no workshop in civ3...  hold your polls and answers, we'll have a new poll on monday |
Roman
Prince
Bratislava, Slovakia
Sep 2000
|
 |
posted February 10, 2001 06:22
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Theben on 02-10-2001 12:32 AM
Futuristic tech or no?
[/list]
|
Good idea for a poll.
|
Ralf
Prince
Sweden
Mar 2000
|
|
posted February 10, 2001 06:48
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Theben on 02-10-2001 12:32 AM
NO future tech at all. Diversify existing tech tree!
|
My underlining. I would also add: "and leave SciFi/Fantasy stuff to scenarios". Its important to understand that the choice between future techs or NO future techs, isnt a choice between more, or fewer tecs.
NO future techs should mean a more AMPLE and ENRICHED tech-tree, with more in-between techs, within that good old Civ-2 4000 BC - 2020 AD time-frame. I suspect (and hope) that Firaxis have already desided NOT to implement any hard-to-relate SciFi techs (if so: good!), but it could be fun to investigate how the feelings about future techs in Civ-3, is anyway. |
Roman
Prince
Bratislava, Slovakia
Sep 2000
|
 |
posted February 10, 2001 07:43
|
|
| |
Very well and aptly said, Ralf. |
Roman
Prince
Bratislava, Slovakia
Sep 2000
|
 |
posted February 10, 2001 10:00
|
|
| |
Another good idea for a poll would be the "Most urgent question for Firaxis" Poll. For details of questions see my thread of the same name. |
Ralf
Prince
Sweden
Mar 2000
|
|
posted February 10, 2001 11:13
|
|
| |
Thanks for the support, Roman. About the poll-suggestion: There are 3 "Yes to future techs", but only 1 "NO future-techs". Unconsciously one tends to look at the 3 Yes-alternatives as the norm, comparing with the single NO alternative. To make things worse they are placed before the NO-alternative. For best result, there should really only be 3 alternatives: YES, NO or NO DIFFERENCE A small thing perhaps, but these things counts more then most people like to admit.
[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited February 10, 2001).] |
Roman
Prince
Bratislava, Slovakia
Sep 2000
|
 |
posted February 10, 2001 12:47
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Ralf on 02-10-2001 11:13 AM
Thanks for the support, Roman.
|
Anytime we agree Ralf. 
quote:
Originally posted by Ralf on 02-10-2001 11:13 AM
For best result, there should really only be 3 alternatives: YES, NO or NO DIFFERENCE
[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited February 10, 2001).]
|
Indeed. |
Theben
Emperor
"Life is a swirling cesspool of despair."
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 11, 2001 04:15
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Ralf on 02-10-2001 11:13 AM
About the poll-suggestion: There are 3 "Yes to future techs", but only 1 "NO future-techs". Unconsciously one tends to look at the 3 Yes-alternatives as the norm, comparing with the single NO alternative. To make things worse they are placed before the NO-alternative.
|
Ohhh, that's cold, man, using my own argument against me (in unique units thread). There isn't much difference between people's opinions who don't want future tech (a straight no! answer), but there are differences in opinion on how to implement future tech if it IS used. But it's not like I can't see your point. How's about:
- no future tech; expand, diversify, etc. existing tech tree
- extremely limited, as in civ2
- somewhat limited; no names and with small bonuses per tech
- full blown futuristic techs; names, units, wonders, etc.
This way it doesn't seem like it leans so heavily in favor of having FT in cvi3, at least to me. |
Chaos Warrior
Emperor
of the German Reich =)
Mar 2000
|
 |
posted February 12, 2001 17:24
|
|
| |
I'm really curious when the next poll starts and what it will be about... |
Tiberius
Warlord
& Tradelord
Jan 2000
|
|
posted February 14, 2001 03:58
|
|
| |
I started a poll about expanding city radius.
Of course, this is not an official one  .The futuristic tech poll could be a good one, too. Anyway, I agree that the workshop poll is a bit obsolate. Mark, you promised a new poll on monday. Well? |
Grumbold
Warlord
London, UK
Mar 2000
|
|
posted February 14, 2001 06:14
|
|
| |
I'm all for a poll on the type of ego screen, but I would have thought it was more important that it be customisable (and therefore different from game to game) than just asking if we want an interior or exterior picture. |
Theben
Emperor
"Life is a swirling cesspool of despair."
b.02-15-99
|
 |
posted February 14, 2001 13:31
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Tiberius on 02-14-2001 03:58 AM
Mark, you promised a new poll on monday. Well?
|
He didn't say which Monday. Anyways, I'm thinking that perhaps the best solution is for Firaxis to include a whole bunch of futuristic tech , units, etc., that are not in the main game. Then if hardcore futurists or scenario-builders want to use them they can add them in the .txt files or whatever, while us purists can leave them out, with the smug self-satisfaction of knowing that they aren't supposed to be in there anyway. |
MarkG
Apolyton CS Co-Administrator
Greece
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 14, 2001 16:09
|
|
| |
#> |
Roman
Prince
Bratislava, Slovakia
Sep 2000
|
 |
posted February 17, 2001 08:03
|
|
| |
Why a poll about palace/throne room? There are so many more interesting issues. |
MarkG
Apolyton CS Co-Administrator
Greece
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 17, 2001 11:28
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Roman on 02-17-2001 08:03 AM
Why a poll about palace/throne room? There are so many more interesting issues.
|
dont worry. we've got a long road ahead of us... |
Roman
Prince
Bratislava, Slovakia
Sep 2000
|
|
posted February 17, 2001 12:04
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by MarkG on 02-17-2001 11:28 AM
dont worry. we've got a long road ahead of us...
|
Very true, MarkG. There will be plenty of time for other polls. |
Stuff2
Warlord
Sep 1999
|
|
posted February 17, 2001 13:26
|
|
| |
Actually, it depends on the gaming goal. If winning bye reaching AC is possible in civ3 I think it's absolutely silly to be able to do that without some futuristic techs.
If the game will go on until 2050 it will certianly feel stupid not being able keep develop the last fifty years. It all depends on the game itself. Before i vote for anything i'd like to know a few things like:- Is winning going to be achieved by sending colonist to AC?
- How far in the future will the game go on? 2000? 2020? 2100?
- Is the civ crew going to make some educated guesses about what futuristic tech will be in or will they just grab things out of the air?
- Future techs means also future improvements right? I think firaxis should answer these questions before they ask about our opinions in how much future tech we want.
|
Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
