Let's pool our ideas for our own game

I've always wondered why folks like hex terrain so much. Our own C3C terrain, with its differently sized tile options, can look much more 3 dimensional than hex terrain, which confines every tile to the same height.

But yes, Virote has it right: I meant embryodead's 'adding new terrain with hex' tutorial. You see, I've been wanting to add LM Tundra to my Old West map (as the Transcontinental railroad), and haven't been able to make the process work. It's pretty frustrating.
 
Since the map is uses a lot of desert/plains tiles, I think that could be why the issue exists -since tundra/LM tundra cannot exist next to desert tiles or plains tiles. Though you may have taken this into account already.
 
First, hex terrain or square terrain can both be "3D looking", it's just a matter of using the correct graphics.

The advantage of hex is that every side is similar, you don't need specific treatement of side vs corner.

For instance, with an hex, I can say that the N side has a river, and the NE side is a cliff.

But with a square, if the N is a river, and the NE is not, it's not that easy to represent.

I switched to hex to allow more flexibility in the definition of map. And it's actually easier to program I think.

I also wanted to find a solution where each terrain is "independant" so if you want to add "sand desert", "ash desert", or "stone desert", you can do this easily.

The current system of Civ3 is not very convenient for that.

So I think using existing graphics is good, for units, buildings, etc. But for maps, I think it's too limiting.

I could if I want, my initial SSS attempt could reproduce Civ3 maps, with a few more options (like different types of hills)

However, there may be some programming constraints. For units, I'm using my own format because it opens some possibilities when programming the unit animation. But then, I have a FLC converter.

About the "expanded game feature", it's not very easy to expand it further than what I did without the source code, since we are limited to changing the contents of the save game, and we still have large chuncks of it which are "unknown".
 
On an aside, I'm building a strategy/roleplaying empire building boardgame using hex maps. I've found movement and terrain representation to be more realistic with them. I'll put a version of it up here if anyone would like, to see if any of the ideas are worthwhile for a computer game.
 
Doing the best I can as a programming illiterate... I've contacted Bitcasters on how the coordination with 2K Games and Firaxis was achieved and am hoping for a response :D
 
This is way beyond my limited area of understanding but I am very curious to know how the process behind "cloning" CivIII works. Is it reverse engineering or is it more of a take the head off the engine to see what's inside approach? Are there copyright issues?
 
Doing the best I can as a programming illiterate... I've contacted Bitcasters on how the coordination with 2K Games and Firaxis was achieved and am hoping for a response
Don't bother- Steph and some others went down that road a long time ago and made contact with 2K, only to be told that it would never happen.

This is way beyond my limited area of understanding but I am very curious to know how the process behind "cloning" CivIII works. Is it reverse engineering or is it more of a take the head off the engine to see what's inside approach? Are there copyright issues?
"Clone" in this sense refers to a game that is, from the player's perspective, mostly identical to the original game. It has been completely rewritten to allow for whatever changes prompted its creation, but made to be a "fixed" and/or free version of the game rather than a new game. For example, OpenTTD is an open-source clone of Transport Tycoon Deluxe.


Anyway, I still don't see any activity on the wiki, which is the reason I started this thread. :)
 
Don't bother- Steph and some others went down that road a long time ago and made contact with 2K, only to be told that it would never happen.
Furthermore I've been in direct contact via Skype with the project manager from BitCasters, no possibility to get access to the source code through this channel either.
There are under strict NDA and cannot disclose anything.
 
Furthermore I've been in direct contact via Skype with the project manager from BitCasters...[they] are under strict NDA and cannot disclose anything.

I'm glad that you're in touch with them, Steph, because we should be asking them (nicely) to provide whatever guidance they can without violating the NDA. For instance, they could tell us what that mysterious number field in the editor is for, couldn't they? I have about a dozen questions for them myself, none of which would violate their NDA. We should compile a list of questions for them, perhaps...

The thing is, there is plenty that we could still do without reading the source code. We still have 1) the exe file, which has yielded us the no raze & barbarians patch; 2) the Conquests ini file, which we've discovered can be modified (i.e., KeepRes=1 for instance); 3) the hex files, which embryodead found we could manipulate to create new terrain; 4) the biq file, which you've been manipulating and which still hold lots of secrets; 5) the editor, ditto; and 6) all of the built-in bugs & other game mechanics which can be manipulated to do much more than the designers intended. So why even consider creating a new game platform, or rewriting source code before we've exhausted these other avenues? That just creates new problems to figure out.

But there's no legal reason that BitCasters can't tell us where the rocks are without violating their NDA. Just ask: is this possible? They can blink once for yes and twice for no....
 
I'm afraid that BitCasters is no longer actively working on that for Budget issues.

I had a kind of agreement with them that IF they secure a budget to make a new version, then I could send them specific requests to fill the gaps in the biq/sav format, and they would try to look in the source code to explain what it is supposed to do.
Without giving direct access to the code.

I'll try to contact them again next time I see them online to check for status update.

So why even consider creating a new game platform, or rewriting source code before we've exhausted these other avenues? That just creates new problems to figure out.
Because we are almost at the limit of what we can do, even combining different "tricks", and there are part that we cannot really fix.
For instance, we cannot make it so that the fastest unit can withdraw (instead of using the current method : withdraw can happen only if one unit has 1 MP).

If we make a clone, all these flaws could be corrected.
 
I'm afraid that BitCasters is no longer actively working on that for Budget issues.

They wouldn't be the first to discover that mod creation is more work than they anticipated. I just surveyed their site & it looks like they blew much of their budget on the soundtrack.

I had a kind of agreement with them that IF they secure a budget to make a new version, then I could send them specific requests to fill the gaps in the biq/sav format, and they would try to look in the source code to explain what it is supposed to do.
Without giving direct access to the code. I'll try to contact them again next time I see them online to check for status update.

That sounds better than your previous answer. Fine. Good! Leave it at that, then.

...we are almost at the limit of what we can do, even combining different "tricks", and there are part that we cannot really fix..

Customization is about the art of the possible, and this forum is all about customization of this game, so we have to keep trying. I think that the horizon you see is much farther away than it appears to you. This group will atrophy like the Apolyton site before we figure it all out. Tom, for instance, was just recently working out the possibilities of charm ability.

We could begin, for instance, with figuring out how to add the extra possible terrains that embryodead discovered (I linked to his thread a few posts ago) without doing complicated math.

If we make a clone, all these flaws could be corrected

And all-new flaws could be created in their place. Sure.

But, like everyone here, I have my own dream of perfect game design:

It would combine the isometric terrain (iso just looks better, IMHO) of Civ III with the multiple-map capability, diplomacy & trade rules of Civ2: Test of Time.
It would allow micromanagement of Cities in the manner of SimCity 2000, which is now abandonware and also featured isometric terrain - in fact, I used some SC2K buildings in my Manhattan terrain.
It would allow Real Time Tactical control of battles in the manner of Medieval Total War or Sid Meier's Gettysburg.

I mean, why just do a Civ Clone when you can open the format up beyond what anyone else has done so far?
 
I mean, why just do a Civ Clone when you can open the format up beyond what anyone else has done so far?
That's why I drifted away from a clone and started on SSS then SGF. Unfortunately I never could find a good team to work on that, with programmer and most importantly artists ready to do what I needed when I required it.
 
Surely the fact I changed for hexagon last year, after several years working with iso squares with no real support from artist, shows how inexact (I won't use another word so I won't have to autoinfract me) this comment is.

Beside, the quality of the terrain gfx depends greatly on the artist and what he does with raw materials. For instance, we could have some very nice graphics potentially, but with a very poor choice and ligthning and very dark shadow you spoil them.

We can have crappy graphics with iso, and good graphics with hex.
 
Did you even ask Ares for his terrain? Or did you not like it enough, as happens regularly with you and gfx of quality it seems...

Anyway, i am not french so lets not play rooster-fighting anymore.
 
I'm using Ares terrain for my mod.

I did a clone of CivIII using the gfx (except it wasn't pcx but png) years ago, but I wanted to do more, with more options.

Perhaps it wasn't a good idea and I would have been more inspire to just finish my clone, I may have too ambitious.

I need help from artist to make something new, not to reproduce the same game.
 
But, like everyone here, I have my own dream of perfect game design:

It would combine the isometric terrain (iso just looks better, IMHO) of Civ III with the multiple-map capability, diplomacy & trade rules of Civ2: Test of Time.
It would allow micromanagement of Cities in the manner of SimCity 2000, which is now abandonware and also featured isometric terrain - in fact, I used some SC2K buildings in my Manhattan terrain.
It would allow Real Time Tactical control of battles in the manner of Medieval Total War or Sid Meier's Gettysburg.

I mean, why just do a Civ Clone when you can open the format up beyond what anyone else has done so far?
I couldn't help but smile as I read this, considering that when this topic last came up you were quite vocal about making a game very like Civ3 :)
That does, however, sound like an amazing game. It would be sure to ruin my life if it existed.
 
I couldn't help but smile as I read this, considering that when this topic last came up you were quite vocal about making a game very like Civ3 :)

Apples and Oranges, my friend. In the first instance I'm saying, if you want to make a clone, make a clone we can use. I find it ironic that the #1 complaint from all of the unfinished clone makers is the lack of graphics support. My answer is that we've been making tons of original graphics for you, guys, but you don't want to use them....

That does, however, sound like an amazing game. It would be sure to ruin my life if it existed.

Yes. You see? Why did Civ4 & Civ5 fail to meet our test for worthy successor to C3C? Because they weren't trying to build on Civ2: Test of Time (which was created by a team that didn't include Sid) or Civ3 Conquests (again, which creation team didn't include Sid), but rather on Civ1 and (the original) Civ2, so they feel like a throwback to us, because they have neither the ingenuity of TOT nor the realism of C3C. Sure, C4 & C5 are popular - Sid has a genuine knack for that, bless him - but they're not evolutionary, just remakes of the original game in a new format. We (I, anyway) want more than that, I think, before moving on.
 
Top Bottom